SEC Freezes $8M in Assets in Alleged Fraudulent Token Offering Scheme - <AUTHOR> https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2019-150 <comment><USER2> > The SEC filed charges against Reginald "Reggie" Middleton, a self-described > "financial guru,"

WOAH they went after Reggie Middleton!

Yeah that should be in the title.

From "TheBlockCrypto.com"

> What appears to have precipitated this filing, in part, is that after the > SEC told Defendants' lawyers that they were likely to recommend filing of > enforcement action, Defendants "moved more than $2 million in remaining > offering proceeds from a blockchain address they controlled into other > addresses, and used a portion of those funds to purchase more precious > metals." When asked by staff to not spend any more of the SEC funds, > Defendants refused.

> [https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/08/13/sec-files- > emergenc...](https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/08/13/sec-files-emergency- > lawsuit-against-veritaseum-to-stop-spending-millions-of-dollars-in-ico- > money/)

So this is interesting in that there was active discussion between the SEC and Reggie's lawyers.

This is different than most of these press releases.

<comment><USER3> Wow, that complaint is kind of nuts. The SEC is accusing him of just about every major financial crime imaginable.

But the "Related Individuals and Entities" section broke my heart:

> Employee One, age 18, has worked for Veritaseum since 2017.

Stealing/embezzling money is disgusting enough but he very well could have ruined this 18 year old kid's life. I generally find the SEC to be pretty reasonable so I would imagine the kid is only included so they can't transfer funds either but I really hope this kid/kid's parents were smart enough to get a lawyer and cooperate.

<comment><USER4> Does that imply that he was 16-17 old minor at the time when the crimes were committed?

<comment><USER3> The major crimes, yes, but unless they had a birthday in the last two weeks they were a legal adult when the company moved funds after hearing that the SEC was preparing to bring charges.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Good, time to start cracking down on all of the scams so the space can actually flourish.

<comment><USER6> I disagree. For me, being barred by the government from making an investment is a bug, not a feature.

Although it isn't obvious, I would hold that this is true for any rational investor.

In reality, these sorts of regulations only exist to keep reckless people from losing money that they already treat as disposable.

That is not a valid reason to block the freedom of genuine investors.

<comment><USER7> > This is true for any rational investor.

> These sorts of regulations only exist to keep reckless people from losing > money.

No. It's not. You're barred from investing in fly-by-night scams unless you have more than enough money to do so comfortably. If a poor person, who is naturally desperate to make money, is conned by a snake oil salesman, you know who pays? Literally everyone. They end up on the social safety net collecting on our taxes. As such the public has an interest in making sure, to a reasonable extent, that only those capable of taking huge financial risks do so.

Now if your company is established enough to provide the required quarterly disclosures by SEC regulations, sweet. Anyone can invest their last penny. Seems like a fair place to draw the line.

> That is not a valid reason to block the freedom of genuine investors.

I agree, if you mean a "genuine investor" has over $1M in assets excluding their primary residence or a previous years income in excess of $200K and an expectation they will have the same in the coming year.

Accredited investor rules weren't brought in because too many poors were hitting it big and all those new yachts were clogging up Boston Harbor. Literally because not having them _caused the great depression_. And they didn't call it that because it was just a pretty good depression, ya know.

<comment><USER8> The cryptocurrency boom has been people painfully re-learning why we have these regulations in the first place.

<comment><USER9> >"We don't need no government regulators!"

 _Gets frauded_

>"Where were theeeyyyy to save us?!"

<comment><USER7> Literally though.

> Regulations are bad!

 _gets defrauded_

> HELP POLICE! SEC! FTC! DOJ! How was this permitted in the first place?! > Where was the government when we needed them!

Privatized gains, socialized losses.

<comment><USER9> Turns out the government does actually protect people in first-world countries in ways we simply take for granted... Huh who woulda thought!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Any idea who Investor One is (according to the complaint, they're a "connected political figure")?

<comment><USER11> He's pretty popular. I've seen him mentioned in various other SEC court documents

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> An "emergency freeze" of moneys that were raised in 2017 and 2018...

On Aug. 12, 2019, the court entered an emergency freeze to preserve at least $8 million of the $14.8 million the defendants raised in 2017 and 2018 in an offering of digital securities."

<comment><USER13> "What appears to have precipitated this filing, in part, is that after the SEC told Defendants' lawyers that they were likely to recommend filing of enforcement action, Defendants "moved more than $2 million in remaining offering proceeds from a blockchain address they controlled into other addresses, and used a portion of those funds to purchase more precious metals." When asked by staff to not spend any more of the SEC funds, Defendants refused."

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Mr Middleton sat next to me during the Ethereum launch at the TNAB in Miami in 2014. He was very excited about all the possibilities Bitcoin and cryptocurrency would usher in. His pet project then was a platform to allow kids in Africa buy and sell shares reflecting the US stock market. The idea was to globalize investing by tokenizing shares. Very innocent beginnings and dreams of a better, more financially enabled world. This report sounds like a lot changed since.

<comment><USER8> Innocent beginnings? It sounds exactly like he planned to commit securities fraud by preying on one of the world's most vulnerable populations. And if what commenters below are saying is correct, that he continued to move money around even after being directly ordered not to by the SEC, he is a particularly stupid and/or arrogant con man.

The only possibilities cryptocurrency has ushered in are new ways to scam people. Or rather, digital versions of old scams. Involvement in cryptocurrency should be prima facie evidence of fraud.

<comment><USER15> > Innocent beginnings? It sounds exactly like he planned to commit securities > fraud by preying on one of the world's most vulnerable populations

What sounds like securities fraud about that original idea?

<comment><USER7> The reasons folks would or would not be able to trade is:

(0) Having money to invest.

(1) Access to the internet.

(2) Being able to afford the transaction fee.

(3) Being on a list of people who can't trade like OFAC or failing AML/KYC, or being underage.

The only one blockchain addresses is (3): granting access to people who aren't permitted to trade. Every single other thing is either a social problem, already a solved problem or can easily be addressed without the magic of the blockchain.

<comment><USER15> Or being someone without access to a bank account, or without proper means of identifying yourself. Which applies to a substantial number of people in Africa.

