thisisdallas

No, not at all. It's political theatre the media is playing. Russia has been the big bad wolf since 2016. It's far more likely China than Russia, although it could be a variety of different states/parties.

I know this isn't technically what you are looking for, but have you looked into the rank and rent model? Basically, you build local service based websites, rank them, and then sell the leads that come in.

I live in a tiny town in the US and have rarely met my clients in person

This is awesome. I feel like it's more of the exception than the rule though. Just out of curiosity, I assume you primarily work off of referrals now, but how did you get your first few clients? Or I guess a better way of asking is how did you get enough clients to where you had enough referrals coming in?

Really good post.

The main thing that sticks out is that the author mentions how referrals are the number one source of leads for basically every freelancer. The problem is that he only mentions it. Ok, that's great. How do I get referrals? The issue is that none of the other stuff matters if you don't know how to get referrals.

The author did a good job with the post, but I can't express how important it is to be a people person when freelancing. In order to get referrals you have to get projects. In order to get projects, you have to leave your house and meet other local business owners. That's very hard for freelancers to do and I think the post would be 100 times better if the author spent a little more time on that aspect of freelancing.

Thanks for the help, I appreciate it.

You basically need to fully commit to being HIPAA compliant if you go directly with a service.

Do you mind explaining that a little more? Are there specific actions that need to be taken in order to be HIPAA compliant if no data is being saved on the server?

I agree. I could just as easily write up an emotional medium post talking about how Cortana is amazing because I can simply add calendar events using my voice. I could then say, "The pm in charge should be the CEO!!!1!!111".

This is Hacker News, though. Is it news that the CSO has a degree in Music? No, not without further investigation, which didn't occur prior to the bait-titled link to her LinkedIn profile.

First off, the title was literally a fact. There was no opinion or "click bait" added to the title.

Second, yes this is absolutely news. The Chief Security Officer of a company who has very private details of tens of millions of US citizens received two degrees in a music field. Some might find it news because it's, in my opinion, quite interesting she was able to go from studying music to becoming the CSO of a major and very important company. Some people might find it to be news because it most certainly could cause questions of her ability when looking at this fact and other Equifax security related facts.

I'm quite confused as to why you are so offended by this submission. It's not uncommon from C level executives of major businesses to have received degrees in the area they are working. The fact that computer/network security is an extremely focused field and the CSO of an extremely important company has two degrees in music instead of CS or a related field is quite interesting.

Should it be the best person for the job, male or female alike?

Yeah, that's not how it works.

When I bought my first house, I would have gone crazy without an agent. She was absolutely wonderful at providing info, answering questions, and carefully explaining all of the acronyms, numbers, percentages, forms etc. etc.

I'm not sure what the point of this is?

The_Donald has always been about "dank memes" not providing political commentary written by major media outlets.

classy.

You don't need to apologize to me personally. For what it's worth, I agree with a lot of what you are saying regarding climate change and I do think we, humanity as a whole, should be doing more than what we are currently doing. Even if climate change is absolutely not man made, cutting carbon emission would still be good thing.

My point is, from the viewpoint of conservatives, most liberals think conservatives are dumb hicks who don't know anything and are just brainwashed by big oil and the GOP. This viewpoint is perpetuated by statements similar to those you, with no malintent, made. You lament about the politicization of climate change yet you yourself initially related conservatives to those who use ignorant excuses to ignore or reject climate change. For the most part, when someone disagrees with climate change, they are instantly labelled as an ignorant science denier who has done no research on their own. That's not a good way to have a fruitful conversation with someone and it will never help solve any problems related to climate change.

Ok, cool (no pun intended) thanks. I'll watch it.

to be frank, conservatives only changed their tune on this when it was so painfully obvious that they had to

I guess you don't know that in the 70's it wasn't global warming that was a serious issue but global cooling? Funny how that works.

So, I guess you would agree that the "ignorant" scientists on this wiki page all base their disagreements on their conservative political beliefs?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_th...

It's ludicrous to think that I could hold a "healthy skepticism" on the efficacy of heart transplants when I don't know the first thing about human anatomy, biology or medicine, but this is exactly what is happening with an equally complex scientific issue.

I also find it interesting you speak of the complex nature of the study of climate change yet make the blanket statement that anyone who disagrees is an ignorant person. I would be correct in assuming you are a scientist that has studied climate change?

I will treat an informed dissent respectfully

And therein lies the problem. You assume every person who 1) disagrees with any part of climate change and 2) holds politically conservative views are too ignorant to form their own opinions based on their own self study. You assume they are a bunch of low IQ ignorant hicks that can't think for themselves and must rely on big evil corporations to feed them their climate change arguments.

Yes, that's very respectful :)

Put another way, the real question is not are we causing it but can we slow or stop it by making changes. And the answer to that is undeniably yes.

This.

