owlmanatt

No, but it's easy to say that with the benefit of hindsight.

Nobody knew everything would turn out OK back before HL2 was released.

Aye. Crowdfunding is an excellent way to securing investment without the project being beholden to shareholders expecting a big payout at the end.

Yes, exactly. The other half of the article feels exactly the same: "PBS decided to kill the show, so LeVar is obviously wrong for wanting to continue anyway". It doesn't present an argument that teaching language is more important than creating a desire to consume books; it just appeals to PBS's authority.

But aside from the article's shortcomings, I do agree with their sentiment. You typically see Kickstarter pages explain what they need the money for in some level of detail -- who would want to give strangers money otherwise?

The idea of promoting literature to children is great, but that's just a mission statement. The entire pitch is frustratingly unspecific about what exactly they're making with their million dollars. I can take some pretty good guesses, but why should backers need to guess at that?

That's not what the message says, though.

> WARNING: Using TrueCrypt is not secure as it may contain unfixed security issues

That is a perfectly reasonable thing to say if you are abandoning security software. Any issues discovered will not be fixed, so you should stop relying on this software for security.

It says 'may', which is a responsible message if you're abandoning security software. Never know what the future holds; don't want to encourage people to rely on it if bugs will never be fixed.

You're ubinator. Unfortunately, you come home one day to find Mr. Binator in bed with some 20-something blond hussie.

The divorce paperworks sails through. Do you still want to be ubinator, reminded of that bastard every time you have to log in, or would you prefer to go back to umaidenname?

We both know where HR would stand on that one :V

That does not give you license to steal other people's content and profit from it.

If you want music but you don't want to purchase rights, there is plenty of creative commons licensed music available.

What's the point of that? You still need to worry about your own off-cloud backups and a contingency plan for when your vendor goes out of business.

All I know is I'm not building badass bird simulation engines.

> ii) Should search engines pay the scraped sites if they are charging to access their indexed data? probably some of the scraped sites has a specific license forbidding the search engine to sell their information in any way.

Any reputable search engine will respect robots.txt.

> Google takes 32% of every adsense click [1], so assuming an account makes $5,000/month, Google is making $2,352/month from that account.

The publisher (ie your website showing ads) isn't the one paying them that money; they aren't losing any recurring revenue by banning them.

Since they're Google AdSense, it's very likely that they have plenty of new signups to show those ads on.

ARIN does not have the authority to reclaim the blocks allocated before ARIN existed.

This is the source of a lot of problems.

Seems comparable to Box's pricing.