quickConclusion

I checked launch cadence, and I am now thinking Ariane is in much bigger trouble than I thought.

Ariane 2016: 7 launches (all successful)

SpaceX 2016: 9 launches (8 successes, 1 failure)

Ariane 2017: only 1 so far (don't know how many affected by the strike)

SpaceX 2017: 4 successes so far.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ariane_launches_(2010%...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_He...

Article says that in many cases it is the mandatory job posting to hire H1Bs. Answers are ignored.

You forced me to check my sources. Thank you. I cannot just trust my memory.

Looks like the front of the house can pool their tips in many states in the USA indeed. But according to Nolo, they cannot pool with people who typically get no tips.

"Only employees who regularly receive tips can be part of the pool. Employees can't be required to share their tips with employees who don't usually receive their own tips, like dishwashers or cooks."

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/tip-pooling-credits-s...

The cook in the kitchen gets no tip. Unlikely to be appreciated, gets no share of the tip, and could make my dish a delight, or spit in it.

The guy/girl says "i'm gonna be your waiter tonight", and that's the last time you see them, others bring the dishes and clean the table. And by law, they cannot share the tip.

When I pay for service, I'd like the employer and the market to figure out for me what's a fair wage. Don't put it on me, 1) I'll most likely be wrong and unfair, and 2) I just cannot tip the cook.

If all of this is true, the logical end to me, not suggested by the author, is that Google buys Uber. For less money than anyone could. Travis is out.

Makes industrial sense for Google to be in that business too.

>Services, on the other hand, almost always are governed by contracts, and the contracts get very extensive.

I try to have extremely light contracts. I'd rather have the payment structure reflect the work and the value over time. If we don't agree, we part ways, this is cheaper than arguing with lawyers.

Also: trust & repeat clients. Little need for contracts anymore. Then yes, I can get screwed, but that's the cost of doing business, and they can only screw me once, protecting my downside. Still cheaper than lawyers.

Thanks

>So Nyaira decided to share the photos with him on Messenger (Facebook's private chat tool).

>That was a big mistake. Almost instantly, Facebook's computer software deactivated her.

I thought Facebook was using the Signal protocol from Open Whisper for Messenger, so that even Facebook cannot access the content.

Are pictures/attachment in clear? Or was it the previous version? What's the situation today?

If this is not their phone, made by them, how can they brick them? How is that legal?

Are there software vendors selling systems that make it easy to fingerprint documents? Are there any proven known cases of some administration branches using fingerprinting routinely?

This reminds me of the bird complaining: "if only there was no air slowing me down, I would fly a lot faster".

> Full Ack.

Intentional spoonerism?

Agree. But my point is that people adapt and learn. They assumed PageRank was still ruling and could be somewhat trusted, and now they're learning -a little late- that FB's popular randomnewssite.biz should be challenged.

Maybe something new will happen at the next election, but it will be harder to convince people with this type of fake news.

People learn. I still believe more in people than algorithms to debunk fake news. This election was step 1 in people's learning curve about it.

Of course, if they don't want to learn, they won't. But no algorithm or laws will change that anyway.

Even if what you said was true, what would be the point of a strong economy if people cannot have healthcare? I'd rather have a less strong economy and better health for everyone.

Not surprisingly, it helps the economy: people dont lose their savings, jobs and houses when they get sick in Europe.

I really do not get it.

Verizon spends a lot of money for what essentially is a widely recognizable brand, popular destination, and an email service, and they change it?

"I saw it on Altaba"???

All these people with emails @yahoo.com is free advertising for yahoo.com, but guess what, no more yahoo.com? Will they try to force a change of email domain over 20 years and kill the email service for good?

I have no clue now why they bought Yahoo in the first place...

Edit: got it all wrong. Thanks all for clarifying which piece is what.

I think Facebook's demise is closer than we believe, and that the main culprit will be Wall Street.

Given that the Street wants the stock price to always go up, future earnings has to go up. Hard to do with less user growth, because 1.5B already. More ads is hard if you want to keep the platform interesting. Still, room to grow in lesser FB-developed countries, with FB benefiting from economy growth and ad market growing there. But how much growth left in main earning market (US) without destroying the user experience?

