kailoa

Yes, but only a small percentage of those are actionable... You would need to do a lot of filtering.

Very neat idea though. It's like using twitter for market research. If twitter could be intelligently analyzed for that purpose, I bet that's something people would pay for.

In Tokyo, they hire an army of people to canvas houses and apartments and collect a modest fee (about 10-20 dollars) per household to support public TV. The general population just pays, but many expats make up some excuse or feign ignorance until they go away.

If Ireland really needs the TV license revenue, they will have to start charging per head, rather than per device. Per device sales, just mean that companies will stop selling neat things in your country and the black/grey market will thrive, at the expense of consumers.

The success of the Mac is the only thing that will encourage ports to the Mac.

Developer familiarity doesn't seem to be a big problem with games. Most PC games are written in DirectX, which doesn't have a real alternative on the Mac side. Similarly, the real novelty of the iPhone is the UI. The Mac UI is fundamentally the same as the PC.

That being said, as long as Mac market share keeps ticking up a point or two a year, more developers will invest.

I suppose the problem is that if you are browsing, you are stuck.

AngelConf was great.

Sports fans love it because they can rely on someone else in a broadcast umbrella to catch events they may not otherwise be able to see.

I don't think they can or want to do revenue sharing with Apple.

Hulu is fascinating. Watching it (the company) is like Celebrity Deathmatch between Silicon Valley and Hollywood.

My own observations:

1. Content is still king. 2. Hollywood is trying to change (Hulu), but fear limits them (Boxee) 3. Cable companies are the middleman. They are the ones who are the most scared and their existing relationship with Hollywood affects what Hollywood can do.

Stories like the above are way too common.

Despite how fantastic the tool is, git's biggest weakness is it's own opacity and steep learning curve. github's real magic is in indirectly getting git out of the way of the common coder. Sometimes it's through the GUI, and sometimes it's with helpful guides.

I suppose, when the core audience and developers are linux kernel hackers, usability is not going to be a priority.

Scott Adams blog has the best "thought experiments." It's like a playground for out of the box thinking. This is just one great example.

Highly recommend Naval Ravikant's talk as well. Those two were by far the most informative.