The lawyer's comment is particularly funny, too. Most countries in the world already have the option at their disposal because, duh, they censor all sorts of things anyway.
Can anyone chime in on why a front facing camera is needed at all? Big #fail or too resource hungry and it was their way of stripping my ages old first gen iPad?
I'm an Afghan citizen of US descent. I'm about 450 millionth in line. Seriously.
I live in Kabul, and I'm in great danger every day. You never know, those drones, heh. Anyway, second exit off the Kabul western highway. Take the second right and continue until you reach the camel. Then take a left and it's around a mile down. It's the yellow crack shack. Please send two CIA agents full time!
But the iOS success has really made it clear: Control the hardware supply chain and you can produce products (e.g. the iPad, the iPhone) that are actually cheaper than your competitor's products, as well as better.
This point gets made often, but I'm deeply suspicious about it.
Methinks Apple happily contributes to it so as to distract from the fact that its impeccable supply chain is even more key. Apple moves its entire --and colossal-- worldwide inventory in five days. No one comes even close, by a very wide margin.
There's no fundamental incompatibility IMO for an OEM to line up only two lines of well designed laptops (consumer/pro) whose models only differ in their display (11", 13", 15", 17"), and whose components are broadly shared between the various models.
Look for Google to counter with a first or second party tablet in the near future. Expect them to push heavily and fail miserably on the proprietary Google services that you don't get on the Kindle Fire.
The issue here is that a company name is only unique for a given location.
Even within the same countries, nothing prevents two firms in nearby locations to be using the exact same name and doing the exact same or nearly the exact same thing, until one of the two trademarks its name. So, who gets to use the domain name?
"Had I asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have answered stronger horses". (Henry Ford)
Your points are valid, but only up to the point. Some people, and VCs are no exception, simply can't see the elephant in the room. I'd wager that more than a few VCs rejected, say, Google, or Twitter, or Instagram. When you're doing something completely out of the box, your audience will generally not get what you're onto.
The guy who started Europe Assistance is but one example. Faced with rebuttals from his potential financiers that there was no demand, he eventually showed them a phony market study that suggested there is. The rest is history.
That is all very expensive to produce, but do you think 30% of every sale is justified? Really, if writing software to do things takes up 30% of all economic activity, why the hell are we embracing that? The answer is because it doesn't.
Indeed. I'd wager it's closer to half in most of the industries I've worked in. Think it through: order processing, managing fraud, managing supplies and inventory, provisioning, shipping, accounting, the list goes on and on. If you were in an industry that delivered goods, you'd also add organizing your production chain based on orders to the mess. All of that automated for 30%? Go run a business for a while. You'll then appreciate how cheap it is.
Yes, of course. All your content are belong to us....
Personally I'm more than happy with the idea that my details aren't passed along to Time's, since my trust in most US corporations is about zero.
Regardless of whether you respect Time Inc.'s collection, I'm sure you'll disagree with me that you yourself have "no fucking clue how hard it is to create and operate" a respectable journalistic enterprise.
i don't disagree, actually. I do know this, however: Times, like virtually every other company that tried to create a well integrated back-end system, has been eating crow for years -- and it is failing.
Businesses that get the non-trivial stuff working properly are far and between, and absolutely no one --not even the big IT names-- is out there delivering anything that works properly. 30% for something that works and isn't under your responsibility is a steal.
Make it process orders in one step for 400M users -- it needs to scale accordingly, btw.
Make it deal with refunds, chargebacks, reverse-chargebacks, complaints, fraud, yada yada, pretty much anything that can go wrong when you do business.
Make it manage subscriptions, including cancellations. And rentals. And DRM.
Make it deal with taxes in 150+ countries, including local variations where applicable.
Make it do your monthly accounting, including subcontractor payments.
Make it provide all sorts of metrics to your subcontractors, too.
Oh, and QA test anything your subcontractors send you, too. Check for malware, crashes, etc., anything that might make those millions of end-users unsatisfied.
Do all that, and more, and you'll appreciate how 30% is a bargain.
Alternatively, just shut up. Because you've absolutely no fucking clue how hard it is to create and operate a backend.
I'm mystified what the motivation would be to work on something like that unless its just another paycheck.
The same motivation that leads coders to contribute to GPL software, in spite of the fact that gazillions of other coders and designers and etc. make money on it without ever contributing anything back.
As I understand it, inflation is when the government prints more money than the value of goods and services produced.(...)
It occurs to me that bitcoins can't be abused in this way. It's impossible for a government to blithely print money except by mining, for which there are diminishing returns.
