skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Jurisdiction for the lawsuit arises from (1) past contacts with the U.S. at the time of the claim from which the lawsuit arises or (2) current contacts with the U.S.

For example, if your LLC is being sued for...say, slander, that supposedly occurred 6 months ago, and your LLC were conducting business in the U.S. 6 months ago, your LLC would be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. courts based upon your past contacts. (Otherwise, businesses would just leave the country to avoid jurisdiction.) On the other hand, if you are currently in the U.S., but were not in the U.S. 6 months ago, you are still subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. courts based on your current contact with the U.S.

Again, your personal assets would be protected. However, the LLC's assets would not be protected. Once you've been targeted by a lawsuit, there's no point in moving the LLC's assets overseas. If anything, you're more likely to have an enforceable court order freezing the LLC's assets in whatever jurisdiction you've moved to.

I assume that I'd still have subscribers to my service in the U.S., but it doesn't make sense to me that that would constitute doing business there. By that rationale wouldn't every internet company be subject to the jurisdiction of every country on Earth?
Accepting and continuing to do business with the U.S. subscribers constitutes doing business in the U.S. Under most double taxation (prevention) treaties, a software/online "service" is deemed performed where the customer uses the service, unless there is a significant human element to the service in which case the service is deemed performed where that particular human performs his tasks.
I'm not an expert, but that's not quite how LLCs work. LLCs limit the liability of the owner. Not the LLC.

Lets say I install plumbing in your house and it fails and damages your property, so you sue my company. If I'm a sole proprietor or a couple of guys doing business as a partnership then suing the company effectively means suing me (us) personally. If I lose and owe you $1 million, you can have my plumbing stuff seized to pay the debt, but if that doesn't cover all of it then I personally owe you the remainder. You can put a lein on my house and screw up my credit and put a collection agency after me until I pay off the debt.

On the other hand, if I have an LLC or a corporation, then the liability is limited to the property of the LLC or corporation. You can have my vans and warehouse seized, but you can't take my personal property like my house. If the LLC can't pay the full debt then it can owe you and make payments or something, but you can't "ruin" the owners.

In this case, simply "dissolving" the LLC wouldn't solve the problem. While it existed the LLC presumably had property, and that's what they would go after. If you tried to pull a "The LLC didn't have any property" then they'd probably toss you to the IRS for running an illegitimate LLC. And when the IRS was done auditing you, the patent guys would come back and go after you personally.

I'm definitely not a lawyer or any kind of business expert, though. If anybody knows better I'd also be interested.
API Analytics - using Heroku, 3scale, GRAPE and Ruby
Transferring the idea" from your conscious mind to your unconscious mind"... that's exactly what I'm talking about. I've got to watch Rich Hickey's talk. Thanks for the link!
There's something very wrong with people who pay $80/mo for a smartphone contract and don't want to pay $1 for an app.
why not link to http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/4/getting-non... ? this seems to be pretty much a cut+paste.
reinhardt: I agree. I think the reason for this kind of thinking ("have to get to $100MM") is that developers are brainwashed (by all the TechCrunch-style hype about the few startups that make it very big) and forget common sense - that they can live very well indeed even if pulling in much less revenue than $100MM - hey, 1 to 5 mil or even 0.5 mil is enough for a pretty luxurious life for most people anywhere in the world, unless you want to buy yachts or something like that.
Strange title, considering:

* "Apple’s products have a look and feel that few can match, and even the Nexus 7 doesn’t quite get there"

* "The screen is no Retina like the latest iPad"

* "It may not have all the apps, or some of the latest and greatest, that Apple has"

* "The default screens are a mess of apps"

* "My Library, and recommended apps and magazines I couldn’t care less about"

* "there’s not much content in its Google Play store"

* "Only by tweaking the browser in a way most people don’t want to bother with can you watch Amazon Instant Video on the Nexus 7"

* "there’s apparently a problem with the touchscreen"

* "it’s just a tad too small"
Here's what I don't really get about google+: what's in it for me as a user? "Horizontal integration" makes a lot of sense for google, but as a user I get nothing from it. At best, it creeps me out a bit.

The entire reason I refuse to sign up for google+ is explicitly because google is behind it. I don't dislike the company (they're fine), I just don't want all of my stuff tied together in the way that google VP so gleefully describes.
He fails to address the point, which I have mentioned on HN before, that aqui-hires gradually erode the confidence of future customers.

True, there will be no shortage of indie developers. True, Sparrow didn't owe anyone updates for life.