<comment><USER7> Are you sure? How much do you know about banking in Africa? I know that I personally don't know much, which is why I don't offer solutions -- but what I do know is that services like Flutterwave and M-Pesa [2] are absolutely killing it.

[1] [https://money.cnn.com/2017/07/31/technology/business/flutter...](https://money.cnn.com/2017/07/31/technology/business/flutterwave- africa/index.html)

[2] [https://www.forbes.com/sites/tobyshapshak/2018/11/27/how- mob...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/tobyshapshak/2018/11/27/how-mobile-money- continues-to-boom-in-africa/#69317ca8205c)

<comment><USER15> Those businesses are succeeding exactly because of the lack of banking/identification access in Africa. They use phones as the axis of identity, which people do have (somewhat) ubiquitous access to. However that doesn't make it easy to access the US stock market, which is why this guy's concept would have been useful to them.

<comment><USER7> You can't access the US stock market without SEC regulation thanks to the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. No amount of blockchain is going to change that.

<comment><USER15> According to US law, you mean. However, nothing stops a foreign entity from creating derivatives pegged to the price of US stocks. Which is exactly what this guy was attempting to do.

<comment><USER7> Owning stock conveys beneficial ownership share, pays dividends, etc. This is strictly worse.

<comment><USER15> Worse than what? Their alternative is owning nothing at all. And derivatives are just fine - they can be pegged to the dividend adjusted value of the asset.

<comment><USER7> It's not an investment, it's gambling. I'd suggest that's probably not the best use of capital for what you identify as an impoverished group.

<comment><USER15> How exactly is a single-stock future any more gambling than investing in that stock directly?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why the Google+ long game is brilliant - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2013/01/05/why-the-google-long-game-is-brilliant/

<comment><USER2> 'The animals of the forest thought it was very strange that tropical fruit should want to race a very fast animal.

"The pineapple has some trick up its sleeve," a moose said.

Pineapples don't have sleeves, an owl said

"Well, you know what I mean," the moose said. "If a pineapple challenges a hare to a race, it must be that the pineapple knows some secret trick that will allow it to win."

"The pineapple probably expects us to root for the hare and then look like fools when it loses," said a crow. "Then the pineapple will win the race because the hare is overconfident and takes a nap, or gets lost, or something."

The animals agreed that this made sense. There was no reason a pineapple should challenge a hare _unless it had a clever plan of some sort._ So the animals, wanting to back a winner, all cheered for the pineapple.'

[http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/talking-pineapple- questi...](http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/talking-pineapple-question- state-exam-stumps-article-1.1064657)

MORAL: Google+ doesn't have sleeves.

<comment><USER3> Sorry, this isn't entirely relevant to Google+, but is relevant at the nydailynews article.

To anyone looking at that article: clearly the test meant that the owl was the wisest, as he literally said the moral of the story. And the animals ate the fruit as they were annoyed (there's no other negative emotion there, and the whole point of the story was the animals didn't like that the pineapple seemed to be tricking them). The more difficult question is actually "What would have happened if the animals had decided to root for the hare," though the correct answer is probably "They would have been happy to have cheered for a winner."

Upon reading the first part of the story, I was actually really excited about the questions that "had everyone stumped," because if given in a class discussion, they'd lead to students saying all kinds of outlandish, but really interesting, and hopefully perceptive and creative, things. Unfortunately, there were then four answer choices: what's the point of having creative thinking exercises, with a very creative story, if the students don't then get to show off a bit of creative thought themselves? And here is where I really dislike standardized tests, as done by companies like Pearson's or The College Board: educators want to tell students to be creative, to explore on their own, sometimes to be silly and give silly answers, and need a good outlet for that. But if we teach to these sorts of tests, then we're saying that you need to suppress your silliness and creativity even in the face of a dauntingly silly story.

As a personal note, I always really liked taking standardized tests, because the math was usually fairly easy and fun to do, and the reading passages were usually very interesting reads (I remember one was about the Trail of Tears, another about a girl climbing a redwood, and there were a bunch more. The worst ones were the passages that read like shopping lists). Also, it definitely didn't hurt that on most the tests I took, I was told I was in the 9xth percentile (this likely had a lot to do with the fact that I enjoyed the tests, rather than getting anxious at them).

<comment><USER4>
        There was no reason a pineapple should challenge a hare
        unless it had a clever plan of some sort. So the
        animals, wanting to back a winner, all cheered for the
        pineapple.

The owl is a part of the group "the animals", "all" of which cheered for the pineapple, according to one interpretation.

The owl correctly states that the pineapple has no sleeves, but it only does so on a literal basis, not necessarily a figurative one.

The hare is the only creature that, from my reading of the language, does not cheer for the pineapple, making it the smartest of the lot.

So it's a weird test that is interesting to discuss for fun, but ridiculous to put on a test that will define the lives of the people who have to answer it.

<comment><USER5> > but ridiculous to put on a test that will define the lives of the people who > have to answer it.

Depends on how the question is graded and what the objective of the question it. I think it's a wonderful question, personally. It's not the type of question that you can just memorize the answer to, and then regurgitate on the test. You also can't just put down an answer that you think the testers are looking for, as you would on a question about, say, climate change or multiculturalism. So what's left? You use your brain, reason something, and then justify it.

// No standardized test in grade 8 will define your life and certainly not any single question will make much difference.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > They are being understated about it but doing exactly what business > strategists talk about when they describe the long game as the one to play.

I had a hard time reading past that line since Google is literally ramming G+ down everyone's throats at every possible opportunity. It's almost impossible to use their services without being forced into a G+ account nowadays.

It's not that they're being understated, it's just that people aren't noticing because G+ is _that_ boring to everyone.

Edit: And as I write this comment, I'm once again reminded of how idiotic the name 'Google+' is. Do I call it GPlus? G+? Google Plus? Google+? Should I put a space between them? How do you search for a plus sign? Oh, that's right... Google didn't realize they had to completely break that operator until AFTER they named their social network. How's that for a brilliant strategy?

<comment><USER7> > It's almost impossible to use their services without being forced into a G+ > account nowadays.