Unless a government is reckless, the primary contributor to inflation or deflation is banks expanding or contracting the credit supply. It stems from fractional reserve banking, and it goes like this:
1. Customers enter banks applying for loans. 2. Banks extend the loans, creating money out of thin air, and worrying about reserves later (aka M0 lags M1, which it does indeed). 3. A fraction of the money eventually circulates back into the bank's reserves. Goto 1.
Note that the above process also holds for metals and bitcoins. If you allow fractional reserve banking, fiat or commodity makes no material difference beyond where the base money comes from.
Also note that the process is healthy in itself, since entrepreneurs need loans to create and operate businesses. Things go haywire when banks overextend loans (inflating asset bubble) that are subsequently defaulted (deflating bubble).
- Not black, not white: population size is not significant relative to these other effects.
I haven't been in the US untold numbers of years, so you'll have to excuse the question... Isn't the hispanic population significant in the US nowadays? Or are they considered just as white as WASPs?
Oh come on. Be proud when you should be. In this case you should be.
The US was still segregating blacks only 50 years ago. For perspective, more than a few EU country --many of which have 10% or more of their population from African or Asian origin-- are still miles away from representing non-whites in parliament, let alone electing one at the executive helm.
Nonsense. What this implies is that you've many ancestors who were more or less distant cousins.
Incidentally, optimal fertility seems to occur when mating third or fourth generation cousins, aka someone from the nearby area. Some historians and demographers additionally suggest revisiting the idea that family size dropped when wealth increased during the industrial revolution: an alternative explanation, or at least contribution, could be that the increased population mobility led to inoptimal mating patterns.
Slashdot Mirror
The lawyer's comment is particularly funny, too. Most countries in the world already have the option at their disposal because, duh, they censor all sorts of things anyway.
Can anyone chime in on why a front facing camera is needed at all? Big #fail or too resource hungry and it was their way of stripping my ages old first gen iPad?
I'm an Afghan citizen of US descent. I'm about 450 millionth in line. Seriously.
I live in Kabul, and I'm in great danger every day. You never know, those drones, heh. Anyway, second exit off the Kabul western highway. Take the second right and continue until you reach the camel. Then take a left and it's around a mile down. It's the yellow crack shack. Please send two CIA agents full time!
But the iOS success has really made it clear: Control the hardware supply chain and you can produce products (e.g. the iPad, the iPhone) that are actually cheaper than your competitor's products, as well as better.
This point gets made often, but I'm deeply suspicious about it.
Methinks Apple happily contributes to it so as to distract from the fact that its impeccable supply chain is even more key. Apple moves its entire --and colossal-- worldwide inventory in five days. No one comes even close, by a very wide margin.
There's no fundamental incompatibility IMO for an OEM to line up only two lines of well designed laptops (consumer/pro) whose models only differ in their display (11", 13", 15", 17"), and whose components are broadly shared between the various models.
And if the battery life and price are right. And if it ever delivers. (Remember the Courier?)
Look for Google to counter with a first or second party tablet in the near future. Expect them to push heavily and fail miserably on the proprietary Google services that you don't get on the Kindle Fire.
There. Fixed that for you.
That's not comparable. Also, MS would by no means be guaranteed to succeed at monetizing it. Recall that Google makes less on Android than on iOS:
http://gizmodo.com/5897457/google-makes-four-times-more-money-from-ios-than-android
I'd wager this will happen instead eventually:
People say, "I want privacy" and Government tells Free Market, "Fuck you, stop tracking."
If by "real users" you mean the geeks, that's a rather small market share in the long run for MS.
The issue here is that a company name is only unique for a given location.
Even within the same countries, nothing prevents two firms in nearby locations to be using the exact same name and doing the exact same or nearly the exact same thing, until one of the two trademarks its name. So, who gets to use the domain name?
Long term, the thing will get discarded entirely.
On the other hand, the other 1000 guys the VCs rejected were not Google or Twitter.
Possibly... How can you know, if they never got the chance to try it out?
"Had I asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have answered stronger horses". (Henry Ford)
Your points are valid, but only up to the point. Some people, and VCs are no exception, simply can't see the elephant in the room. I'd wager that more than a few VCs rejected, say, Google, or Twitter, or Instagram. When you're doing something completely out of the box, your audience will generally not get what you're onto.
The guy who started Europe Assistance is but one example. Faced with rebuttals from his potential financiers that there was no demand, he eventually showed them a phony market study that suggested there is. The rest is history.
That is all very expensive to produce, but do you think 30% of every sale is justified? Really, if writing software to do things takes up 30% of all economic activity, why the hell are we embracing that? The answer is because it doesn't.
