Sounds fun:
In May 2010, Groupon created a challenge to live off Groupons for one year. The contestant Josh Stevens traveled throughout the United States and to the United Kingdom and purchased all food, drinks, travel, entertainment and more from Groupon for 365 days. At the end of the year, he received a prize of $100,000
Please stay far away from the startup scene. You're toxic.
Edit: since the downvotes from assumed sycophants are pouring in, I'm not afraid to defend my position: the story of the Groupon pump and dump is well-known here and criticism has always been widely upvoted. But once the man is right here in our midsts you retreat. This is essentially the same behavior we see over and over of society promoting the psychopath. Others might have short memories but I don't.
Your response wasn't really constructive. A lot of people may agree with your comment but now that Andrew is at YC it'd be more useful to get his side of the story and learn something from it.
Yeah, it's interesting that this whole LulzSec thing turned out to be a "false flag psyop" by the FBI. This would mean that while "Sabu" was an informant, many of the hacks performed were sanctioned by the FBI.
No he's mocking the idea that the FBI sanctioned the attacks. As far as I can tell, all major hacks by lulzsec predate the conversion of Sabu, but even if the FBI had control of Sabu before some of the attacks, that does not mean the FBI sanctioned them.
At best the FBI decided it was more important to catch these people than it was to prevent the leaking of some cc's.
> As far as I can tell, all major hacks by lulzsec predate the conversion of Sabu
According to wiki, "He later turned informant for the FBI, working with the agency for over ten months to aid them in identifying other hackers from Lulzsec and related groups"
The CIA's website went down June 15th, 2011 (towards the end of the LulzSec campaign) - definitely while Sabu was working for the FBI.
"I've had it just about up to here with inane conspiracy theories about every corner of government including the DMV and the Census Bureau, but please do give me one more!"
Yes, because domestic spying agencies (or their controlling entities) couldn't possibly have anything to gain by increased control over the web- let's say through legislation, followed by the outcome of events like LulzSec.
Anonymous is an enemy of the state. Also, some of the US Government's own citizens are joining this enemy of the state, making them enemy combatants. It is lawful (meaning: within the bounds of international convention) for a government to infiltrate an enemy, and even lead its enemies' campaigns, if it means that the government utimately prevails by doing so.
If you're going to be an enemy of the state, expect the state to react accordingly. They hold no quarter for terrorists since the Dubya Administration.
Sabu was a friend of the United States Government. Benedict Arnold was a friend of the British Crown. both are cheered by their supporters, and derided by their enemies.
Putting aside the fact that articles on Business Insider are extremely sensationalized, what about Youtube or Ustream? It really wouldn't take much for Youtube to implement the rest of the features Twitch has.
I thought that actual revenue is actively frowned upon because it's just an obstacle when you hype up the acquirement price tag.
I guess Foursquare could actually serve as an example supporting the validity of that insane strategy... They're trying to actually make money, and found that there just isn't much money to be made with what they're doing, and now nobody wants to buy them either.
It legalizes asking for accounts, in very limited circumstances, in a manner that makes is extraordinarily risk simply to ask. It doesn't legalize seizing accounts.
You get that under at-will employment, there's a UNIVERSE of unreasonable requests employers can make that will permit them to fire you directly, right?
My point is that the misinterpretation is catastrophically riskier for the employer than the employee. This is as it should be, but isn't something the author of this article (or many commenters here) seem to recognize. Some commenters even hint at a belief that employers can directly access employee accounts on third party services, which is not an action accommodated by Illinois law.
I'm rather annoyed as it seems like a simple "housekeeping" task that OS X should have already handled. When upgrading the OS, Apple always re-hides my user Library folder and wipes out my TRIM support kext for my "3rd party" SSD, but they cannot perform clean up like this? Very disappointing.
The word "entrepreneur" is getting used as a blanket term way too much to the point that anyone with an idea, CRUD app or working at a startup is an "entrepreneur."
Way too many people start a company these days because they want "Founder", "CTO" or "CEO" title... rather than because they see a real need and want to solve a real problem.
The fact that anybody with Google or Stanford on their resume can raise a $500K or $750K seed round doesn't help things either.
It's almost like you haven't been paying attention to a single thing about Groupon for the last couple of years.
You could start here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupon#Reception) but somehow I think that wouldn't matter to you.