pkill17

Seems like a great idea. I would be interested to hear about the indicators used to show that students sometimes didn't bother applying in these cases. It seems intuitive that college students, having to plan in Fall of N for full-time employment or even internships in Summer of N+1, would have been adversely affected by the normal application schedule. Were there a large number of potential founders that raised the alarm about this?

If HBO is hamstrung by lucrative deals, then it stands to think that HBO's own deal making has prevented them from usurping Netflix. To my knowledge, I haven't heard of Netflix having overtly anti-competitive behavior but I'm all ears for examples. It seems as though HBO is capable of competing, but they have to make a risky play and get out from their cable TV bubble to do so, which is no fault of Netflix.

If anything, this shows that the monolithic telecoms that have large stakes in these cable TV brands are facilitating monopolies elsewhere because likely competitors are locked into their current markets.

EDIT: to be clear, HBO's unsuccessful attempt to be level with Netflix in the streaming arena is more "don't want to" and not "can't". I wouldn't call a lack of wanting to be monopolistic. If HBO suddenly turned around and wanted to compete directly with Netflix and got boxed out by Netflix in some way, i.e. Netflix striking deals with Level 3 or similar providers to prevent HBO from getting equal treatment, then there's a strong case for them being labeled a monopoly.

If large stakeholders in Snap also had large stakes in all these media outlets praising the Snap IPO, would you say the same?

It's not really about what everyone else is reporting; it's the fact that no matter what the spin, they should disclose their ties to Snap's success so the reader is fully aware that this piece could come across as a back-scratch type of move on Vox's part.

There was another example in this very article of them writing a glowing defense of Comcast, which they neglected to put a disclaimer on until a large outcry caught up with them. Where are you getting your opinion that they "usually do a good job of disclosing things"?

Are you sure none of the commits on any of your repos accidentally have the author email as the private one you login with?

In their diff example, line 33 on the left and 35 on the right are shown to be unchanged, however the indent isn't the same... Seems like they've hardcoded this example incorrectly unless I'm missing something? Left line 32 is removing a bracket at indent level 2, left line 33 is unchanged bracket at indent level 1, but there's now one less bracket at level 1 in the right side, even though no bracket at level 1 was removed?

Coin stood by nothing, not even their early backers. I'm genuinely upset they got our money and sold out, making more money. I wish they went up in flames and died out for the horrific user experience I and other backers experienced.

I'm with you. Not only was I an original backer, but I was also an early backer. I got my Coin 1.0 months after they promised, and it almost never worked anywhere. Coin 2.0 comes out with EVT but no NFC payment, promises to work at more locations, still hardly works. I'm pretty pissed with Coin, and will definitely not buy into any future FitBit products as a result.

I'm glad there's at least one government agency that's competent and technical enough to further our encryption tech. I'm worried the FBI and DOJ will try to spin this DARPA notice into somehow justifying that 'perfect encryption should be a military-only technology'.

Are you going to cite facts to back up your claims of a $100,000 university? You roughly doubled the tuition, room and board, and required fees of NYU, commonly cited as the most expensive private U.S. university.

Begrudgingly, I agree. I don't consider a patent holder to be a troll unless they're clearly not the first party to develop said technology. If there's clear prior art, only then would I consider someone a troll.

Unfortunately, patents are becoming more commoditized than healthcare in our country. It seems silly to me that someone is permitted to sue on the basis of patent violation when a) they weren't the original inventor, b) they bought the patent for the entire reason of profiting from litigation, or c) they're suing people who 'violated' their patent prior to the time they purchased it.

61C veteran here too! Those projects were mind blowing at times; unrolling a loop by 2 or even 4 would have ridiculous effects on runtime.

April fools?

I find people's immense gullibility more humorous than any of these April Fool's jokes. That said, good post! Had a bit of a chuckle at the NSA rib.