p90x

last post.

"Maybe you could start up a thread or write something that addresses your perceptions so it can be discussed"

i thought about it, but i decided that there isn't any point. the site is what the users want it to be and i'm not here to "educate" them.

great analogy, btw.

long time lurker, short time poster.

I will make 3 statements:

1) hacker news has become www.reddit.com/r/nerdstuff

2) “Entrepreneurs are simply those who understand that there is little difference between obstacle and opportunity and are able to turn both to their advantage.” Niccolo Machiavelli

A lot of energy is being put into user driven content, which seems to start of useful but end up becoming crap. There must be an opportunity in there somewhere.

3) someone reply to my post with "this." so i can move on from this site, and find something useful to do.

another lesson could be: "don't make a site that appeals to people who use ad-block. revenue won't keep up with demand."

This.

"it's a disgrace that we give Google transit data but locals can't compete"

my city and transit system offers that info to locals if they want to compete.

how do you know what the market demands? you know through sales. The market liked a big iPhone 3, so it is reasonable to predict that they will like a big iPhone 4.

Feature list:

- front facing camera - "retinal" display - iPhone 4 style designing

The first iPad was a big iPhone 3, so this one will be a big iPhone 4. iPad 3 will be a big iPhone 5. Why mess with a successful model?

if you want to trade proverbs i'm give this one: "a lot of talk and no action makes homer simpson a dull boy."

i don't understand the purpose of the article, or of your post. if the city has what it takes it will happen. if it doesn't it won't. everything else is conversation. that is how i look at it, what am i missing?

I didn't find any use in the article. Apparently, the useful information will be coming next week:

"Next week, I’ll give what I think is a potential plan for Montreal to take the lead in Open Source commercialization."

I hope he isn't going to ask for government money.

Does this need to be said? Is there anyone suggesting that there is a tech bubble like there was in 2000?

I mean that literally. Is there a single person on the face of the earth voicing that opinion? Because I haven't heard it.

The tech bubble in 2000 was more than overvalued companies, over hyped stories, and big promises. What I see now is the same thing that happens every day in other financial sectors.

That's interesting. Did you know that apple's original logo depicts Isaac Newton under an apple tree?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Apple_fir...

Apple is the forbidden fruit. Tempting, seductive and ill get you kicked out of paradise.

I guess we won't be seeing a RIM, Microsoft merger any time soon then.

Don't go to the library. I don't want people taking my seat.

I like it because it describes someone who knows how to sell and convince, but also has a lot of skill to back it up (pool hustler for example).

"may reduce your data throughput speeds periodically for the remainder of your then current and immediately following billing cycle to ensure high quality network performance for other users at locations and times of peak demand."

"Verizon says it will only do this if you fall in the top 5% of the company's data users"

To me this sounds fair to users and good for business. I'm part of the 95% and would prefer to do business with a company that puts my needs ahead of the 5% heaviest users.

Usage-Based Billing in Canada has been canceled.

"Ottawa to reverse CRTC Internet billing decision" http://www.tested.com/news/how-canadas-usage-base-internet-b...

According to Wikipedia, PayPal claimed they canceled the service because wikileak's funding origination, Wau Holland Foundation, violated its "Acceptable Use Policy" by engaging in "illegal activities".

Wau Holland Foundation is responding by suing PayPal. That's how the law works.

Partisan politics has no place in business.

The media likes to talk about twitter and facebook because it is profitable. Social media stories have good margins, and wide market appeal.

Getting source material for a story is very easy and very cheap, this increases their margins as opposed to paying a correspondent and crew which is very expensive.

Also, talking about social media allows an uninformed and uninterested western audience to relate to the events in a far away place. This increases the potential market of the story.

News is a business, stories are their product.

For profit corporations staying out of politics as much as possible, regardless of which side they take on an issue. Especially when the issue has to do with society in general and very little to do with their business as in the Visa Paypal case.

There is a lot of support for Al Jazeera English in the west now, but when they report facts and show images that are news worthy but put American lives in danger, it will again be the outcast station.

The Cultural Revolution, where tens of millions were persecuted, millions killed, and millions more permanently disabled, was only 30 years ago. I think that a lot of oppression we see in China is from a desire to avoid another such revolution.

Obviously, selfish power grabbing plays a part, as it does in every other human society.

I don't believe in the universal superiority of American style free speech.

When I said "we" I was referring to the tech community in general, and tech activists in particular.

But you bring out a good point. The American government is approaching the crisis in a responsible, and moderate way precisely because they have an investment in Egypt and will have to deal with the consequences of the crisis.

Tech activists are behaving irresponsibly, and encouraging civil disobedience precisely because they have no investment in Egypt and can walk away if things there deteriorate. Armchair revolutionaries.

They could simply follow the law and fulfill their contracts, could they not?

Ok... Can you connect the dots for me? I still don't see what I should be taking away from that. I'm sure that there is a whole spectrum of political opinion in Egypt, as there is in the USA, of which Mardini represents a single point.

We don't know what is going on in Egypt other than sound bites from CNN. It's our flavor of the month. We don't have anything invested in the country, and don't have to deal with the consequences of any of our actions there. Considering all that, is it ethical for us to get involved?

Ultimately, this system is an interesting use of technology and makes for good infotainment. I have doubts to the extent which social networking impacts peoples lives in or moves events in Egypt. I see it as a cheap and easy way for news agencies to relate international news back to our lives in the west, possibly to make news stories more commercially viable.

I just don't like the precedents of companies taking activist roles in foreign countries.