disposable

Jeez. Would you look at all this downvotes, eh?

Just read what Apple says - "and more scratch resistant than ever" - meaning that this glass is meant to protect against casual scratches, and not against the glass breakage during accidental drops.

The point being that the time it takes to scratch the heck out of 3GS glass is more than a lifetime of its battery. I've been carrying my iPhone in the same pocket with keys, coins and god knows what else for several months now and it still has NO scratches. Hence the original comment - the lack of ultradurable glass is not exactly a problem with existing generation of the iPhone.

> Why do you think that ultra-durability is to make it easy to change the batteries?

What? Why do you think I think that?

Yep.

Their statement implies that with this glass the phone is going to stay usable longer than its existing revision. However Jobs himself said that the battery in the current iPhone is non-removable, because he expects everyone to upgrade before it reaches the end of its life.

> Chemically strengthened to be 20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic, the glass is ultradurable.

... though the battery is still non-removable, so the ultradurability of the glass is really a moot point.

Hardly an option.

Besides one either gets the "don't do to others what you don't want to be done to you" view on things or one doesn't. In this case you clearly don't.

I am 6'2 and I passionately hate people who keep their seat reclined for the entire duration of the flight. With the seat in front reclined it is impossible to eat the meal. It is also absolutely impossible to use a laptop. For this reason I actually never recline myself, unless I have a child sitting behind me.

> The mob wasn't replaced by FSB, it was the FSB from the start

Back in late 80s and early 90s there was a mod and there was a FSB, with former comprised predominantly of criminals and former athletes. I am sure you are well aware of that if you lived in Russia at that time.

Depends on the nature of the service, but contrary to a popular HN opinion it typically makes more sense to release something well polished yet late, than something crippled and half-baked yet early.

If your primary goal is to gather a feedback, do a private, by-invite beta.

Junk. Not worth watching.

This has virtually nothing to do with "Investing in Startups in Russia". It is basically Esther Dyson, whoever she is, enumerating her successful exits and plugging several of her new ventures. That's it.

Slow news day as they say it on /.

Drop it.

Or rather evaluate how long it would take you to catch up with them (in their existing state) including the hardware part - acquiring it, stocking, selling, supporting, etc - and then see if you are willing to do that knowing that you will also need to out-market them. Then sit down and think about it. Realistically you are too late and you are too few. Think about it a bit more and then drop it.

Frequently quoted number is the 80% that are spent by the charities on supporting themselves and 20% reaching the actual people they are helping.

A friend of mine worked for a larger charity and the level of self-indulgement was astounding. Especially around the end of fiscal year when they had to spend the whatever budgeted cash left on something... anything, so not to have the budget cut next year.