Whether it's man made or natural, it's the main issue. The main issue is that global warming is obviously a negative issue. Can it be stopped? If so, what are the steps to stop it and how do we proceed. Why would we not try to stop something negative?

To be conservative (in the tribal sense) means holding disbelief in climate change

To be fair it's not disbelief in climate change, it's a healthy skepticism of man made climate change.

It's an odd time when someone is criticized for changing their mind based on new or changing information.

Ahh ok, I see. Odd.

touting numbers that "prove" that Hilary lost on both electoral and popular vote.

Which is moot point until someone can scientifically prove the person who's calculations showed Hillary losing the popular vote are indeed inaccurate, correct?

It's like googling "moon landing date" and the first hit is a page that sincerely argues "the moon landing never happened."

And that's what I am confused about. Isn't google suppose to the show the most popular result based on a set of criteria?

Be fair I didn't read the article. Just judging by the site, the headline, and current events, I assume the problem is that the content of the page is opinion instead of fact.

Ok, what's wrong with that? If that site/blog post has gained more traffic, social signals, backlinks, etc. etc than it's "competitors" shouldn't it naturally be top ranking?

My theory is that, and this totally based on opinion, most people don't want to show support for a specific idea or policy of the "enemy" politician out of fear from being persecuted by those who are on their same team. "I might agree with Trump on the tpp but I will certainly never say I agree with Trump about anything."

I agree it would be interesting!

This certainly isn't scientific at all but a quick search for tpp (all time popularity) shows the first page of results as posts that primarily took place more than a year ago. https://hn.algolia.com/?query=tpp&sort=byPopularity&prefix&p...

Trump mentioned he was opposed to the tpp almost exactly one year ago today.

If we search the popular 'tpp' posts from December 1st 2015 to today, we get results that show posts that are critical of the tpp but over half of the first page of results have less than 100 upvotes. https://hn.algolia.com/?query=tpp&sort=byPopularity&prefix&p...

Like I said, not scientific but kind of interesting I guess?

Globalism is nothing more than the rich elite gaining control over more peasants. Sure, it's good for some of us.

I'll get down voted but it doesn't really matter. The sentiment changed because of identity politics. As soon as Trump mentioned he was against the tpp places like hn and reddit suddenly became very quiet in their opposition to it.

My cynical nature tells most people were only at 18F because of Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if most of them leave because Trump was elected.

Do you remember the Obama presidency?

ftfy

I would just like to remind everyone of the words Obama spoke yesterday, "Now, everybody is sad when their side loses an election, but the day after we have to remember that we’re actually all on one team. This is an intramural scrimmage. We’re not Democrats first. We’re not Republicans first. We are Americans first. We’re patriots first.

We all want what’s best for this country. That’s what I heard in Mr. Trump’s remarks last night. That’s what I heard when I spoke to him directly. And I was heartened by that. That’s what the country needs — a sense of unity, a sense of inclusion, a respect for our institutions, our way of life, rule of law, and respect for each other."

Let's make sure our comments here are tolerant of others and devoid of hate at those we might not understand.

Lol...wow.

Ok, so where to start. First off, I guess we can go back to my original point that you completely ignored. Once again, you are assuming all of your claims above apply to every person who does shout the 2016 democratic party talking points. That belief is ignorant.

You claiming all people who hold conservative views or vote for a republican are racist, homophobic, bigoted, science deniers is no different than people in 08 who claimed Obama was some secret Muslim agent whose only purpose is to bring Sharia law to the US and destroy our way of life.

if you think Clinton's DNC is "a violent leftist sect"

Did I say that? No, I sure didn't. First you make an ignorant claim about at least 50% of the US (and for some reason lump me into that group while knowing nothing about me), and then you put words in my mouth. What's next?

you are so divorced from reality that you are probably beyond all hope

Oh that's what's next. Character assassination and bullying.

Maybe stop getting your news from just Scott Adams and Fox News.

Maybe stop acting like you know me based off of hacker news posts. Oh wait, you are so intolerant that you believe those who do not hold the exact same opinions as you must all get their news from Scott Adams and Fox News. You know nothing about me yet you assume I am so divorced from reality that I must only get my news from two sources? That's quite intolerant.

BTW, funny that you mention "character assassination"... right after seriously trying to paint the DNC as some kind of Satanist cabal

Did I ever do that? No, I did not. Did you...actually read my posts? I implied that are too many coincidences to upper level governmental politicians (you once again put words in my mouth by stating I claimed DNC only) being somehow related to spirit cooking in some unspecific terms other than mere art.

It seems to me you are only interested in making wild assumptions about who I am as a person, judging me based on the actions of others, being intolerant of my views, and verbally bullying me as a way to somehow excerpt your dominance over me. You clearly aren't concerned about having a rational discussion with someone who might not share your exact world view. Since that is the case, I won't be replying to any more of your comments. Hope you have a great night!