Google+ is Google. It is a way to consolidate all Google services. Requiring a Google account to utilize Google services seems pretty okay to me.

<comment><USER8> Until you're suddenly participating in a social network under the default (public) privacy setting without realizing or intending it.

As what happened when Buzz was (c)rudely integrated into the rest of Google+.

One minute you're sharing links and sending short messages to a small private group. The next, your posts are all publicly visible on a public profile page you didn't know existed.

<comment><USER7> I don't remember integrating Buzz into my Google+ page but I've never had issues over-sharing on Google+ - it's one of the things Google+ makes extremely simple.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> So, this person hates the calendar, hates the phone, and lives in Chrome and gmail. For this person, the G+ long game is brilliant.

For the rest of us who use calendars, get along with our cell phones/landlines just fine, use a browser as a tool to browse the internet rather than as our permanent desktop, and may or may not use gmail, I'm not convinced at all.

<comment><USER10> G+ will be the bane of google.

i use gmail, gmaps, i use android, i use gcalendar, i use gdocs... but I don't use freaking facebook or g+. but now every new feature i click i get a "you must have a g+ profile"... want to leave a review for an android app? too bad, you need G+. Want to thumb up/down a youtube video? too bad, need G+. want to share location with someone on latitude? too bad, he's not in your circles.

for the first time, i'm looking for alternatives to Gmail. because i'm pretty sure i won't be able to use it unless i have g+ at some point. And everyone knows what happens after you get free from the gateway drug...

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This has little to do with Google+ itself and more to do with Google becoming ubiquitous and + riding along

<comment><USER8> Inasmuch as plus has actually caused Google to better-integrate some of its services [1] it can be quite convenient.

Unfortunately, that convenience is often paired with bad default privacy options and seemingly-impossible-to-stop annoyances. [2]

[1] Compare youtube integration vs the various clumsy half-measures they've taken since the acquisition. Or consider chrome/google+ bookmark sync'ing vs the various iGoogle bookmark situation and plugins and half-measures.

[2] a.) the emails google continues to send me, recommending people i may want to add to my circles. b.) the nonsense 'popular' post crap they inserted into my google+ 'timeline'-thing, back when i was actively trying to use it. I turned that off, at least once. But after a few weeks, it just magicked itself back on. c.) the nonsense 'popular' post crap they _email_ to me every few months.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> _Why the Google+ long game is brilliant_

I'd usually expect an article like this to at least end up with what Google really gains from G+. Whats the big win in this game? Eyeballs? Behavior data? It may or may not be successful, but honestly I'm not sure I ever see a mass seachange of friends and family from Facebook to G+. I think its much more likely for a challenger in this space come from out of left field.

I'd love to see Google doing something else with the G+ resources, something really new and innovative then iterative. The whole G+ thing seems kind of a waste (I say this as I see my usage of social networks start to slip every day)

</comment><comment><USER13> I agree their strategy is the best one they could use. I still think they messed up in a big, big way when they announced Google+ but then didn't allow anyone to sign up for it. The hype was a huge: everyone wanted to signup and be part of the next big Google thing. Then one month later when they opened up registration nobody cared anymore. I wonder where it would be today if they had managed that correctly.

</comment><comment><USER14> I'd use Google+ if their mobile app didn't have the appeal of a flaming monkey diarrhea breaking the sound barrier on a cold winder day in antartica.

<comment><USER15> Is that supposed to be terrible or awesome? Because it sounds sort of awesome.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Google+ is certainly improving slowly but I don't think there is a mass of general users there as of yet. For Google+ to succeed on its own as a social network, they need to get the Mom, Pop, Cousins, Aunts and all.

<comment><USER17> The premise of the article seems to be that its not crucial for the dedicated social network portion of G+ to be a success if the features it enables within individual Google products get used.

<comment><USER16> Well, from that perspective, the Hangout feature has turned out to be a clear winner. Has it not?

Unlike its intended use, I personally have been using private Circles for bookmarks where I drop lengthy articles in my Read Later circle (where I am the only one there) to come back to it as time permits. G+'s search feature is not bad and if you add few keywords to the text box of a post, you can make a fine bookmarking service for yourself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Despite Google's muscle, G+ is still largely irrelevant until they release a third party API (unless that is also party of the brilliant strategy and I'm just not clever enough to work it out).

<comment><USER19> No write API means that literally everything I read on G+ was typed by a human. I really, really like that.

<comment><USER18> Facebook and Twitter have become part of the fabric of the web because if their open APIs, which have greatly helped their widespread adoption. There are many non-write use cases, for example auth. Seen "Sign-in via Google+" implemented anywhere?

<comment><USER19> Yup. In fact, I've implemented it. :)

<comment><USER18> Care to share?

<comment><USER19> Sure - <http://mashable.com/login/>

Implementation docs are at <https://developers.google.com/accounts/docs/OAuth2>

<comment><USER18> Nice! Thanks for sharing (sorry, don't read Mashable so missed this).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Venturebeat: Yes, now Google will spend more Ad dollars with us and rank us higher in search results.

</comment><comment><USER21> Bing is also in a long game for 3 years now, in web years that has got to be more, surely.

</comment><comment><USER22> No single word about privacy?

</comment><comment><USER23> If by brilliant you mean "less incompetent" then, yeah.

Any site, such as Yahoo, MSN, AOL, etc. with a large number of users and multiple properties that touch social network features like posting (images, videos, blog entries), comments, followers/friends/groups, etc. could have grown a social network the way Google is doing.

Google tried to do it as a standalone product, with Orkut, and failed, and then they correctly realized that by integrating the concepts of "posting" and "circle" into all their properties that have similar characteristics, they would succeed.

Yahoo tried this half-heartedly and failed. I'm sure others went halfway, without discipline that enforced implementation in multiple Web properties, and failed. Google is integrating more systematically than these failures.

</comment><comment><USER24> If Google+'s long game equates to simply integrating with other Google services then I fail to see how it is brilliant.

<comment><USER25> >I fail to see how it is brilliant.

This is why the guy who designed this Google+ plan (Vic Gundotra) is where he is (at Google) and you are still a commentator in a public forum. You need some long-term vision, bro.

