hymanroth

11 ms·

61.
by hymanroth 17y ago
That's a bit off base, and Google is not making a web OS. What was wrong with the original summary: instead of pushing users into using web apps, big G should pull them in with better ones?
62.
by hymanroth 17y ago
I was thinking more in terms of an open semantic dictionary containing the top-level concepts most often used by SN and business. The key point is that it should be open to all applications.
63.
Chrome OS - When pull is better than push(lmframework.com)
10 points by hymanroth 17y ago|12 comments
64.
by hymanroth 17y ago
This proposal is not too dissimilar to the ideas behind P-BOS ( http://lmframework.com/page.php?id=pbos ) P-BOS works best when the modules are small, and hence breaking down individual contributions within a given module does not get too m
65.
by hymanroth 17y ago
How can a model that has never been tried be unpopular?
66.
by hymanroth 17y ago
There will always be explicit permission from the consumer. But you're right about trust. For this reason we are not trying to roll this out ourselves.
67.
by hymanroth 17y ago
Thanks, will do
68.
by hymanroth 17y ago
The term 'Kamikaze' crops up frequently in the media out of its original context. For example, the UK chancellor used the same term to describe the bankers who created the housing bubble ( http://bit.ly/Qdmlj ) - so I don't see how it can b
69.
by hymanroth 17y ago
David, When I wrote the original article I was already aware of Shirky's views on micro payments, but it's true that the comments both here and on my blog made me understand that this issue was more important than I had previously thought -
70.
by hymanroth 17y ago
I disagree. My interpretation of Shirky's thinking is that the dialog is the issue, rather than the payment size. The key is to create an almost friction-free and fair method of payment. People are happy to pay a fair amount for content (cf
71.
by hymanroth 17y ago
Thanks for a great comment. It's true that we are attempting to solve quite few problems in one go, but this just reflects the nature of the challenge - rather than any particular desire to blow ourselves up. If you look at AWS, they spent
72.
Kamikaze Marketing (why usage billing kicks freemium's bottom)(lmframework.com)
37 points by hymanroth 17y ago|17 comments
73.
by hymanroth 17y ago
If you use a service without charge which entails a non-zero cost to produce and supply it, then I'm afraid somebody, somewhere is subsiding it. So that's my first abuse of language sorted. As to the price of premium services being 'artific
74.
by hymanroth 17y ago
Shirky was talking about micropayments for content in that article. An endless stream of little decisions. I agree with him. However, as I pointed out in a comment above. The one-off mental transaction cost for agreeing to be micro-billed f
75.
by hymanroth 17y ago
Yup. The trick is to get consumers to embrace it.
76.
by hymanroth 17y ago
The mental transaction cost is certainly an issue with content. I wouldn't want to have to decide every time I start reading a news article whether I want to pay to get to the end. However, the one-off mental cost of deciding whether to all
77.
by hymanroth 17y ago
Good point. But not every web service benefits from the network effect. The spreadsheet example was not chosen at random. As long as you can save you spreadsheet in a common format, would you really choose a service with a higher user base
78.
by hymanroth 17y ago
I hope you meant 'micro-billing is much better'....
79.
by hymanroth 17y ago
The cost of the paid versions are artificially high wrt to the additional benefit they provide and to what they would cost if all the users paid up. As web apps become more prevalent, people will be less willing to giving up their acreage t
80.
Freemium - Shmeemium (or why micro-billing is better)(lmframework.com)
23 points by hymanroth 17y ago|21 comments
81.
by hymanroth 17y ago
@mahmud - what a useless, unconstructive comment. There's no reason why you can't create rich webs using an Ajax framework - in fact that's the whole reason they exist. As regards the original question, I'm sorry I can't help. You should tr
82.
by hymanroth 17y ago
It's not stable enough to download at the moment, sorry.
83.
Ask HN: Please review LM, an experimental ajax framework
1 points by hymanroth 17y ago|3 comments
84.
by hymanroth 17y ago
Thanks Jimmy - knew I could count on you.
85.
Drag Flickr photos straight into Twitter [video](lmframework.com)
6 points by hymanroth 17y ago|3 comments
86.
by hymanroth 17y ago
Thanks very much. Remember - it's all in the browser!
87.
Twiggler Screencast - and it's all in the browser...(lmframework.com)
1 points by hymanroth 17y ago|0 comments
88.
by hymanroth 17y ago
I don't what happened, the link is good.
89.
Twiggler: Awesome AJAX Twitter Client-Drag&Drop, Folders, multi a/c, the lot..
2 points by hymanroth 17y ago|5 comments
90.
by hymanroth 18y ago
In a way you're right. But I do know what Stallman stands for and respect what he's done. I was just hoping he would lay off the web. The web is open, by definition. Anybody can view a javascript file in the browser cache, and it's not hard

More ›