Indeed. I'd wager it's closer to half in most of the industries I've worked in. Think it through: order processing, managing fraud, managing supplies and inventory, provisioning, shipping, accounting, the list goes on and on. If you were in an industry that delivered goods, you'd also add organizing your production chain based on orders to the mess. All of that automated for 30%? Go run a business for a while. You'll then appreciate how cheap it is.
I take it you work for apple.
No... But I used to work on back-end systems.
Yes, of course. All your content are belong to us....
Personally I'm more than happy with the idea that my details aren't passed along to Time's, since my trust in most US corporations is about zero.
Regardless of whether you respect Time Inc.'s collection, I'm sure you'll disagree with me that you yourself have "no fucking clue how hard it is to create and operate" a respectable journalistic enterprise.
i don't disagree, actually. I do know this, however: Times, like virtually every other company that tried to create a well integrated back-end system, has been eating crow for years -- and it is failing.
Businesses that get the non-trivial stuff working properly are far and between, and absolutely no one --not even the big IT names-- is out there delivering anything that works properly. 30% for something that works and isn't under your responsibility is a steal.
And your proof is? Mike Daisy's narratives?
Nah, Mike Daisy wouldn't know a rosy-cheeked Chinese slave girl if she slapped him in the face.
Well, go on then... Show us proof that Apple employs underage slave labor in sweatshops.
And your proof that Apple is doing anything worse than its competition is? The competition's reports on their contractors' work conditions?
Apple's competition is much worse: they buy slaves from Apple, after they're old and tired, no longer full of energy in the bloom of youth.
More dirt? Proofs and references needed.
Else, stop trolling.
Can any moderator or site admin just ban this domain?
Dude!... Write a fucking backend.
Make it process orders in one step for 400M users -- it needs to scale accordingly, btw.
Make it deal with refunds, chargebacks, reverse-chargebacks, complaints, fraud, yada yada, pretty much anything that can go wrong when you do business.
Make it manage subscriptions, including cancellations. And rentals. And DRM.
Make it deal with taxes in 150+ countries, including local variations where applicable.
Make it do your monthly accounting, including subcontractor payments.
Make it provide all sorts of metrics to your subcontractors, too.
Oh, and QA test anything your subcontractors send you, too. Check for malware, crashes, etc., anything that might make those millions of end-users unsatisfied.
Do all that, and more, and you'll appreciate how 30% is a bargain.
Alternatively, just shut up. Because you've absolutely no fucking clue how hard it is to create and operate a backend.
And your proof is? Mike Daisy's narratives?
And your proof that Apple is doing anything worse than its competition is? The competition's reports on their contractors' work conditions?
Scuk?
Dcik. :-)
I'm mystified what the motivation would be to work on something like that unless its just another paycheck.
The same motivation that leads coders to contribute to GPL software, in spite of the fact that gazillions of other coders and designers and etc. make money on it without ever contributing anything back.
As I understand it, inflation is when the government prints more money than the value of goods and services produced.(...)
It occurs to me that bitcoins can't be abused in this way. It's impossible for a government to blithely print money except by mining, for which there are diminishing returns.
Unless a government is reckless, the primary contributor to inflation or deflation is banks expanding or contracting the credit supply. It stems from fractional reserve banking, and it goes like this:
1. Customers enter banks applying for loans.
2. Banks extend the loans, creating money out of thin air, and worrying about reserves later (aka M0 lags M1, which it does indeed).
3. A fraction of the money eventually circulates back into the bank's reserves. Goto 1.
Note that the above process also holds for metals and bitcoins. If you allow fractional reserve banking, fiat or commodity makes no material difference beyond where the base money comes from.
Also note that the process is healthy in itself, since entrepreneurs need loans to create and operate businesses. Things go haywire when banks overextend loans (inflating asset bubble) that are subsequently defaulted (deflating bubble).
Lectures with the gory details.
- Not black, not white: population size is not significant relative to these other effects.
I haven't been in the US untold numbers of years, so you'll have to excuse the question... Isn't the hispanic population significant in the US nowadays? Or are they considered just as white as WASPs?
Oh come on. Be proud when you should be. In this case you should be.
The US was still segregating blacks only 50 years ago. For perspective, more than a few EU country --many of which have 10% or more of their population from African or Asian origin-- are still miles away from representing non-whites in parliament, let alone electing one at the executive helm.
Nonsense. What this implies is that you've many ancestors who were more or less distant cousins.
Incidentally, optimal fertility seems to occur when mating third or fourth generation cousins, aka someone from the nearby area. Some historians and demographers additionally suggest revisiting the idea that family size dropped when wealth increased during the industrial revolution: an alternative explanation, or at least contribution, could be that the increased population mobility led to inoptimal mating patterns.
why does any of that matter to nerds?
It arguably is stuff that matters.