DanLivesHere

Wow, thanks a ton!

I actually very rarely get paid to syndicate my content out.

* Patreon

* Sponsors

* Amazon affiliate ads

* Network ads

* Two books/audiobooks out

* Working on content syndication

I am, at http://nowiknow.com

It's a general trivia email. Every day I send a fun fact of the true story behind it.

Been writing for seven years. Not going to disclose how much I make a month, but I describe it as not quite full time job money but a lot more than beer money.

Thanks, I wrote this!

Thanks! (I run Now I Know)

I wrote the article linked to above, and in it, I link to the archive.org saved version of the Verizon security blog. It's all there.

Hi! This is from my email newsletter of interesting facts, Now I Know. If you want to give it a try, http://nowiknow.com is the signup page.

It's free, I don't give out email addresses, etc., and have 100,000 subscribers so it can't be all bad.

Hi, I'm Dan! I write Now I Know... thanks! :)

For everyone else, please consider subscribing at http://nowiknow.com

I've only read the linked-to article once, but this doesn't seem nearly as bad as it sounds (minus the patent trolling aspect).

Here's how I think it happened -- and, for sake of clarity, I worked at a large-ish law firm, have a bunch of friends who worked in the huge ones, and even know a partner at the named firm.

1) Lawyer and his wife start (with others) a company. Company invents something (kind of) and lawyer, being a lawyer, files for a patent.

2) Someone else comes along and creates something kind of/sort of like what they did. They have a patent so they look at suing the other company.

3) Lawyer works at a law firm which represents the target company. The law firm has 1,300 lawyers and two dozen offices around the world. He tells his firm's general counsel about the issue, likely to set up "chinese walls" as to not run afoul of any ethical obligations. Note that he's kind of stuck otherwise -- his company is going to be adverse to the law firm's client, and he's stuck in the middle.

4) When the firm's client hears about this, they freak the eff out and demand that the attorney in question be fired. He's fired.

Sure, but that's only because this is new.

Interesting. Wikipedia shows about 50k active editors (5+ edits) for any given month in 2006 -- I didn't keep the URL, but that's pretty much right. I didn't realize how much output the "9%" yielded.

Braff owns all rights to this movie. He is the studio.

I never said he got $2/ticket from Garden State.

Hah, no worries.

I dunno. You're right on the poor understanding of the fact, but think those are convenient (albeit incorrect) reasons for haters to use.

But Braff has access to the money. That's pretty clear. The methods of access are misunderstood, that's all.

Corrected. Thanks.

I've been reading a lot about publishing and self-publishing, and the core themes around going the traditional route keep repeating themselves.

The negatives of traditional publishing:

1) Unless you're a known commodity/celebrity, you're basically writing for your advance, and that it.

2) There's not going to be a lot of marketing support for your book from anyone other than you.

3) You don't have as much control over the product as you think you do.

There are a lot of positives, too -- there's the ego aspect, as you have to get past a gatekeeper; if you're a writer, you don't have to worry about all the stuff that happens to go from manuscript to book; they handle distribution; etc. But this guy didn't really gain or care about those factors. And some factors which would be a positive for many writers (i.e. the design of the book itself) are a HUGE negative for him.

I'm really not surprised that his experience was negative.

I wrote this! Glad to take any questions.

(and why'd it come up now? I wrote it a month or so ago.)

Is there a way to do an optional hover in email? You can't pass js

Eh, I read a lot :-)

Thanks, it's a broken redirect -- will strip that out.

Kinda defeats the purpose.

Thanks! I write this :-)

Has to be an every day thing.

New readers.. it's a mixed bag. Word of mouth, content shares, cross-promos, etc.

(And thanks for reading!)

Blogging + RSS is interesting. Blogging - RSS isn't as much, because you need to get people to come back over and over again. And there isn't a lot of consumer adoption for RSS. "Publishing" isn't enough any more because it assumes that distribution is built in, when it just isn't.

I made my blog -- http://nowiknow.com -- into an email newsletter for this very reason. Two+ years in I'm at 80,000 subscribers. It's doable.

I like this except for the crowdsourcing part. I'd rather have it done as a paid-for service somehow. I realize that it's hard because you'd have to constantly check, but still.

Huh.

I really liked the Olympics. And almost all the "normals" I know did, too.

If you're a coder, build something and figure out how to take it to market. Then, and only then, you'll understand marketing.

If you're a marketer, try and build something. Then, and only then, you'll understand development.

There's no better way to learn than to fail miserably.

FYI this is the same org which is running the $10K app challenge using their API this weekend; https://singly.com/appchallenge

Too late, I think.

Facebook has scared off a lot of the "moms" out there by their bad bad bad privacy history. Do you really want to pay for things using their service?