If there are tests for a binary result (has cow-flu/does not have cow-flu) that are not correlated, one or both of the tests is bad. Further information could confirm or negate the choice of Y or Z (or sticking only with X).
I think 'ramen profitable' is a great pithy phrase, but to work long hours effectively (and stay healthy) it always struck me as a false economy to live on rice & beans. Good to see some data on the topic.
The bbc are a bit behind, but have been talking about doing the same for a while now - and appear to be building this archive of (currently just very old) programmes out gradually:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/
Not sure whether it can be accessed from ip addresses outside the UK though...
But I'd suggest that the disappointment people felt with MS products was at least part of what spurred open office & ubuntu (for example) - and open source software certainly threatens MS's revenue stream.
In my experience (IANAL etc.): If you're being hired solely for your expertise &/or experience, there should not be a non-compete clause in your contract. If you are expecting to some extent to be trained in an emerging field then a non-compete clause may be justified.
Juristiction plays it's part too - I've 'agreed' to such a clause in the past knowing that it was unenforcable as restraint-of-trade under EU legislation.
Some useful tips that can be applied to other areas too - not just open source coding projects. I liked the examples of dealing with time & resource sinks.
Good start on a great idea. You could add a signup for email updates option on your homepage to keep those of us who would definitely buy a more developed version (ie more exotic chord recognition) &/or different format informed about new releases - I'd signup to that. I actually browsed the apple app store in vain for something like this yesterday.
"4.Pretending you know what you're doing is almost the same as knowing" - no, it's not. And such hubris can prevent knowledge discovery (besides the loss of reputation).
That makes sense - thanks for the clarification. Assuming there is a similar exclusion for business pcs then it might not be too bad. I suspect the end result will focus on residential homes with a TV or internet access.
The contentious point will come if/when people start being charged for TV content for using a device that can receive streamed TV - eg businesses being charged a licence fee for each pc/blackberry/ipod. I'll be interested to see how this goes.
Not a critisism, but a question: why are you paying a return on investment funds from before they are drawn? I'm curious - was that based on a precedent?
I agree, you're right about the low dividend. But the argument against paying a high price for MS's future earnings stands. I conflated two ideas, but although I actually believe MS's conservative cash position is perhaps their best strength - I still believe they had a valuable monopoly & lost their way.
True. But you pay a lot for the 3b as an investor. 1% earnings & negligible dividend for a 'monopoly' is not great, even in this low-interest environment. It indicates that the market (and I would guess most HN readers) do not believe MS's 'monopoly' is secure.
The founders were looking to raise funds to buy back - but IF this post is correct, I guess Ebay must think they can get a better price via IPO (or are using the IPO-route as a bargaining tool).
The advice already given here is good - if you believe you can be a 'google' the their 'altavista' then your new competitor is an important validation & valuable testlab for your idea - go for it.
BUT as others have noted, that depends on your market etc. Good luck.
From Europe, whilst many elements of our culture are less conducive to entrepreneurs than the US, these examples are not among them (except I don't know about the legal docs thing - I agree with earlier replies that critical information providers need to have rigorously maintained qualifications). My mate set up an internet wine company here without any problems, it's easy to pay directors of a company in equity [but non-directors get minimum wage protection], and the real estate industry is 'self-regulated' here in the UK. Oh, and we have free universal healthcare.
All that said, I still believe the next game-changing startups will come mostly from the US - which is still the destination of choice. And I agree with your central argument that 'big government' generally stifles innovation.
How about Richard Branson? Who has created more $1Bn companies in different marketplaces (and had fun along the way)?
I count 4/5 so far Virgin Records, Atlantic (& Blue) airlines, Radio, Mobile/Media... and counting (for example Virgin Galactic & Rail are getting there).
Interesting article, but not very internationally-informed. Mixed-use residential/retail mall complexes may be novel to the US, but they've been common in Singapore (& I would guess elsewhere) for some time. I lived in one a few years ago. Strikes me that it'll only ever be a niche market, except where land space is a high premium.
I agree with Fenn, it's definitely c. They have form for leaking such headline-grabbing 'information', including one about introducing business class with rude 'extras'.