<comment><USER26> I do think Vic Gundotra is pretty brilliant and pretty "Steve Jobs-like". If Larry Page intends to stop being CEO of Google anytime soon, I hope Vic gets it (although I guess Sergei would be next in line).

<comment><USER27> Vic Gundotra is a master of bullshit, in the Frankfurt sense: when he speaks, he shares nothing of his own beliefs or opinions. Rather, his words are the party line, and nothing more than the party line; he doesn't say the things he says because he believes they are true, but because he wants you to behave as though they are true.

In this he is hardly alone, as a spokesman for a major corporation: but Google used to be better than that, and Google especially used to be a place where the top brass would tell the truth internally. It was a place where any Googler could speak up on a Friday company meeting and ask pointed questions and expect to get a real answer. Not so with Vic Gundotra: he bullshits internally just as hard as he does externally. You can't crack him; no matter how obvious his boosterism for G+, he never stops grinning and blustering and insisting that everything is awesome. It is severely off-putting.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is there an open-source clone of Metafilter.com? - <AUTHOR>

Basically, a site that allows multiple authors to log in and make posts, and other users to comment on the same.
No karma system necessary.
I am especially interested in Django-based projects that come close to Metafilter.com <comment><USER2> Not really. There have been a couple of clones but non are active anymore. You could, however, Use Wordpress+Buddypress so create a very powerful community oriented site.</comment>


OpenDNS vs Google DNS: Which is Better ? - <AUTHOR> http://www.manu-j.com/blog/opendns-vs-google-dns-which-is-better/405/ <comment><USER2> I was running a mailserver in a network where OpenDNS was the default. Outgoing e-mail where the domain-name was misspelled would linger in the queue for five days, instead of failing immediately, while the SMTP server attempted to deliver to OpenDNS' catch-all host. Apparently, if there isn't a MX record, it's standard to attempt delivery to the A record.

</comment><comment><USER3> After watching the CEO of OpenDNS spread tons of FUD on Hacker News itself, I will be switching to Google.

Pro-tip: compete by being better, not by spreading FUD about your competition the second they appear.

<comment><USER4> I politely disagree and do not think David spread any FUD, but rather shared his opinion where other techies would see it- here on HN. Switching services not because you think one or the other is better for your needs, but only because you don't agree with the CEO's views/actions is a bit thick IMO. I might not think highly of certain things Steve Jobs does but that doesn't mean I'm switching to Windows 7..

<comment><USER5> When you say that _your service_ , which intercepts and manipulates requests to get ad dollars, is better than _their service_ , which does not --- for the sole reason that _their service_ is owned by an ad company --- you are coming pretty close to objectively spreading FUD.

It's almost _prima facie_.

<comment><USER6> If you think that their service, being Google itself, does not redirect and manipulate requests (regardless of layer), you are being delusional.

But we've had this discussion for years Thomas, so I doubt I'll change your opinion now.

<comment><USER7> Here is one example. Google does not redirect the NXDOMAIN request, nor does it manipulate that level.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I posted a comparison here, from AT&T in IL: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=977389>

Short summary:

      nsping -z amazon.com 220.127.116.11
      nsping -z amazon.com 22.214.171.124
      nsping -h www.amazon.com 220.127.116.11
      nsping -h www.amazon.com 22.214.171.124

Pretty straightforward (-h tests a single A record, -z, the default, tests random labels under a zone).

OpenDNS was faster than Google for me, but slower than my own ISP. However, the numbers are under the noise floor; Google DNS is plenty fast, and bound to be more reliable than your ISP. It also doesn't break the DNS like OpenDNS does.

My point isn't that I know which is faster, but that it's really easy to just test for yourself.

</comment><comment><USER8> Google returns NXDOMAIN by default, without having to setup every IP I might be making queries from. That's "better" for me.

<comment><USER4> I was able to disable this in OpenDNS:

<http://pstam.com/i/00130041dfa557f4a17323cbcb63d090.png>

Then click apply to all networks. So you don't have to "setup every IP I might be making queries from"

<comment><USER5> Did you have to sign up for an account, tying your DNS requests to personal information in their backend, to do it? Because Google "just works".

<comment><USER6> As discussed many times, (1) we do not do anything like that and (2) nothing stops you from using email@example.com

<comment><USER5> The irony here is pretty rich. You don't do it, although your privacy says you might do it for as long as the account is open. Meanwhile, Google (a) _can't_ do it, and (b) specifically states they won't do it in their privacy policy.

But _Google's_ the one we should be worried about.

I didn't give a crap about the redirector until you started making privacy vis a vis Google DNS an issue on Hacker News.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> tracert 22.214.171.124

          17 hops, 132 ms

tracert 18.104.22.168

          12 hops, 239 ms

tracert 184.108.40.206

          11 hops, 186 ms

I'm going with 188.8.131.52

</comment><comment><USER10> I thought the consensus was that OpenDNS is evil, censorship and all.

</comment><comment><USER11> Off-topic perhaps, but that is an atrocious use of blogging for affiliate marketing dollars.

Maybe it's time to hunt down an ad blocking extension for Chrome.</comment>


Cool URIs don't change. (1998) - <AUTHOR> https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html <comment><USER2> TL;DR ->

www.example.net/2019/10/03/article.html

'decays' much more gracefully than

www.example.net/articles/author/published/some-article-title-that-might-be- changed#section-2?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article&uid=7LiH5GsQD9sGFVqzZRewzr8uUBd8q3ETmCXjif6RZQBmn2S96KDpYjtHSV&detect- adblocker=true&js=full

Okay, so I added on some URL parameters to uglify the latter more, but it gets the same point across, hopefully.</comment>


China has no good options for retaliating against Trump's Huawei ban - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/29/18637291/huawei-ban-trump-trade-war-china-united-states-tariffs <comment><USER2> No good _short term_ options.

