sparkzilla

Actually, the best question for a recruiter to ask is "Why wouldn't we hire you?" You'll be amazed what people say.

Google makes billions while the Wikipedia contributors providing their fact checks and knowledge graph data get nothing.

https://newslines.org/blog/google-and-wikipedia-best-friends...

For some background on Key's case check this timeline: https://newslines.org/matthew-keys/

Snap!

I often meet people who want to use <insert tech here> for their generic MVP or website, and seem quite eager to spend thousands on programmers replicating what you can easily find on WordPress. But even though I tell them they should buy a WordPress template closest to the result they want, and hire a programmer if they need to customize it (saving thousands of dollars and a while load of grief), quite a few simply don't believe it's possible and still spend the money.

In case of sonic attack, think only of yourself. Do not panic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8pGS4cWbHo

Polar Bear populations are not declining. Also, the plural of anecdote is not data. https://polarbearscience.com/2017/02/15/baffin-bay-and-kane-...

I see you got downvoted too. So much for facts.

Just a reminder: When floating ice melts in water the level of the water does not rise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOCqHRpQh88

Try http://fiskkit.com/

The thing news startups need more of is neither news nor investigation, but distribution. Too many news organisations think that quality content is the driver of news, when the challenge is to get distribution, and then you can make news of whatever quality you like. By focusing on "quality content" WikiTribune falls into the same trap.

https://newslines.org/blog/wikitribune-will-sink/

Infobitt had a more radical strategy - to strip the news down into individual facts and then reconstruct articles from them. The problem was that the site used crowdsourcing, which is too slow a process to use for news - a problem Wikitribune will also come up against.

I have lost the same amount from about the same weight in the past eight weeks or so, and will have no trouble continuing. The key (for me at least) is to eat a big lunch (around 1000 calories) of whatever you like (today I had burger and fries) and then have a couple of small snacks to a total of 200-300 calories in the evening (I'm eating a Muller corner yoghurt right now). The problem with most diets is that they starve you throughout the day, when the actual problem is habitual snacking. With this method, the most you have to wait is until the next day, when you can eat whatever you like again for lunch. Originally I intended to have a cheat day every 10 days, but I've barely needed them.

Many journalists are happy to censor opposing views.

>And then a couple of other guys came to support him.

And there's the rub. On Wikipedia, 'truth' is determined by the most powerful players on the page.

It's not really a choice between a feed tuned to extract cash from small businesses and a newsletter though, is it? People were seeing my business's posts without any complaint until Facebook throttled the reach. I was also a Facebook user at that time, and didn't notice any particular problem either from pages that I follow. Now we get to see what Facebook thinks makes the most money for itself.

The business closed. And, I'm doing my part...

I'm surprised the author didn't mention that Facebook has a history of screwing small business owners.

A few years ago I spent more than $4000 on Facebook to build up about 4000 fans for a karaoke venue I ran at the time. I'd put some news out, and reach most of the fans. Then Facebook told me that to reach all of my fans I would now have to "boost" my posts, while the company simultaneously cut the organic reach to the fans I had paid them for.

They used the excuse that "people have to much stuff on their feed" but we all know that is BS. If I had known they would have done that I would never have bothered in the first place. Why help a company build its audience for you to be treated poorly? I suspect many many small business people feel that same way, and will abandon Facebook as soon as a less greedy alternative comes along.

It doesn't shit all over your floor.

Crisis averted: https://www.livescience.com/60607-helium-reserve-discovered-...

Actually, I've found the opposite. My feed is almost entirely social now, and it's very difficult to find news.

While this is a good move for Facebook's users, who will get a less cluttered feed, it's a disaster for publishers who use Facebook for content distribution. For example, over the past year my company has been supplying news to a network of two million MMA fans on Facebook. With this change it's very difficult to make enough revenue to continue: less reach = less clickthrough to our site = less revenue. The silver lining is that if publishers write off Facebook as a distribution method then perhaps they can work more on other distribution methods, generating some innovation.

<insert reply about platform dependency here>

Warning: If you have work to do, do not start this game.

Free speech is part of the natural right of individuals to live and think without being oppressed by society.

I will report this back to the Dear Leader, he will find your plan very interesting!

Expect the nukes to fall when the north wind doth blow

>His company was, as we all know, a dorm-room lark, a thing he ginned up in a Red Bull–induced fit of sleeplessness.

False. He stole the business from the Winklevoss twins.

Roger Waters

...with our petrodollars

Rings are not likely to slip off and break, though.