chaqke

Addendum to the why: - If you lean towards one side, the other side is incentivized to dismiss you. - If you're in a case with lawyers, both sides actually want jurors that they can influence, rather than jurors that will come to their own, unexpected, uncontrollable conclusions. That would be a dangerous wildcard.

Many startups don't become long-term businesses.

However, the startup that (wins a big contract with a big promise && delivers on its promise) certainly has a larger chance to become a long-term business than the ones that short circuit themselves out by not winning contracts.

This was a pretty cool example of that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSwys0dm_EA

(context: after some occupy wall street protests were met with police violence, an armed Arizona militia watched over a local occupy movement to prevent police violence)

most campuses do not have narrow, unavoidable choke points as gathering places to distribute pamphlets/flyers. in fact, the popular locations are often intentionally chosen to be large plazas.

you have the choice to walk around them and avoid this "gauntlet".

"essentially he's talking about Netflix for Books, yes? [...] But I just don't see it happening."

already happened: http://www.scribd.com multiple publishers - not all, but neither does any music service provide "all".

"All you need to do is make the expected value of an attack against the system worth less than just doing some actual research."

you'll always have some people willing to take a gamble on the risk to get the reward, especially if it's a low % chance that they get any penalty at all. on top of the conscientious choice, humans are bad at estimating low-likelihood risks.

unless creating for the sense of ownership or pure joy, it's certainly valid to compare the time spent against the opportunity cost of a full-time job or contracting.

it was a thread about _profit_, after all.

i wonder what the charity's overhead is, compared to the theoretical "loss" rate to addiction/booze/whatever we want to decree an ineffective use of someone else's money.

given the copious amount of US laws regarding giveaways, it's probably illegal too.

did it for fun because of a coupon code, but I feel sorry for anyone who paid the full price of admission. if they were going to rig it anyway, why sell hackathon-only tickets? that's pretty malicious.

From the article: "Basically, a publisher gets paid only if a reader chooses one of its particular books — and it only gets paid in full if the book is read in full."

Sounds like it's free to browse, but the publisher gets paid if the book is actually read. I assume that publishers would pay authors at whatever rate they were already paying for ebooks.

It seems that scribd's business model now more prominently features selling access to publisher content - seems like a fine decision to me.

yea, isn't this blatant "ghosting", punishable by delisting?

Not intending to be harsh, but your grandmother could use the equity established in her property, and move to somewhere where the costs of living are within her means.

In cases where the property has appreciated so much that the increase in property taxes is a burden, surely there is a corresponding increase in equity to lessen the blow.

The "CA Prop 13" option pretty much makes newcomers finance existing landowners' property taxes - not my favorite option.

It seems that some people are shocked that potentially copyrighted material is available..

..and others are shocked that the same content is not conveniently copyable.

Go figure.

Preferential placement, cross-product tie-in....yeouch. That's powerful.

Rule of thumb: Fat = 9calories/gram Carb = 4calories/gram

The difference might be that you feel full quicker with fat - but in that case carbs don't make you fat, eating more makes you fat.

I just remember those numbers from a class, but here's reference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate

Pretty much all hosting solutions in the United States will fall under the "safe harbor" clause of the DMCA.

This law makes any noncompliant service a "publisher", liable for all content on the site - unless you follow the DMCA. Upon receiving a takedown notice, the service provider must take down content immediately, and issue a notice to the supposed actual content owner. Content owner has a short period in which he can file a counter claim and keep the content up for a little bit while the two sides argue.

Service provider becomes a publisher, liable for your potentially illegal content (trademark/copyright infringement, slander, libel, child pornography, etc) if they do not comply.

Rackspace is not the problem - the 105th Congress was the problem.

i'd recommend you try rittenhouse's 23-year-old and black maple hill's 21-year-old

i'm surprised that marriage was a factor - i'd suspect incomplete data on that dimension.

could be handled by directing people to a posting about hacker news, where they could comment to their hearts content (or, hopefully, read historical conclusions to their comment's topic, if one already exists)

I wonder if facebook was paid by adobe when facebook videos began requiring Flash 10. That's the only reason I upgraded flash.

Find a side-interest that you can do in class, after completing class work. It'll incentivize you to complete your class work sooner, and prepares you for being able to handle multiple things at the same time...especially if you have interest in that side thing.

check out the map on the right side of http://www.buzzillions.com/

real-time view of customer reviews at a couple hundred retailers.