Trump will claim victory in the trade negotiations and be long gone when the profound result of his actions are felt (China and others moving away from US tech).</comment>


The Best Marketing Resources for Startups - <AUTHOR> https://rrrepo.co/repo/Marketing <comment><USER2> www.venture1st.com/marketing-pr/ Crossing the Chasm by Geoff Moore and the workbook, which is much more practical

For Dev focused companies [http://www.heavybit.com/](http://www.heavybit.com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't think either are more practical, and cannot even find the workbook thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is a great tool. Highly recommended!</comment>


Ask HN: How to evaluate job offers? - job-dilemma I'm a computer programmer and I've found myself in the enviable position of having to choose between 2 nice job offers.  It's a classic dilemma of high risk v. high reward or corporate work for higher pay (~15%).
I am married with a child and my wife does not work.  If I choose to work for the startup I will essentially be unable to save for the next 4 or 5 yrs (or until we learn to appropriately adjust our lifestyle).  The corporate gig represents a modest pay bump (and the ability to save) and a more traditional path for career advancement (i'm not 100% sure that matters to me).
Everything about this choice is a conflict.
If I think about my life goals in terms of non-work life then the higher pay, the slow & steady nature of the corp. job, and an office (with a door!) are appealing.
If I think about my life goals in terms of work life then the startup is more appealing - I will have more autonomy, using more exciting tech, solving bigger problems, working with movers & shakers, and generally more of a challenge.
How can I convince myself of one or the other?  How can I vet the opportunities of the startup vs. the position of the corp. job?  Any insight is appreciated. <comment><AUTHOR> How old is your kid? Probably relevant.

Building up enough savings to cover (surprisingly expensive) dental/medical/orthodontia and, more importantly, to serviceably help my kids get to college was supremely stressful for me in my last(=current) startup job.

The likelihood that employment at any startup will pay out is low. You can cycle through lots of startup jobs to improve the odds, but if you do the math across all startups and the amount of time you have, the odds aren't great.

Meanwhile, if you take the corporate job, you can still fulfill your bigger ambitions; you just have to be determined enough to chase them in your spare time, clever enough to scope your projects down to something achievable (at least, until you get dollar-valued traction) in that spare time, and disciplined enough to keep that tempo up.

Over the long term, the way to make the startup path really pay is to be a cofounder. Taking a series of jobs at startups isn't necessarily the best way to cofound a company. Having some degree of financial stability might be more important.

Also, don't forget to evaluate the benefits packages at both jobs. Your spouse doesn't work; the quality of your insurance is going to matter.

<comment> job-dilemma 6

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, you've got ~12 years to build up some kind of war chest. If you're willing to work for 15% less money at a startup, consider what that 15% saved every year for 12 years might do for the college problem? On the low end of software positions, I come up with numbers that more or less pay for college.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> _I will have more autonomy, using more exciting tech, solving bigger problems, working with movers & shakers, and generally more of a challenge._

Do you know or expect this to be true of the startup offering you the job or is this more your general vision of startup employee life? If it's the latter, that would worry me.

Overall, I don't know that you've provided enough information to go on. The fact that one is a startup and the other is corporate work is, IMHO, of a lot less relevance than most would assume. The devil is in the details. In the end, it will all be about your fit with the team at work, your boss(es), your enjoyment with the content of your work, level of responsibility, and work/life balance. Those can be good or bad in either situation. We've all read many a post of a disgruntled startup employee on HN.

I don't have a recommendation of which one to go with, but what I try to do in these scenarios is think of a range of scenarios (e.g. best, worst, and in- between cases) for each situation and use those as inputs to my decision. It's easy to romanticize the start-up and think of corporate work as boring, but the truth often falls somewhere in between.

<comment><USER3> To add on to what kohanz said, I think it is important to find out concretely what "more autonomy, using more exciting tech, solving bigger problems, working with movers & shakers, and generally more of a challenge." mean exactly in terms of this startup.

Let me explain:

1\. What does more autonomy really mean? Do you have product level decisions? Do you have decisions governing the architecture of problems? Do you have the kind of experience that means they will eventually trust you with that?

2\. What does more exciting tech mean? Is that a question of you using a new technology, new paradigm or new space? If so, have you considered what will happen in a year's time when the tech is something you get used to? Also, if more exciting tech means the prospect of working on fancy new tools all the time, there is a drawback to that too. As a company grows, you have these bits and pieces which don't fit correctly and don't scale properly.

3\. 'working with movers & shakers': Again, it completely depends on the company what this means. Being able to sit next to your CEO or grab a beer with him could mean nothing more than a 1 degree connection on linkedin or something, it all depends on how they perceive you too.

4.'solving bigger problems': Again this completely depends on the company's scope. Scaling up a web app to ten thousand users at a startup vs working fresh out of school in Amazon scaling up to millions and millions of users are two different sorts of bigger problems.

A few years back I was faced with these two caricatures of companies two: a startup being a romantic place where a bunch of cool people sip beer and change the world and big companies filled with engineers who dress in blue shirts and slacks and are generally "cog" in a wheel. Again, the truth is that every company is different.

Oh, yeah, I can't agree more with what _kohanz_ said there. Team matters more. In fact, when I make my decisions, I would care more about the team than whether the company is considered "prestigious" or "exciting".

Also, lastly, unless you are interviewing with an early stage startup, asking the startup to be relatively competitive is not out of the realm. I know there is this perception in industry that working in a startup automatically means lower pay but that doesn't always have to be the case. There are tradeoffs always obviously, in that a small startup won't be able to say match Google's benefits or whatever but having said that, you can surely make sure that your family is not left high and dry if things blow up.

<comment> job-dilemma I have no illusions about the startup life, I'm not excited to drink beer with the ceo.

I'm excited by the prospect of owning a technology platform and running with it. The existing tech stack is one outside of my comfort zone (i.e. jumping from windows -> linux), but the architectural & dev principals are very familiar to me.

Solving bigger problems to me means that the company's mission is a good one - working towards a societal good as opposed to building intranets or perosonalizable web portals.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Which group of people do you want to become like?

<comment><USER5> Incidentally, this is one of the best litmus tests I've found for many life decisions. (college, hobbies, friends, dating, etc.)