With strong leadership, FB could say "to hell with higher and higher profits, I am happy to run a very profitable utility, not plastered with ads, a la Craiglist". But Zuckerberg seems all talk there. And he is trying to sell a lot of his stock. Yes, he's trying to retain control too, but that will be very hard (see current litigation on that). And employees don't like stocks that are not going up.

With less user and financial growth, less momentum, fewer interesting challenges, FB can slowly turn into Yahoo/AOL, and people may start saying bad things about the company (users + employees), creating a bad momentum. It would be hard to reverse, especially if FB is managed quarterly by earnings, as opposed to strong leadership.

Also, I get the feeling that FB got a small temporary break with Trump. A Hillary victory may have meant many very senior executives leaving to the new administration, possibly accelerating FB's loss of momentum.

Obviously, lots of talk here, many "ifs" and "maybe", and no hard data. That's why in the end I am not shorting the stock today. But wondering if I should.

And because they operate in a small market, just big enough so they can be very profitable, but don't want other people to know about it and compete with them...

Let's quickly interpret this to further our pre-existing agenda (healthcare, guns, environment, vaccination, inequality, obama, immigration...)

Founders will like the move.

If you are a big investor, the first question during an IPO roadshow of the next a16z-backed company may well be: "a16z, are you leaving the board after the IPO?"

If there is no way for me to delete my personal data after i leave the store, i find it distopyan.

If one day all the stores are like this, I guess you may argue I can still grow my own food, and everything is fine.

Interesting, i can see where the risk of confusion is. But wondering how it could have been written for similar effect...

" For the teens, the psychologist's advice is literally: well, maybe don't be such a bitch in the first place, Mom. "

Feels a bit confusing. Is there a better way?

Interesting, well written. Gives a window on how a corporation manages relationships with young smart people, and the actual psychological impact it has, the effectiveness. Thank you.

Nitpicking: "Disclaimer: All opinions expressed below are my own." ??? Who else? How does poor legalese help your story? I swear: nobody will sue you.

I am thankful for my elders and felllow citizens to provide for free education, free healthcare, and retirement for all.

My turn.

It can absolutely be a valid strategy. I have used both, the true apology without excuses, and the FU one.

It depends. Do i really regret what i did? Was it the wrong thing to do? Then i'll apologise, and try to get rid of all the excuses.

Was someone offended and want me to apologise, but when i look at it, i stick to my guns? Then FU strategy, no apology, i'll fight for my point all the way.

You can think that this is bad to expell people that way from social interactions with others. That it is bad for a minority to decide the news a majority should have easy access to.

And therefore, you could decide as a society that you want to forbid Facebook to do that.

It assumes you are in a democracy. China obviously is not. But if you're lucky to live in one, then you don't have to accept what Facebook does, at least in your country, because they are a private company.

Then you want to bargain a discount, a faster delivery, a whatever, for being a public reference.

In other words, if they want something, and want it badly, instead of monetizing it with $$, monetize it with a case study.

Personal favor also. You go the extra mile for one user/infleluencer/decision maker in a customer company. Then ask to return the favor: "could you spend 15 minutes talking to this prospect of mine, it would help me a lot".

They can say no, find an excuse. But it will hurt them because they know you helped them unreasonably in the past, it was valuable to them, and you may be less willing to do so in the future.

Some will say yes. You just need one or two.

>as long as people are getting something for their lack of privacy (such a slimy but convenient taxi service) they're OK with it.

There are more options than "use it or leave it".

We, as a society, can value Uber's service, and use it, and agree to pass privacy laws that would force them, upon user request, to delete every record of their transportation history from their servers. And they would be audited. Technically it is not hard.

The tech industry lobby would fight against it, the NSA and the FBI too, but I don't see why we the people would not support that.

This is why we need good whistle blower protections. If Google does that intentionally, there must be quite a few people in the know at Google.

Even without, it just takes to open a throw away account here, and say something.

Side question, off topic: I am seriously considering switching to Linux (Windows slow, auto-updates outside my control). I'd start with a dual boot and see whether i will miss some apps.

My sticking issue is mailbox. I like local email storage bc of responsiveness, offline use, as opposed to web ui. Is there an email/calendar client that can work on windows and linux, and update the same file? E.g if i sent an email on Windows, and now i am on Linux, i'd like to see it in my sent folder. Any tips?