ahlatimer

Why? Trademarks have to be defended or they can be lost (not 100% accurate, but close enough). You can't say "I'll only sue companies who are bigger than x" when it comes to trademarks and still hold onto them. That isn't the case for patents. You can selectively sue (or not sue at all) and the patents remain valid.

[1]: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/

Do you have any actual examples of this happening?

I'm not saying there aren't people starting companies because they want to get rich, but I don't think it's happening in the droves that people make it seem like it is. I'm as pessimistic about the whole SV culture as they come, to the point of moving away in two weeks, but even I can't say I've met many, if any, people who seemed to be generally disinterested in what they were building, only doing it because they thought they could flip it.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/dt10_282.asp?r...

I'm a Rails developer working for Batch / Dailybooth looking for some supplemental income and experience working on different code bases.

I've been doing Rails for 3 years professionally, and I'm proficient with HTML/CSS/JS. I also have a few months worth of experiencing doing iOS if that's needed.

I have experience writing APIs and large, responsive, scalable applications.

For some code samples, take a look at my Github profile (http://github.com/ahlatimer). The largest project is likely the write-through model cache written for Redis, CaChing (http://github.com/ahlatimer/ca_ching).

Contact info is in my profile.

There are loads of reasons why someone would rather work for Big Corp. than doing a startup, especially when they've already checked "build a successful company" off their bucket list. I can only speculate, and I don't feel it's right to in what was probably a very personal decision.

And I'll point out that novelty and non-obviousness are two different things in the context of patents. The majority of software patents seem to fail the latter the majority of the time. Novelty is more of a wash.

There's more to time management than just prediction. When I was working for a company doing client work, we used Basecamp to keep track of how long we spent on each project so we could bill appropriately.

That said, ZeroCater still has its own problems. The biggest one we've had is ZeroCater simply not listening to our requests. It took us a while to get a gluten-free option, for instance, and even longer to get it removed when we no longer needed it. We've also requested no fish several times, and yet we still end up getting fish on occasion.

Overall, though, I'd recommend ZeroCater if you're planning regular team lunches in a city where they offer it and you don't want to deal with the minutiae of it.

I assume "will" means that it hasn't been sent, yet, but it will be at some point in the future. I haven't gotten one either, FWIW.

In the case of knives, a computer could make a copy so exacting that it would be indiscernible from any of the knives this guy produced if given the instruction and materials to do so. The only thing that would give the computer made knives away would be that they would be too perfect (if perfect is measured by how close it falls to the original), while the knives produced by hand will all have inconsistencies because they were made by something that isn't precise to a micrometer.

Speaking of which, that's part of what I think drives the hand-made movement: you're buying something unique. Even if that particular artist made a hundred of them, there are no two exactly alike.

It's not to say that FB will be the one and only way to access Batch forever and always, but, for now, in its current state, it makes for a better user experience (I feel, at least) if we do only allow FB logins.

(Disclaimer: While I work for Batch/Dailybooth, the opinions expressed here are my own and are not necessarily the opinions of the company.)

Disclaimer: I work for Batch/Dailybooth.

Both A and B must be true for Apple to win the case, and the court can rule on those two issues separately. For instance, the court could rule in favor of Samsung because they found Samsung was not infringing on Apple's patents, but leave the patents intact if B is satisfied. They could also rule in Samsung's favor because Apple's patents were invalid.