<comment><USER6> "If you tell me who your heroes are, I'll tell you how you'll turn out." \-- Warren Buffett

<comment><USER7> Cute.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Have you negotiated the startup one? Tell them that you'd rather work with them, but you have another offer on the table for more money. Read Patrick McKenzie's article about negotiation: [http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary- negotiation/](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/) .

<comment><USER7> Wish I'd read that _before_ accepting my first offer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5>
        I am married with a child and my wife does not work.

I bet your wife works a lot. It's just that nobody pays her for it.

</comment><comment><USER9> Take the corporate job.

You have two people that depend on you to provide for them for both income and insurance (assuming you are in the USA). In a year or two your wife could return to the workforce, then go for whatever startup is in fashion at the time. Being as tech startups are, it has a >50% chance of failure anyway. It would also be possible to start your own side project while working the corporate job.

</comment><comment><USER10> IMHO you left out a couple key data points.

1) How senior are you?

2) How much do you respect the folks that will be your boss, and how much time will they give you?

The more junior you are, the more important #2 is.

</comment><comment><USER11> Since you have a kid the startup should be very compelling to consider it.</comment>


Cheap CO2 removal shows promise - <AUTHOR> http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja2100005

<comment><AUTHOR> For those with no access, a good (hacker friendly) summary of the findings, from a surprising source: [http://www.teacherken.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/04/1051521/...](http://www.teacherken.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/04/1051521/-Cheap- plastic-sand-composite-absorbs-CO2-like-crazy?via=siderec)</comment>


PHP.js - PHP function for js - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/kvz/phpjs

<comment><USER2> I've used this. It's a nice set of libraries.</comment>


Show HN: If Google owned Twitter, what would the Android Twitter app look like? - <AUTHOR>

Frustrated be the lack of anything approaching the quality of TweetBot on Android, I decided to write my own Android Twitter client with the above goal.
The result is Tweet Lanes, which I just released for phones running 4.0 and above.
The big ticket items are: borderline theft of the Google Talk & MMS app styling; New take on composing tweets; Reply to multiple tweets at one time, or block multiple spammers in one action; VolScroll - navigate the feed with volume up/down buttons; and plenty more.
App & screenshots can be found here: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tweetlanes.android <comment><USER2> I've just switched to Android in the last few weeks and been using the official Twitter application. Needless to say, I've been disappointed. This is far and away superior, and I will definitely share it around to my friends and coworkers as much as possible :)

</comment><comment><USER3> not much of a Tweeterer, but lookin at the screens I'll say that you've probably hit on something. Gtalk is designed that way because it works.

VolScroll, tho . . . not sure about it. on my Gal S2, the vol buttons are really out of the way. I'll bet that the only time i'd use them with this app would be when i only could use one hand. even then, it's just as easy to hold with hand and thumb scroll...

And when's the only time you'd need 1-handed scrolling? Behind the wheel of the car. Neat idea, to be sure... just not sure if it's practical.

<comment><AUTHOR> VolScroll is an additional means of scrolling. Touch scrolling naturally works as you would expect.

I use it primarily when I'm tweetin' & eatin'. One hand is using a fork, the other is holding the phone and easily navigating the feed.

<comment><USER4> If you could make it animate, rather than jump, I think it would work well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The UI is amazing. I really liked the tutorial screen for some reason. Great job!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot. I went through a few iterations on that, and I'm pleased with the final result.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> this is sexy, but why only ICS? Older phones need some <3 too!

Fantastic job. You should be a Google dude.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot for the feedback. Once I add a few more core features and implement tablet support, I will backport it to Android 2.x.

<comment><USER5> I'm sure you know this, but in case you don't - ActionBarSherlock is incredibly easy to use for backporting the actionbar, tabs, and fragments to 2.x.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yup I'll definitely use ABS when I backport it.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Google Launches New Search Results Interface for Tablets - <AUTHOR> http://searchengineland.com/google-launches-new-search-results-interface-for-tablets-235340 <comment><USER2> So they updated it slightly to match other devices. Is that news? This feels like blogspam.

</comment><comment><USER3> *Google centers phone interface for tablets</comment>


In under 12 hours, Facebook reinstates Scoble's account - <AUTHOR> http://scobleizer.com/2008/01/03/facebook-lets-me-back-in/ <comment><USER2> ...since he's agreed not to run the script again.</comment>


Huawei Just Started Selling Laptops with a Beautiful Linux OS Pre-Installed - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/09/12/huawei-just-started-selling-laptops-with-deepin-linux-pre-installed/#17ba05977824 <comment><USER2> Given past cybersecurity incidents I'd be very leery of getting one of these. Some relevant links are a description Titan Rain [1], an article about China hacking a Navy contractor [2], and a 3-star general's interview about his concerns regarding Chinese hacking [3]

[1] [https://www.cfr.org/interactive/cyber-operations/titan- rain](https://www.cfr.org/interactive/cyber-operations/titan-rain)

[2] [https://beta.washingtonpost.com/world/national- security/chin...](https://beta.washingtonpost.com/world/national- security/china-hacked-a-navy-contractor-and-secured-a-trove-of-highly- sensitive-data-on-submarine- warfare/2018/06/08/6cc396fa-68e6-11e8-bea7-c8eb28bc52b1_story.html)

[3] [https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/07/16/the- chin...](https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/07/16/the-chinese-have- already-broken-into-my-stuff-cyber-espionage-concerns-army-acquisition-three- star/)</comment>


A sheet of spider silk nearly half a mile long covers a field near Memphis - <AUTHOR> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/11/151124-spiders-webs-tennessee-nation-science-animals/ <comment><USER2> spiders are amazing creatures. Just read the article on the BBC on one where is spun a web across a river.

[http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151126-the-worlds- biggest-s...](http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151126-the-worlds-biggest- spider-web-can-span-an-entire-river)

<comment><USER3> There's also the 2010 article "An Immense Concentration of Orb-Weaving Spiders With Communal Webbing in a Man-Made Structural Habitat"[0] documenting a 4 acre web inside the Baltimore Wastewater Treatment Plant housing an estimated (lowball) 107 million spiders.

