Elessar

Your comment begins with "except", but the content agrees with the GP.

GP would like aviation users ("passengers") to not be the ones doing the testing. You state aviation users historically tested -- it's why flight regulations and rules are written in blood. I suspect the blood of passengers is exactly what the GP would like to avoid.

I can't tell if you didn't make the connection, or if your commenting style is just to naturally start negatively. My suspicion is the former, given the throwaway account.

Government censorship is significantly more impactful than what companies can do. One makes the rules. The others operate within. It’s best not to equate the two.

And yes, HN has a diverse audience and you’ll always find someone celebrating a story.

Regardless, as a westerner, I feel sorry for the people of Pakistan.

We're rapidly moving to a point where an official (government) criminal record is not important to folks you want to interact with -- landlords, employers etc. They will instead turn to Google. As such, Google might as well be the official record for many people.

And if one put themsleves in the shoes of a victim, or even a criminal who has served their time, Google's pagerank is doing them a disservice.

I don't know if expunging records is the right thing to do, but it's worth discussing. There's no guarantee that searching a criminal's name will bring up the recent history where they've done their time, shown contrition, and is contributing to society. Instead it'll be the most highly cited -- likely news about their crime.

As a society, we approve of jail being the mechanism to "forgive" a person's crime. As such, isn't it horrible that Google's pagerank will only turn up what they've done wrong in the past? Again, I don't know if expunging the records is the right thing to do (in fact I believe it's wrong), but I do think it's worth debating.

Demand (ie. Customers) is easily one of the hardest parts of business. You're suggesting that supply is the cornerstone of a market, but thanks to the Internet, owning supply is nowhere near as important as owning the customers.

See: Facebook, Google, Amazon.

This is a click-bait headline, as the conclusion of the article is "we'll compare the two prediction methods tomorrow and find out which has done better".

I'll go so far to say that the article itself is lacking content, and does little more to say that two popular models don't agree on percentage probabilities, even though they both agree who has the advantage. Apparently that they both agree on Clinton having an advantage is not sufficient for the author.

I'd love to be able to start at higher levels. Depending on your WPM, the first few minutes are somewhat boring... but if you keep grinding for long enough, it's quite challenging.

Especially when the capital ships start shooting!

It's not a bad comparison.

The question is why is Apple not diving into a "productivity machine" like the Surface. The answer is that the iPad Pro is selling better than the Surface. That is: Apple isn't building the Surface because they built something that sells better.

This 'elusive' property is the idea that taxes are an indirect method of funding the police (as it is re-proportioned via much bureaucracy), while seizures directly fund the policeman's wallet.

Obviously the latter is much more dangerous, because there's a self-reinforcing cycle where the police spend their entire time stealing, instead of doing their government-defined jobs.

Indirection is important. It allows someone to give you goals that are productive, otherwise you would just steal from your employer instead of working for them (so they would give you money).

Don't be baffled. Engineering is driven by business direction, and the creation of an upgrade cycle is beneficial for the entire Android ecosystem.

You are not the customer they want.

Have you ever travelled to a foreign country where you don't speak the language?

You really need to put yourself in the tourist's shoes. If I booked a tour and the host drove me to a different place to stay, that's all I can do. You rely on their ability to communicate, and if they're being kind and doing their best to make your stay comfortable, then that's fantastic.

What you're suggesting is that you're going to start making international calls with some website's support staff while you have luggage on the street, no place to stay, in a foreign city and completely on your own. You're also going to blow off the only person (the host) who cares at all about your situation. Are you kidding me?

If it makes you feel better to knock the author down a peg, by all means.

But don't equate the two. The author built software and expected professional discussion about a business opportunity. Billy attempted to take everything using his 'existing' incorporation that was against the rules.

These actions are not equal, and the author highlights that there were plenty of warning indicators he should have, but did not pay attention to.