rebel

Can you show me a single example of a website making enough to sustain itself on Flattr?

Then don't visit those websites. If you haven't paid money to access the content, immediately turn away from websites that are free and ad supported. If you don't agree with it, why do you have the right to not only "steal" the content on the website, but also needlessly shut down their revenue source just because you not only want the data for free, but you actively want to harm this person supplying the data for free.

Edit: I can't reply further down. However, I included in my original statement that using adblock is an acceptable measure. Why do you actually have to shut down the publishers revenue stream and ultimately their website to show off your dislike for ads? If you want to go with your street musician example, the way I see it is that you are free to not pay him money, however to punch him in the face after listening to his music (and presumably enjoying it) is completely pointless.

It's a shame this is even receiving front page publicity. This is ultimately terrible for everyone except maybe a few anarchists that think they deserve every websites information for free while sabotaging the publishers who work to develop the sites. And if it actually were to take off, it would then be bad for the anarchists who no longer get that free access to the information they wanted. Who wins?

Edit: Seriously, how is this a good idea? You disproportionately harm the sites you actually visit, and ultimately the result is A) Big ad networks shut them off .. or B) Independent ads think their ads aren't converting and pull them.

This is how you kill the sites you actually visit. They don't magically find a new business model before hosting/payroll/whatever catch up to the fact that their ad revenue has been shut off. I can't fathom what you stand to gain from getting their ads shut off instead of just hiding them for yourself with a standard ad block that is much more acceptable.

I've always wondered, do you need a licensing deal to use individual player stats etc. to run a site like this? If not, it seems like the barrier to entry would be quite low and you wouldn't even really need the network effects that poker requires.

Having recently read "Trust Me I'm Lying" from a recommendation on HN, it's hard to imagine this isn't a PR piece from Uber.

Am I the only one who thinks the available/previewed watch faces don't match the intended goal of the device? This event was all about fashion, inviting all of the fashion journalists and talking about personalization. Not a single one of those watch faces look appealing, and worst off they do nothing to shake off the "geeky" stigma attached to smart watches. I think the design has potential when it gets a little bit thinner (v2?), but the previewed watch faces look absolutely awful to me. You'd think that would be the easiest part of building a super computer that fit on your wrist.

This presentation looks like it's going to be on another level.. even for Apple standards.

Very interesting information, but I can't tell which industry you mean as the parent was referring to both casinos and f2p games? I assumed f2p but I've never heard of account managers giving gifts in f2p games, that would blow my mind.

"This article appeared in print under the headline 'China's Google' is on a roll'" ... Which was a much more appropriate headline for this article. Did they start changing their online headlines solely for the purpose of click bait?

Considering flash sale sites are emphasized in the article, I don't see how Groupon doesn't break the claim that there are no public ecommerce companies worth over 2B (Groupon market cap is around $4B)

So out of curiosity, what would be the easiest way to securely accept file uploads? Taking into account all of the possible malicious attacks.

Site loads for me. However I recall seeing your site many months ago, and I think it's a great idea, but misspelling "guarantee" on the homepage really gives it an illegitimate feel. Aside from that, best of luck. I think you've got a good idea.

My guess is that the recent 'nearby friends' feature from FB was no coincedence. Once I'm already being alerted that my friends are at the bar I just drove by, why not an alert that the ice cream shop I just passed is having a 25% off sale? Facebook and Google are probably the only companies with enough small business advertisers to pull this off, and I don't think Google has enough active mobile activity to pu this off (especially without WhatsApp). And of course it would be far too risky to build that into Android and push everyone to iOS. I think it's pretty clear Adwords is useless for your local ice cream shop, but an always active mobile alert for nearby customers could provide huge results. I've been expecting this for years but without a massive userbase and a significant number of advertisers it just wouldn't work. I think we're reaching the point where it is viable now though.

There are billions of dollars at stake. They know what the estimates are the whole time, and they have a pretty good idea for weeks/months on whether or not they are going to hit them. They would be borderline insane to not have PR plans in place. It would be naive to think otherwise.

I wonder if people already have gotten a head start on becoming ad-blind to these types of ads...

