bobthebee

6 ms·

1.
Distinguishing blue from green in language(en.wikipedia.org)
1 points by bobthebee 15y ago|0 comments
2.
The New CEO 2×2: A comparison of Apple, Nokia and (unpredictable) RIM(datadrivendream.com)
1 points by bobthebee 15y ago|0 comments
3.
Combining PR/customer support with steroid usage(kotaku.com)
1 points by bobthebee 15y ago|0 comments
4.
by bobthebee 15y ago
If DuckDuckGo could really make $301+ M on search in Firefox, they would bid that. Reality, they can't. There is no value created in the imagined middle man investor.
5.
by bobthebee 15y ago
It's a great option to consider, but: * What matters is not just default placement, but actual share. How many would not switch to Google? Say hypothetically half which I think is generous. * That leaves them with the kind of share that Bin
6.
by bobthebee 15y ago
The dynamics behind the deal are interesting. Google probably paid just enough to outbid Bing, the second highest bidder. Or Firefox played a great hand of poker with Google. In either case it should trouble Mozilla that they are dependent
7.
by bobthebee 15y ago
I don't think it is productive to blame "the players". In fact, it obscures the issue. Look at it from the perspective of the patents (in a Dawkins sense). Patents want to make money. Patents grant exclusivity to something valuable. In a ca
8.
by bobthebee 15y ago
Ask the shareholders. And since I am one I'll answer. I don't have a problem with this at all. $300M is about 1/1000 of the current market cap. The rewards are spread over 10 years. So 1/10000 per year to have a world class CEO running the
9.
W3C Launches Community Groups; Agile Track to Speed Web Innovation (w3.org)
1 points by bobthebee 15y ago|0 comments
10.
by bobthebee 15y ago
Freakonomics had another entertaining podcast related to Nathan, namely his work on "molecular gastronomy" and comparing to traditional cooking. http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/01/27/freakonomics-radio-wa...
11.
Sid Meier's Pirates now on iPad(phx.corporate-ir.net)
2 points by bobthebee 15y ago|0 comments
12.
by bobthebee 15y ago
And my assessment is that the article is wrong. Google+'s goal is absolutely to kill Facebook. With something this important to Google, they want to control it themselves. If not, there is always the chance that Facebook will screw them ove
13.
by bobthebee 15y ago
True. But to go a level deeper, Facebook is dangerous to Google, because: 1) The competitive advantage of AdSense ($10 billion in annualized revenue) is all about having better user profiles that can translate into better syndicated ads. Fa
14.
by bobthebee 15y ago
Pointless generalization. Engineers have their place: as individual contributors without customer facing roles. Not at the top or any management position.
15.
by bobthebee 15y ago
1) lobby your congressman and senator. get everyone on HN to do the same in a co-ordinated way. 2) ask them to lower the barriers to invalidate patents. many big companies including apple, google, microsoft would support this as well. 3) as
16.
by bobthebee 15y ago
Seems like a very poor choice for Eric to appear in front of Congress. Can only result in bad PR for Google and hightened scrunity of Google. My favority Schmidt gaffe thus far was his comment on user privacy "If you have something to hide,
17.
[Humor] Hitler and the Downfall of Firefox (youtube.com)
3 points by bobthebee 15y ago|0 comments