jmh42

I didn't even use the word 'developed'. Nice try. ;)

I simply mean if you are comparing countries, you need to look at aggregate figures, such as total GDP or market size or population. If one country has lower GDP than another, you could say it is "poor" on that basis, even if per capita GDP (a dis-aggregated figure) were higher.

Taking your example, simply by population size and aggregate GDP and therefore ability to spend on military, India and China ARE stronger than Singapore.

> Why should Mahathir get to call his country "poor" relative to China...?

A simple answer may be aggregates matter when it comes to country-to-country comparisons. A country's companies and government get 'strength' from the aggregate first.

Looks very awesome. What term app is that?

While this is entirely unethical, it is an amazing business decision if they get away with it without any harm to their reputation. I wonder if they reputation risks were considered when they rolled out this "feature". It's a good example for Bruce Schneier to add to the next edition of "Liars & Outliers: Enabling the Trust that Society Needs to Thrive".

I had not heard of Henry James and his book "Progress & Poverty" (1879). More info for anyone interested [0]

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_and_Poverty

I've spent some time thinking about basic income. At times arguing for it, other times arguing against it.

Unfortunately we cannot resolve the scarcity problem, particularly when it comes to real estate, i.e. the location one chooses to reside. There is a simple physical constraint: only one thing can occupy a specific space at a time. Cities in general are popular places to live because of their proximity to "things", the Arts and that interesting stuff happens where more people can collaborate in the real world. (Consider the demand to be close to your child's school or near a dog park.)

Given this (assumption if you will), let's consider a few rounds of economic cause/effect. Round 1: if everyone were given a basic income, many more people will be able to afford to live in a city. Round 2: not all people, but some, will seek housing (rent or buy) in this city. Round 3: owners will need to choose between [1] renting/selling at current price for which there is suddenly higher demand or [2] increasing their price until there is less demand. Round 4: most owners choose option [2] and excess income begins to be sucked up by higher and higher prices.

The issue is basic income increases the demand (perhaps good for today's global economic ailments) while supply of goods/housing will take time to adjust. Of course, given the opportunity to sell apartments in a city at higher margins will cause developers to build new supply, but this takes years.

One way to deal with the supply/demand issue is having a basic income that starts low ($100 a month?) and increases to a basic living wage over the course of 5 years. This way, investments can be planned ahead of time so supply increases with demand.

Like it says in the video, it's mostly a business decision. All the companies in the top list are customer/user facing, while Amazon's AWS is not customer facing at all. It's about the customer's impression of the platform they are interacting with on a daily basis (presumably not Linkedin). Standing up with Apple on this issue shows their users they are (also) serious about their privacy.

Turn the tables for a second:

What would the US do if a foreign government had access to their citizens' information?

Would it become an issue of nationalism to use your own country's homegrown smart phone, browser, social network, etc?

OSX example: Even 7 years ago Little Snitch on OSX was reporting to me every Apple App was trying to establish a connection home every time I opened it.

I just blocked it and didn't bother to inspect the packets.

The hack needed an extra rooted android phone and a special 'helper' app. It also took advantage of the subsidy they give new users and the driver for new users. (I have no idea if this has been patched)

Another subsidy I heard about gave about $1000 per week if you had over 80 rides. $4000 dollar subsidy a month goes a long way in China.

It really blows my mind that people think this is a sustainable business. Even after you out-spend the competition, who's stopping someone from downloading a new app from a new service? I've seen users in China blast all ride apps at once and just take the first one to arrive. Subsidies won't buy loyalty.

Because then the growth of valuation metrics will be slow and you will not be able to justify round A,B,C,+,-, etc.

Try reading it through the eyes of an investor putting capital to work rather than the person doing the work.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GE2BkLqMef4

video games /sarcasm

I may be completely wrong here, but I thought TOR doesn't work in China. Something about them blocking the relays or their traffic only supporting TCP and no UDP...

(Sorry for lack of support here.)

Does anyone know how much the Gov't agencies pay for this data?

I'm guessing here, but it seems logical. There must be some kind of economic benefit for Facebook, Google, AT&T, Verizon, etc. to save and provide this data. Perhaps they even help organize it for the "requesting entities".

No. I have found there is rarely a good result from this. In the one case I've observed, the guy courted the girl and quit before they started a serious relationship. This worked well.

This may be different at larger organizations. I have only worked at small companies where gossip travels fast and doesn't need to travel far.

This is horrible analysis: comparing Vista to windows 7 changes to windows 7 to 8 changes.

Vista was arguably Microsoft's worst OS. Windows 7 arguably the best. Obviously the changes you mention would be better. In fact, with 5% I am amazed and think that is rather impressive.

I think there is an elephant in the room here. (Sorry if this stings anyone)

The collective We have been led to believe that we must make something original to be great. Don't make another social network, too tough. Don't do what Instagram did, it's too (pick your reason) risky / saturated / lucky / etc.

The thing is, entrepreneurs have no reason not to shoot for the moon, recreate everything. Why do we resist? The big name funds probably won't invest for fear of cannibalizing their current holdings. Think about that next time you hear a VC or read their commentary (or any commentary for that matter).

This is really not said enough. I've found windows 8 a vastly better experience, mainly due to speed improvements, keyboard shortcuts, metro (I prefer it now, non-touchscreen too), and the un-invasive windows update.

Sometimes I wonder if the haters have actually tried windows 8 or if they are only Mac Users spreading it around.

Agreed. I have trouble falling asleep without a fresh-just-brushed-my-teeth feeling. An annoying habit in the beginning can become a necessity later on.