exelius

94 ms·

691.
by exelius 10y ago
> I'm curious [...] why Google doesn’t temporarily disable accounts so impacted until a human reviews activity. Because Google doesn't have humans reviewing anything unless there's a direct link to marginal revenue/co
692.
by exelius 10y ago
So this is a good usage model, but I'm not sure people want to carry yet another tablet just for gaming. The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it can fall back into an Android tablet mode for web browsing, e-mail, etc. But
693.
by exelius 10y ago
On the other side of the coin, people tend to ask about the same things, over and over again -- so a professional presenter will hit more of the points that people are interested in.
694.
by exelius 10y ago
I think it's more "a paid / sponsored conference isn't the best place to get presentation experience". Especially when you have a plethora of experienced presenters to choose from.
695.
by exelius 10y ago
> Alright, these situations are sad, and sometimes unavoidable due to what is essentially "bad luck". I can't imagine being caught in the vicious cycle. Social and societal safety nets are supposed to help with "bad l
696.
by exelius 10y ago
Unless there's a breaking point of "good enough" that can serve all segments. Typically though, this "making the product worse" thing is used as part of the sales cycle of a patented product. There has to be some &q
697.
by exelius 10y ago
Honestly the price of an SWA flight is usually more expensive than another airline plus bag fees. Plus most airlines will waive the bag fees if you sign up for their credit card (you don't even have to use it).
698.
by exelius 10y ago
> 3.Book directly at airline. God idea, especially considering the problems laid out at #2. Not. Never book a ticket in a 3rd world country directly at the airline. I learned it the hard way! Unless it's a global airline (British Ai
699.
by exelius 10y ago
Generally when numbers aren't released, it's an acquihire. Which means it probably went for less than the amount they raised. It became obvious that Hipmunk was never going to be a 100x growth company, and the industry is not head
700.
by exelius 10y ago
There's some truth to that as well, but I often feel that the large, organized sellers/renters are better able to articulate what they want in a way that individuals cannot. They know the market better, they know what people want
701.
by exelius 10y ago
Most of their assistants just use AmEx travel (or some other travel agency software) -- which has a much higher per-seat license and actually ties in to the back-end reservation systems so you can see all flights, etc. As far as I can tell,
702.
by exelius 10y ago
It's the classic problem of regulatory capture applied to a privatized industry: the entities that are most engaged with the regulator (the regulator, in this case, being a site like eBay or Airbnb) are most likely professionals. Becau
703.
by exelius 10y ago
> What I find most puzzling is how such great founders could lose sight of the wonderful vision they had. I think it's a lot of naiveté about the nature of financial markets. If you find something that is truly better, the "no
704.
by exelius 10y ago
Concur's core product is shockingly awful. My company recently switched to it, and I don't know anyone who actually uses it. Most of us have figured out we get lower prices and less hassle by just ordering directly from the airlin
705.
by exelius 10y ago
This is why non profits need to separate governance from fundraising. If "donating" money gives you influence, it's not a donation -- it's an investment.
706.
by exelius 10y ago
I think we're saying the same thing. :) I don't feel Airbnb is particularly innovative on the technology side; they're just exploiting a combination of inefficiencies in government regulatory mechanisms and the naivete of ine
707.
by exelius 10y ago
I agree with you -- Uber succeeded for many of the same reasons. They found a weak, fragmented, and hyper localized regulatory environment (very similar to that of hotels) that they could overwhelm with global scale after building up in a f
708.
by exelius 10y ago
I doubt Airbnb would agree with that -- since it would make their rentals much less attractive when compared to hotels (which have taxes around 15-20% in most big cities).
709.
by exelius 10y ago
I think Airbnb would argue that it's not their place to enforce these laws; and that if individual hosts are violating them, the government should go after them. It's a typical problem of the "sharing" economy. I'm
710.
by exelius 10y ago
Airbnb's model is to provide very limited oversight. If they have to support these types of grievances to any sort of regulatory standard, it's going to kill their business model because it means they will need to increase overhea
711.
by exelius 10y ago
I dunno; I feel Airbnb is really losing control of their product. Most recently, I've noticed a lot of listings of great places for awesome prices... but only if you're willing to rent for 12 months continuously, provide your own
712.
by exelius 10y ago
Star Citizen isn't even revolutionary though; it's more or less a modern re-imagining of EVE Online. It'll likely devolve into spreadsheet hell just like EVE -- reality is boring, and most of the real world is tracked in spre
713.
by exelius 10y ago
I think the idea is that the 1-in-10,000 in this context is that it's not something you can "break into"; you're either born gifted or you're not. It's really hard for our generation to accept that some people
714.
by exelius 10y ago
It's more that if these extensions ever became a real threat to Google, they could easily block them since they control the extension store. That tends to keep them in line over the long run.
715.
by exelius 10y ago
Don't fret; everyone in our generation was raised to believe we were the 1 in 10,000. That simply can't be true 99.99% of the time. We're a generation that needs therapy to realize that a stable, six-figure job as a mid-level
716.
by exelius 10y ago
The "why" is quite simple: Google is an ad company, and the entire reason they developed Chrome was to ensure they had control over the plugin ecosystem to ensure Google-provided ads could never be blocked. But ad blockers are bec
717.
by exelius 10y ago
Absolutely agree with you. Schedule 1 seems inappropriate and would needlessly restrict any research into potential medical applications. Schedule 1 prevents organizations that receive federal grant money from studying it -- which is basica
718.
by exelius 10y ago
Right; there has to be a middle ground between "zero regulation" and "total prohibition". Schedule 1 classification effectively prevents research, which is a bad idea. But likewise, no regulation means this stuff will st
719.
by exelius 10y ago
I'm not arguing for prohibition (schedule 1). I'm saying that we should make it schedule 2 (which would allow federal funding for medical research), study it in detail (since it's a relatively un-researched drug) and come up
720.
by exelius 10y ago
I think the idea is to go after the distributors and importers; not the end users. They're trying to prevent a commercial industry from growing around it before it starts (just like it did with the "synthetic marijuana" that

More ›