When not hacking, I love investigating the marginalia (doodles in the margins) of medieval Italian, English & Irish manuscripts. Google's book scanning project is awesome for this. Ten years ago I couldn't have imagined having uninterrupted access to this stuff, ever.
Ok that does make sense. But surely the best path is to have a more nuanced evaluation of the options than a binary 'Yay!' or 'no'.
Anyhoo - if someone finds the OP useful then all is well, and maybe someone will.
Seeing everything as 'no' or an enthusiastic yes. It's like always being either really down or hyperactively enthusiastic. As others have commented, there are times when something is just 'ok' and still worth doing - or things you just aquiesce to doing that turn out to be really great. I wouldn't want to miss out on such things by only ever (or even mostly) being 'no' or 'hell yeah!'.
Sounds like manic depression to me.
The example of refining the search for a good candidate is wise though - but it can be explained less dramatically. No candidate was remarkable, though some were good, and he re-advertised the position.
It's a great idea, but you'll benefit from focusing on a particular industry (so that the startups benefit from network effects & relevant mentoring/advice etc.). Also, one of the reasons YC works so well is the relatively low fixed overheads & scaling effects of success in software. If you can find a non-tech niche that fits then fantastic - good luck!
That's not a proof by any definition of the word I understand. Imagining something does not prove the existence (or otherwise) of that thing.
[edit] but a 10th century bishop writing 77 years after the end of the 10th century is still noteworthy :o)
Interesting - especially useful that 'engagement with the blogosphere' rates higher than 'great content' in the survey. Not sure how true that is in practice, but it's a consideration.
I liked how they included a 'consensus/contention' metric alongside their percentage ratings.
I agree that's a better phrase based on the rules, but stating what happened ('car crash') rather than the result ('car is wrecked') conveys more information (ie. why 'I' am not already home).
Either works though.
It's not difficult to avoid the 'HR gateway' problem - just have HR concentrate on payroll, legal compliance issues, visas etc. & not interview or filter resumes. Interviewer should be the prospective recruit's direct manager, &/or someone who has/is or can do the job in question (wherever possible) and a seperate interview by someone else to confirm the first opinion. Is that rare? I've never hired any other way.
I agree with the problems you mention, and the likely unintended effects. My point was that it might be a least-worst-option alternative. I suspect there are no perfect solutions that can be imposed onto the Afghan people from outside.
It's harder than many other large corporations because banking laws vary from state to state, and there are federal laws restricting banks operating universally across several states. Also, as a 'startup bank' you are initially reliant on your incumbent rivals for clearing and interbank transactions (unless you do literally leave cash in a vault at 0%).
I agree technology has made it much easier recently though.
Fair comment, but just how tangible was that $100mm valuation? McAfee anti-virus software appears to have grown primarily through paying for pre-installed trial version placement on new pcs - not through being a 'better product'.
I find John Lewis/Waitrose very interesting. Imagine combining Wholefoods with Goldman Sachs (pre flotation) & raw Marxism (the workers literally own the means of production) - that's what this is. It's certainly an interesting combination.
Next branch of pirate bay?
Seriously, though - thanks for posting this, I had no idea connection and hardware costs were so high in East Africa, and it will be facinating to see what happens. Hopefully better access to information will reduce corruption, for example.
I agree the headline does read like that of a fluff piece, but the article is considered, and it does quantify & address the question in the headline. I guess what I'm saying is that if your attention is grabbed by the headline, then you won't be disappointed by the article - in this case.
I hate to rain on your bonfire, but here's what you're up against to profit from this: I took your two examples & threw them into Amazon (UK):
Quest for Adventure by Chris Bonnington (Paperback - 19 Sep 1991)
23 Used & new from £0.01
Return to Go (Hardcover)
by Jim Slater (Author)
12 used from £0.25
So besides the critical mass issues raised by other commenters, your information providers would have to be either cheaper, more experienced (neither realistic), or somehow provide a far richer experience than these two well-regarded examples. That's a big hurdle & it doesn't scale well.
Try to talk to him about it another time, when you are both relaxed. He's likely got himself worked up into anger over the 'other housemates' (which to him could include you) before doing something that childish.
It will be much harder for him to behave like that once you have discussed it calmly - although if he is 100% a-hole that might not matter much. Also, try to discover the root cause of his annoyance - he might have a justified complaint that just hasn't affected you yet. Good luck!
My 2c: Ask an amateur musician what they think of the site (ideally ask several). If they all say 'wow', then consider it. If they all shrug & say 'I can do this on [say myspace] easier' then don't.