kellegous

Neil Gershenfeld is responsible for two of the best courses at MIT: "How to Make (almost) Anything" and "The Nature of Mathematical Modeling". Neither are compatible with healthy sleep habits, but both are transformative. I took NMM and, to this day, one my biggest regrets is never taking "How to Make (almost) Anything."

It's a good point and since journalists are already asking about it, I now wish I hadn't even posted it. I think Apple is not trying to hide the fact that they are looking for search and machine learning people, but the press will surely get it wrong trying to triangulate a vague one-liner from a recruiting email.

I don't think email is considered confidential by default. Had this recruiter made any confidentiality request, I would have tried my best to honor it. Instead, he seemed more interested in spreading the word that they were entering the search game. Also, Apple has not been exactly hiding their growing interest in search. They rarely let their engineers speak in public, but they were on stage this year at Lucene Revolution giving a number of details about how they are using Solr.

FWIW, an Apple recruiter approached me about working on a new Search-related thing. He used the following enticement in the initial email: "We are building the future of search for the best user experience (unadulterated by advertising for the first time in history)." So as best I can tell, a search experience without advertising is very much on their mind.

I understand your perspective, but I still think this is a reasonable thing to warn people about.

The point is that changing the service location is not covered in the contract. I wrote the article to warn people that Comcast believes this is covered in the contract and will enforce it. So we fundamentally disagree here on whether I'm changing the terms of the agreement. Maybe my expectations are misguided, but I would expect that conditions where they do not give me service and I continue to pay (especially a common one like moving an office to a non-servicable area) it would be explicitly included in the ToS. This is the reason that I think warning people is a legitimate thing to do.

Not sure if I'm answering the right question. I moved out of the service area (not realizing I was out of the area until I called). I tried to have my service moved and was told they could not give me service (because of the area). To be clear, I wanted to continue my service. What surprised me is they claim that their terms of service says that if I relocate to a non-service area, I still have to continue to pay. I've read the terms of service and cannot find this clause. I assume they are referring to one of the more general clauses in the ToS.