[0] PDF [http://www.entsoc.org/PDF/2010/Orb-weaving- spiders.pdf](http://www.entsoc.org/PDF/2010/Orb-weaving-spiders.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The article headline is: "Millions of Baby Spiders Create Giant Silken Blanket"

tldr; Baby spiders do what they do. Spiderwebs enuse.

<comment><USER5> Thank you, the one question I had (Was it a single spider?) was answered by the original headline.

<comment><USER4> The question I had, "Why would someone want to make a half mile long sheet of spider silk and put it in a field outside Memphis?" is also answered by the original headline.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "news.nationalgeographic.com needs to uniquely identify your device to play premium content..."

It begins.

<comment><USER7> I didn't see anything when viewing on chrome on desktop (with uBlock). What information was it requesting? Some new HTML / JS hook?

<comment><USER8> It's Chrome for Android only - [https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/4410268?p=mobile_pr...](https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/4410268?p=mobile_protected_content&rd=1)

I'm assuming it's a nonstandard thing they're experimenting with that provides a combination of device ID and browser ID (assuming Chrome on Android is similar to it on desktop, where each install is branded with a number).</comment></comment></comment>


Let's face it: social TV is dead - <AUTHOR> http://gigaom.com/2014/01/29/lets-face-it-social-tv-is-dead/

<comment><USER2> To say it's dead implies it was alive at some point.</comment>


Valve looking to drop support for Ubuntu 19.10 due to Canonical 32-bit decision - <AUTHOR> https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/valve-looking-to-drop-support-for-ubuntu-1910-and-up-due-to-canonicals-32bit-decision.14421 <comment><USER2> I can't understand the drama. Why doesn't Valve just provide Steam as a Snap and saves us from installing all those dependencies anyway?

<comment><USER3> Why use Snap and not one of the 19385791058 competing standards?

<comment><USER4> Why not?

Redundancy isn't a bad thing

<comment><USER5> It's certainly annoying. If a customer needs to have a few different platforms installed, they won't really learn to use any of them. If they have one or two, they'll likely get more value out of them.

If everything was available on every packaging platform, then I'd say the user choice is valuable. However, if most apps only support one or two platforms, it becomes fragmented and you lose most of the benefits of user choice. I like having lots of Linux distributions because most apps work on most distributions. I don't like the current situation with Snap/Flatpack/etc because that's not the case.

<comment><USER4> I don't use snap personally but surely valve of all companies would keep the packages up to date, meaning no difference no matter what you choose</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Great Grain Robbery (1972) - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_grain_robbery <comment><USER2> Earl Butz is a hero to most farmers because when prices shot up they made more money than they ever had in a lifetime. In Michigan navy beans shot up 700%.

I had a farmer recount to me once that he went out with a broom and got enough beans from the bottom of a grain bin to fill the trunk of his car. He told me that trunk full brought him more cash than an entire gravity box wagon the year before!

</comment><comment><USER3> While in this case, the soviets came out ahead, the deal was not inherently unfair.

It appears the price was set based on market rates on the day the deal was done. In effect, the USA just sold all the grain on that day, more than they actually had, not on the actual day of delivery. They just issued a futures contract.

Had the price of grain fallen on world markets, the soviets would have lost out.

<comment><USER4> If the price of grain had fallen, the Soviet Union would have purchased it from other countries at market rates. Only after they had exhausted other countries' grain surpluses would they have bought from the US.

<comment><USER5> The GP is talking about prices falling after, not before, the purchase.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> As mentioned in this NASA training video on Remote Sensing for agriculture:

[https://youtu.be/pdR4GbMcRiM](https://youtu.be/pdR4GbMcRiM)

<comment><USER6> Anyone aware of European datasets coming from agricultural remote sensing? I'd also be interested in forest land datasets.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wikipedia says that "The problem was heightened by the fact that only a small fraction of the Soviet Union was able to be farmed"

Really? I though that, until the mid-century at least, the vast majority of the population of the USSR were farmers.

I mean, ok, of course they grey other things as well, but still - that sounds strange.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, not sure what to make of that. Apparently this is a reference to the black earth belt ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernozem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernozem)). The article isn't particularly well written. Why only the Chernozem belt can be farmed (short term climate conditions maybe?)? What kind of mismanagement USSR exhibited that led to massive grain shortage on their end?

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Would you steal a loaf of bread to feed your family? Would anyone try to stop you? What about a billion loaves?

<comment><USER6> The robbery is in reference to giving away US money to US grain companies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Why would we subsidize the USSR during the Cold War? Why not require some political concessions first?

<comment><USER9> In the context of the times, the late 60s-early 70s were a time of political concession from both the USSR and the US. This was the Detente period of the Cold War, when the two sides were trying to sign nuclear arms treaties to avoid mutual annihilation like they faced during the Cuban missile crisis as well as the expense involved with making tens of thousands of nukes, and the US was trying to pull itself out of Vietnam and needed good relations with the USSR to make sure they wouldn't have to fight a 2nd Vietnam war if the USSR decided to push the spread of global communism. The grain export deal was just one piece in the puzzle.

<comment><USER8> Each piece should have had its own concession.

<comment><USER9> That's the kind of inflexible deal-making that makes negotiation impossible in real life. Sometimes I wish time machine simulations were real so we could send people back in the past and let them try their hand at navigating historical global crises. That'll be sure to teach some humility after the umpteenth time the world gets nuked.

<comment><USER8> The USSR was responsible for spreading death and oppression through out the world. It finally collapsed due to its failed economic system. Subsidies delayed that collapse, delayed the freedom of hundreds of millions and allowing more deaths.

No one was nuking anyone, the Soviet leadership was just trying to maintain their decadent lifestyles at the expense of their peoples.

<comment><USER9> hindsight is always 20/20.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Regional food shortages can have a global ripple effect. Sound familiar?

</comment><comment><USER11> why the term robbery?

just because the seller couldn't detect a weakness on the buyer and artificially inflate the prices it is considered a robbery? Does someone who will need a car for a job or lose the house for non-payment "rob" the car dealership for not disclosing they really need that car they are purchasing at market price?

