Cancer is the wrong word. These things are addictions not diseases. "coca-cola for the mind" is how I like to put it.
121 karma · joined August 8, 2015
You could easily conclude from this list that it's rich peoples kids creating solutions to imaginary problems - "Oh, how could my poor feet possibly survive the arduous journey from my front door to the uber in an off the shelf pair of shoes? I need a tailor!".
I think we should give them the benefit of the doubt though since these companies are presumably a small subset of those they've invested in.
A more charitable explanation might be that since these companies are in SV then it makes sense for them to start out selling stuff to affluent customers who are not overly price sensitive.
1. What exactly is being stored? I have seen stories/comments saying it is domain names visited from web browsing but does it also cover other internet activity? Or is it being left vague?
2. Does the requirement to keep data for one year come with a corresponding obligation to delete it after that? Are they allowed to keep it longer (perhaps summary/derived data for cost reduction) ?
3. Can the organisations with access make bulk requests for all the data or do they have to request records one ip addr/person at a time? (yes, I know an IP is not a person etc).
4. If the data does have to be destroyed at some point does that only include data collected by the isp or also include copies made by those with access?
5. Are there any published numbers on roughly how many people will have access to collected data?
I do stand by my assertion that it is legitimate for apple to behave in this way though. They get to present their business as they choose to just like any other company and the customer get to choose whether to accept their terms. Personally I don't but, empirically, most other people seem to.
I would however support requirements (as legislation) that consumers should be made aware of such practices at the point of purchase such that they can factor it into their buying decision.
It has always been their approach to control every interaction that every customer has with every part of their business and every product produced by it.
Accept it or use something else.
This sounds like a general problem with modern democracy. Theres so much going on that none of us can keep up with it, including the people who work in politics full-time. The inevitable result is an inability to make intelligent decisions in our own interests. The wisdom of the crowd is all that saves us, except when it doesn't.
Background: I bought my mum one of those customisable calendars for christmas where you can upload your own photos for each month. Since then I’ve been wondering how the on-demand printing industry works. My calendar was cheap, good quality, & delivered next day which I thought was very impressive.
I decided to do an experiment to see what I could learn. As a first step I’ve made some mug designs and I’m using zazzle.com for the manufacturing/purchase handling etc. This lets me see how their funnel works for product designers. I picked mugs because I wanted some for myself.
I needed a niche audience for my experiment and I chose HN readers. Mostly that was just because I am already familiar with the audience but using HN also gives me the benefit of being able to reach customers quickly and free of charge via a Show HN post.
Happy to try and answer any questions etc...
edit: I should have written a more than a single sentence. Obviously I'm joking; hn is what it is now and it's not going to go back to the good old days.
There is a point that is worth making though: when the site was focused on startups it was a much nicer place and people posting new things got help in the comments section rather than just commentary and opinions. That has been lost mostly because of the growth in users but I can't help think that the increase in scope had a negative impact too.
What was that? All I can think of is when the chinese stole their source code but the response to that would presumably be more about managing who has access to what internally than improving the security of their user facing products.
edit: to be clear I'm thinking of the time they had code stolen by a chinese employee in their china office, presumably on request of the govt.
I really get the impression that you don't see how bad your comments in this thread are. It's difficult when you're in the middle of something to take a step back and see it from other peoples perspective but you would really do yourself a favour if you just stopped posting here altogether at this point. I wouldn't be surprised if the op took your posts and made them into a follow-up blog post.
I think it's worth pointing out that even from the perspective of most businesses this situation sucks. Smaller companies or startups lack the resources to benefit from tax avoidance schemes so are at a disadvantage to their larger competitors.
And if you do start a company that is growing large you don't really have much choice but to start doing it too. You won't be able to compete if you are paying 20% and the competition is paying 2%. You have to do it because everyone else is doing it.
The idea behind it is that as your company grows you end up making less of the decisions yourself. Setting a framework for employees in making their own decisions maximises the chance that they would make the decision you might want them to make if you were directly involved.
Zuckerbergs 'move fast and break things' is the perfect example of this. It gave him the chance to set the tone for developers for years after he ceased writing the code.
Where companies go wrong with this is just dishing out the guidelines without explaining the reason behind having them. Doing that leaves everyone thinking it's just some management bullshit.