michael_dorfman

The key to selling to business is to figure out the purchasing process at the businesses you want to sell to. This will vary substantially depending on the industry, the size of the business, and the cost of the software.

In my opinion, you are not going to appeal to business users via Linkedin, or anything similar.

If you have developed (or are developing) a solution aimed at business users, I suggest that you find a handful of pilot users you can speak to, and ask them about their purchasing process, and for advice about how you would sell to similar companies.

"I have no picture" will definitely be fixed with a better cable.

"My colors look wrong" will not, and cannot, be-- for the reasons discussed in the article.

I don't think that the vendors are "sneaking" this into the consumer shopping carts; I suspect that anyone buying this is either a) eager to be fooled, b) more interested in the "conspicuous consumption" aspects than the actual sound/picture quality, or c) a combination of the above.

Uh-oh. Ruby on Rails has a lot of default settings that are decidedly not secure; our own Patio11 wrote an article on this topic for the CACM not too long ago.

You might want to sit down with a security professional before too long, and get an outside opinion on your code.

This extension only applies to their recordings (as performers). The songwriting copyright is already set at 70 years, so nothing is changing there.

Looks like it was 140MB at highest density.

Now, excuse me a moment, while I try to get those pesky kids off of my lawn.

My approach is to first ask people who their customers will be, and how they plan on selling to them-- and then, if they get past that, I'll hear what the idea is.

The government gets to define everything for government purposes. I'm not sure why this should surprise you.

I'm particularly impressed by Rand's ability to keep his spirits up; as one who has been through similar, I know how soul-crushing it can be, if you let it. Kudos.

Without knowing the details in this case, I am assuming that the person in question falsely claimed to have been recognized as a tulku. I can't imagine that this was part of the job requirements.

So, an analog would be falsely claiming on your CV to have won a prestigious award (say, the Turing Award).

It's a pretty outrageous lie; but then again, so is claiming to have cancer.

In the US, at least, you're not allowed to say whatever you like-- there are certain types of speech that are prohibited-- so the first part of your quip is plainly false.

As for the second, I can't for the life of me figure out what it would mean. I can say something, but some unseen force can prevent others from hearing it?

Is disk fragmentation a serious problem for you? I use SSDs for most of my drives, and let the Microsoft defragger do its thing once in a while, and leave it at that. Doesn't seem to bother me none.

Most articles can be reached by every other article, but not if you are only following the first link. You can make a case that anything on the chain that leads from Philosophy back to Philosophy is the root, but anything outside of that is going to be tough to argue, in my opinion.

In the e-mail, reproduced in the complaint, Berry stressed that his past work experience as an engineer made him more valuable than the usual first-year associate, and that "after working here for several months now it has become clear that I have as much experience and ability as an associate many years my senior, as much skill writing, and a superior legal mind to most I have met."

What makes you think that small blogs are censored?

The assumptions hidden in question shows such a misunderstanding of what goes on around here, the mind reels.

I'm a little surprised you'd write a blog post and get HN involved before picking up the phone.

There's a telephone number there-- I imagine you should be able to get this cleared up quickly.

Maybe I'm lacking imagination, but I'm not exactly sure what I would ask the ladies, or what kind of answers they could give.

First, it seems pretty disrespectful to use religious imagery, etc., for a commercial product, especially if you are not a practitioner of said religion. This is doubly worrisome by the text that seems to suggest that "zen" (or, rather, Zen) and "Buddhism" are interchangeable concepts. They're not.

Second, if you are a practitioner, you're undoubtedly aware of the large role that lists play in Buddhism-- which means that it's a bit deceptive to have a product named "Buddhalists" (or Buddalists-- see below) and not have the product based on the traditional Buddhist conception of lists.

Third: you don't even get the spelling straight on your own headline. That's scary.

This topic has recently become the subject of much discussion here in Norway, as recent events have brought more attention to the anonymous racist comments (and harassment) that are quite often found on public forums (such newspaper websites, etc.) There are some who claim that expecting people to sign their real names to their comments would raise the level of discourse, as people would have to take some responsibility for their speech.

Making a list of the 10 largest corporations run by college drop-outs is like making a list of the 10 largest corporations run by men over six feet tall.