IMO, the robbery is that the business people consulted for the deal saw only the big sale and the possibility to get their costs subsidized (for what reason that was even offered by the govt?!) and they indeed made a nice profit and were not affected by the internal price hike as they were sellers, not buyers, while the US public lost 300mi subsidizing this mess and paying the higher prices. Indeed a robbery.

<comment><USER12> "Author Martha Hamilton introduced the term as the title of Chapter VII of her book The Great American Grain Robbery & Other Stories, as part of an allegation that the U.S. government was robbing American taxpayers in order to support grain trading companies."

<comment><USER13> Which in itself is a reference to a 1903 silent film The Great Train Robbery, widely considered to be the first of what we'd now recognize as an action film, and the first western.

<comment><USER14> The wikipedia article says:

> The term Great Grain Robbery is a pun referring to the "Great Train Robbery" > novel

The novel in question being a 1975 one by Michael Crichton! Being British, to me, the term refers to an infamous train robbery in 1963. I don't know if that incident is well known in the US.

Presumably, though, both those uses are references to the film.

<comment><USER15> Michael Crichton's novel references a British train robbery from Victorian times:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gold_Robbery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gold_Robbery)

The 1903 movie referenced is a separate dramatisation of a US robbery:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Train_Robbery_(1903_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Train_Robbery_\(1903_film\))</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How to write a better weblog (2002) - <AUTHOR> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/writebetter/

<comment><USER2> I hope blogging won't disappear. It was really good for a while, when we still had blogrolls. Now it's all walled gardens, that make it even easier to share and comment. I kind of think it's time for the pendulum to swing back.

<comment><USER3> What do you mean by walled gardens? Is not blogging still open, with anyone being able to start a blog, and in most cases anyone read it as well?

<comment><USER4> If I had to guess, I think he's lamenting the relative death of blogs as indie publications of sorts (with novel designs and formats) and the migration of people to tools like Twitter and Facebook which are basically glorified, controlled forums.

I'm convinced the former type of blog has significantly gone away, but merely the marginal fringe of people who don't care too much about format seem to have swung away from them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Interestingly his blog is no longer online: <http://www.0format.com/>

<comment><USER6> Was going to make the exact same point. Good name, too. I think blogging is something we do until our time can't scale with it due to the success of the blog, very few times does the blogging itself carry it's worth past some lofty modicum of success.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I especially liked the point about pith. From what I have seen the mark of a good writer is the ability to say a lot with just a few words. It is all to easy to ramble on and on, without getting the point across.

<comment><USER4> Brevity is the soul of wit.

<comment><USER7> Irony is the soul of wit.

"My liege, and madam, to expostulate What majesty should be, what duty is, Why day is day, night night, and time is time, Were nothing but to waste night, day and time. Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit, And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes, I will be brief: your noble son is mad: Mad call I it; for, to define true madness, What is't but to be nothing else but mad? But let that go."

<comment><USER4> Ah, but it is a proverb in its less nuanced sense all the same.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A (non-compsci) friend recently asked me for advice on setting up a blog, however having never written one myself I wasn't of much help. I'd be interested to know which sites/hosting services people recommend and why. The friend was an economist/financier in case that's relevant.

<comment><USER9> Average person: Tumblr. The easiest way to blog isn't just their tagline, it's also true.

Average person who is a little geekier: Posterous. The easiest way to blog that also has some more anorak-friendly features.

Unhealthy interest in politics: WordPress/Typepad/Blogspot, because that's where most of the other politically opinionated people tend to blog. The hosted services, not the ones you install on your own server. That way someone else has to worry about security updates, maintaining performance, etc, and your friend doesn't have to learn anything about servers just to be able to write.

Programmer blogs: the latest fashion seems to be using github as a blog (e.g. raganwald) or else using a git-based blogging engine and deploying the blog to heroku (e.g. with toto) [http://www.rubyinside.com/deploy-blog-with-toto-and- heroku-2...](http://www.rubyinside.com/deploy-blog-with-toto-and- heroku-2962.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I love this quote:

 _No matter what your audience size, you ought to write as if your readership consisted of paid subscribers whose subscriptions were perpetually about to expire._

<comment><USER11> _No matter what your audience size, you ought to write as if your readership consisted of paid subscribers whose subscriptions were perpetually about to expire._

Presumably that advice applies here on HN as well.</comment></comment>


UK government abandons "Agile" - <AUTHOR> http://cartesianproduct.wordpress.com/tag/universal-credit/

<comment><USER2> UK govt skrewed up more like. Agile is a methodology not a magic bullet,the constant iteration works great when you have a solid known backend tech (eg rails) and you are iterating for features and user experience. In this case your technology base is already stable so iterations come easy. When you are building a technology base from scratch at this scale however you better have a very well thought out data and service model with tested prototypes or you are doomed. Agile is great at keeping up work flow and communication,forcing reluctant devs to talk to business and forcing business to understand the cost of new features,but if you have architectural problems you wont have the luxury of those communication problems later!

</comment><comment><USER3> Don't worry - there are still lots of other buzzwords to put your faith blindly into.</comment>


What is Quality - A Feline Perspective - <AUTHOR> http://blog.smartbear.com/software-quality/bid/271807/What-is-Quality-A-Feline-Perspective

<comment><USER2> This is so weird - but I love it.</comment>


The Mind Behind Early American Protectionism - <AUTHOR> https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-mind-behind-early-american-protectionism/ <comment><USER2> The article is interesting, but I found this short statement much more persuasive: "Economist James K. Galbraith disputes these claims of the benefit of comparative advantage. He states that "[...] none of the world's most successful trading regions, including Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and now mainland China, reached their current status by adopting neoliberal trading rules."", from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage#Criticis...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage#Criticism)</comment>


Norways biggest websites tell IE6 users to upgrade - <AUTHOR> http://www.cjohansen.no/en/browsers/norway_tells_ie6_users_to_shape_up Alot of big websites in Norway are telling IE6 users to upgrade their browser. A full-blown campaign is on! <comment><USER2> Intriguing title. If the story is valid, perhaps all other nations have attempted to drop in on that site in hopes of learning the trick... 'cause something seems to have taken down that server.

</comment><comment><USER3> Just stick ie6 only content between these two tags <!--[if IE 6]><![endif]--> in your html.</comment>