Yeah, that seems like a terrible "license structure". If he added irrevocable I think it would be sufficient for use, but as is I can't understand how you could currently feel safe using it?

This was ultimately a massive bait and switch and I can't believe more people don't find it disgusting. Facebook gave off the impression you would be able to reach people who became your fan on their network.. until they didn't need any more free marketing. Now that everyone is on Facebook, they've decided to focus on the user experience more and leave all the brands who promoted them out in the cold.

It would be one thing if they were charging all along, or made that intention clear. Instead they took all the free marketing and slowly scaled down how many of your fans saw your posts (frog in boiling water?). It's to the point now where I have pages that reach .1% of my fans. Facebook now wants thousands of dollars for just ONE post to reach a significant portion (not even all) of my fan base.

Ultimately, I don't think Facebook had a choice. The user experience, with the amount of pages some people like, would be horrendous. But to spend any time or money to try to build a fan page on Facebook now would be a joke. Anyone currently spending their advertising dollars to buy likes on Facebook is terribly misinformed on the impact it will have (none).

Additionally, it seems many of the major brands I've seen advertising via print, TV, etc. have been only promoting their Twitter accounts now. I have to assume this is a reaction to Facebook burning them and now they are trying to make Twitter a larger threat to Facebook.

Well Telegram advertised getting 5 million (~1% of WhatsApp) users in a day shortly after the sale was announced. Correlation doesn't always imply causation but in this case that's quite the coincidence.

And what percentage of Snapchat users do you think have any clue who that is? As an HN reader (so already a tiny minority) I still don't know who he is.

The amount of time it takes you to create a US Dollar isn't how you would measure the cost of something. It's strictly based on the value of that item. And with .0015 Bitcoin being equivalent to just over $1 USD, it's not much markup. A k-cup can easily cost $.75/each.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. If you don't want someone else to use your product name, don't use one of the most common English nouns in the dictionary.

The corresponding AAPL quarter for the same timeframe would be AAPL's Q1 2014 results from this week, no? Which would be $57.6B (Net: $13.1B)

Happened to me as well. Can't understand why huge companies with a wide variety of visitors use techniques that deliver sub-par experiences so often. I'm running the latest version of Firefox with a $2k Macbook Pro.

It's a legitimate question, although maybe not worded perfectly. I care whether it's me or someone else who ranks for a keyword, maybe my site is better, and I (like anyone else rational) would prefer to make the revenue. I think understanding what ways you can gain links that is still acceptable under Google's guidelines is a very important thing to know, and truthfully pretty difficult to figure out. If you try to build a really great product and never tell anyone about it, I don't think you will last long enough for Google to give you the proper recognition.

I couldn't agree more. Almost every site is defaulted to nofollow. My opinion is that nofollow has actually come full circle and now makes it easier for the spammers. Since almost all legitimate links are nofollow, the only way  to get "follow" links is to pay people to explicitly put them up for you, have friends give them to you, or create spam websites to link to yourself. The people who happily find my website and are excited about it tend to post to social media, and occasionally some blog posts, but very, very rarely a follow link.

The traffic driving methods used are much more useful if you know the site/market they're being used for. I'd much rather people included the project URL than not.

Creator here..

Been working on this site for a couple months now and I think it's ready to get some feedback from the HN crowd. I moved into a new apartment and my walls were bare. I wanted to get my favorite quotes printed but couldn't find a service to do it. Since I have a background in dynamically generating graphics, I decided it was a project I would enjoy. I believe it is already the best tool to easily create your own wall art and I've got some impressive things in the pipeline as well. I'd love to hear your comments and first impressions.

The movie "In Time" is an interesting view on how the world would evolve if that were the case. It's one of my favorite movies and it provides a perspective I'd never imagined.

The example images they use are the ideal use cases for each of these techniques. The rocks photo has no hard edges. Wood texture by nature is similar to what posterization does. These tricks won't help in many cases. Although if you do happen to have something that fits the criteria, these should be quite useful.

Thanks. With that being the case I'd feel like the sales estimations would all be rather low.