4 ms·
Interesting side point: the WSJ article was on HN first (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3978537 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3978537) but Forbes's r
by pg 14y ago
Interesting side point: the WSJ article was on HN first (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3978537 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3978537) but Forbes's rewrite of it got all the upvotes because the WSJ article is behind a paywall.
- zackzackzack 14y agoProbably part of the business plan for Forbes. "Watch WSJ, anytime they have a hidden gem, rewrite it and send it out." Forbes did it with the target targeting parents to be article with the New York Times: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-targe...
- dexen 14y agoHowever you slice it, paywall is bothersome -- one more click to go through, with no added benefit. Let's hope the `netizens' will vote with their feet more often.