ikeboy

69 ms·

691.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Yes, and no. The only email I've sent is from my personal email address at that domain and I've never had deliverability issues there. I don't operate the server, my personal email goes through Google apps.
692.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Searching turns up https://adampash.kinja.com/google-just-dmcaed-my-chrome-exte... , which has the text of an email Google sent out that does include the sender information. You can submit a counter-notice, and if for some r
693.
Ask HN: Best service for simple low volume email marketing?
1 points by ikeboy 7y ago|2 comments
694.
by ikeboy 7y ago
My understanding is Google will tell you that info as well as publish it to the Lumen database. If not, you can always subpoena Google for the exact info in court, it only adds a step.
695.
by ikeboy 7y ago
In theory, you are liable. It's just difficult to actually enforce that because most people won't actually spend a fortune in legal fees hoping they'll win it back down the road.
696.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Every time you use a website with third party content, that's a positive story. Without the DMCA safe harbor many of them would have been sued out of existence by now.
697.
by ikeboy 7y ago
So you believe OJ and Ulbricht were innocent, and the respective civil and criminal court cases finding the opposite were mistaken?
698.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Funny ad hominem by assocation there on NBER. If I'm parsing that right, they claim the paper is wrong because the place it was published has funders that they don't like? https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013&#x2
699.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Metadata is useful but it's a stretch to call it equally important as actual call content. If you were spying on someone, what would you rather know: all the above metadata you listed, or a full recording of all their calls?
700.
by ikeboy 7y ago
I happen to have a hobby of reading law cases on intellectual property that was sparked by my business being affected by IP issues. I used to read all kinds of cases as a hobby even before that, for fun. I remember reading through much of R
701.
by ikeboy 7y ago
The overall market for books is roughly the same as that for music and movies. Quick googling says $27 billion for books, $16 billion for music, $41 billion for movies in the US. Not digging in to those numbers but if we assume they're
702.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Lifecycle investing, for the core insight that one should include human capital when determining how much of your capital you can risk, and why leverage early in your career is advisable.
703.
by ikeboy 7y ago
When I was 13-14 I made games on a TI-83 plus in TI-basic. Made poker, blackjack, pong, some dice games. The biggest project was a version of space trader, I think I just had two commodities and two worlds but it worked.
704.
by ikeboy 7y ago
1. The cost to verify all of those would be extreme. They ship billions of units in a year, that's tens of millions of invoices at a minimum. 2. "issued only by the OEM" but there are many valid suppliers that are not the br
705.
by ikeboy 7y ago
I'd mostly agree with that, with the caveat that they will often restrict particular listings or brands that got a high volume of complaints, and require proof of purchase to sell. They also flag sellers that have large sales increases
706.
by ikeboy 7y ago
>You sold non-retail unpackaged electronics on Amazon Just to clarify: some goods were repacked in polybags, and labeled as such. This is explicitly permitted by Amazon's ToS for the cell phone category: "Amazon product detail
707.
by ikeboy 7y ago
It's that competition that brings down prices. If there was only one unique brand per product, they'd charge much more.
708.
by ikeboy 7y ago
I'm responding to your point that Amazon does "little to nothing to ensure authenticity for consumers." I disagree, and I'd imagine the plaintiffs in the following cases would as well: https://www.courtlistene
709.
by ikeboy 7y ago
>Why would your gut reaction to this entire story be "I'm suspicious of that dollar amount" Because it's presented without any explanation or context, and it's difficult to see how it could be reasonably estimate
710.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Not sure about that number - they give no details on how it's calculated and anyways it's presented as being sales, not profits. Edit: https://www.marketplace.org/2019/11/18/how-amazons-counterfe...
711.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Data point: do you pay for prime?
712.
by ikeboy 7y ago
If some other party did have your contact info and marketed to you based on your purchases, controlled the entire transaction, shipped the product to you, etc, each detail makes them more the retailer and the third party "seller"
713.
by ikeboy 7y ago
No, at no point in this conversation did I discuss what should be done in response to Amazon's monopoly power.
714.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Amazon isn't selling products, really. It's selling last mile logistics. Walmart has historically been great at the rest of the logistics chain but never really invested in last mile. If nobody else can compete with Amazon, yes, A
715.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Iirc, FBA phones hadn't been available for two years, it's MF phone numbers that got proxied to Amazon phone numbers six months back. Then 1-2 months ago FBA addresses vanished.
716.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Those do roughly the same thing. I don't believe a subscription service that gives you no marginal cost 1-2 day shipping is comparable to anything offered by retailers without a two day shipping option.
717.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Yes, but Walmart's online sales are very low, and their selection is as well. If you offer 10k products for fast delivery there's an important sense in which you're not a competitor to someone selling millions of products. Re
718.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Samsclub and BJs are two competitors with the same basic business model.
719.
by ikeboy 7y ago
I think there's a substantial number of people who don't comparison shop because nobody else has a real prime competitor. When Amazon has a hundred million subscribers to a service to ship in two days, it's reasonable to ask
720.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Yeah, it's the physical addresses that were removed recently. Phones were removed about two years ago if I recall correctly.

More ›