The problem is that each acquisition reduces trust in the minds of potential customers. It's more the fault of Google and Facebook but I still believe its the core problem.
TBH Most bankers haven't the foggiest clue how to perform due diligence. The best due diligence is done by someone in the business plus an experienced accountant. Bankers only know enough about actual company finances to value them assuming everything is kosher. If something isn't kosher in the balance sheet, few bankers I know would spot it. Most trust the balance sheet and assume that if there were any shenanigans going on that the accounting firm would spot it (despite the fact that the accounting firm can just as easily be complicit). When bankers do comment in their reports on accounting irregularities it is only in relation to one of that firm's peers in the market and in the context of helping the bank's clients better be able to make a comparison of numbers when they don't measure the exact same thing.

FWIW I'm a former investment analyst at a broker dealer that has done due diligence. In one case I was working on the investment report for a tech company that was supposed to IPO. A few months later, after being fed up with banking and becoming interested in tech, I went to work for that company as a product manager. The due diligence I did as a banker and the reality I saw as an employee were night and day. My banking self didn't know nearly enough to properly perform due diligence. The saddest part is that of all the other analysts both junior and senior were even more ill equipped to do due diligence on a company like that than I was.
Wasn't Siri's story a similar one? They shelved all the good things after being acquired by Apple. Did you feel similarly outraged at that time?
Wow, I think you may have articulated it more clearly than that author (me). It really is about "raw conscious effort"(that you mentioned) vs a passive subconscious state. The raw conscious effort is head on but the passive subconscious state is looking at it from different angles that your raw conscious is not able to generate itself.
Exactly my thought. This could have been a test of over analysis. Though he wrote it should be considered as a simple mah problem and nothing more,
No, I use the Mac version for my IMAP email account as well (I'm in the minority of people who finds gmail to be awful).

I suspect we're a tiny tiny minority though. ;)
I think the guy is pretty spot on. There is a difference between feeling bad ("man this is an awesome app, it sucks I might have to find a replacement and port all my data") and the very real sense that a lot of the more vocal complainers seem to think their 10 dollars purchase earned them the indentured servitude of the Sparrow team.
We’re All Climate-Change Idiots
This is a silly developer-centric point-of-view. I will repeat as I have said before - people for the most part invest in an app for the service it provides. In Sparrow's case it was mostly Gmail. If sparrow won't provide it anymore, users will eventually switch to another shiny app. I have never ever come across a person who was hesitant to buy an app just for the fear that it would be shelved by aqui-hire some day.
The whole of the author's argument, and its weakness, in four words:

> It’s fine. It’s business.

Why is this inadequate? Because whether something is 'business' is not the beginning and the end of whether it is a good thing to do. It is merely one aspect.

The market is not a perfectly accurate and complete representation for all of human wishes and behaviour. So we cannot delegate to it as the final arbiter on questions of what should or should not be done.

No, the whole issue is really the other way around. What currently happen to be the rules of the business game are not grounds for telling people what they should or should not want. What people want is grounds for examining how the market and business are failing to work well -- and then pondering how that could be improved. That seems the more reasonable, just, and interesting avenue to pursue.
I hope SublimeText goes opensource soon. Else if they sell out, a lot of customers will have to become sad. I guess Vi/Emacs are still the best choice :)
He addresses just that. Feeling bad is one reaction, feeling betrayed and entitled to limitless updates of an app that you like is something totally different.
I agree with this statement of yours:

>Basically, the whole computer industry is one big case of buyer beware.

But not with this:

>If you really care about your data use open formats, open protocols and free software whenever you can.

Your first statement actually kind of contradicts your second - if we think of "buyer" as "user" even if the person has not bought the product - for the reason given below:

There's no guarantee that a particular free software will continue to be supported, just because it is free. Example: iText, the popular and widely-used Java PDF generation library. It was free and open source earlier but some time back got converted to a commercial for-pay product (except that, IIRC, you may be able to use it for free if you make your own product that uses it, free/open source as well).
I can see two game changing practical use cases directly:

Releasing computer people (and most others) from slavery to a desk when working -- including meetings. For personal interaction, you would need to stay inside ca 50-100 milli seconds distance.

Giving information to people when they need it while repairing/building/driving/etc a physical object.
I've been looking forward to applying to incubators, this is an interesting concept, looking forward to reading what people have to say. I want to see what different experiences incubator acceptances have, and how it will apply to me.
Interesting that they decided to use JPEGs instead of SVG for the illustrations.
Where the hell was the outrage when a neutered Siri came out with 4S showing that the original Siri that was shelved used to be much more useful?
"Dimensions and units: We designed a way to write such expressions as "2 meters per second" and "15.7 kg" and have them fit smoothly into the rest of the type system and mathematical syntax—still a good idea that has yet to reach fruition."
When Should you post to MAXIMIZE your traffic?
Well, this type of thing is exactly the reason I never trust indie apps to be around and only use open source apps. So although anecdotal and only me, these things have effected my purchasing.
Obama: Cyber attack serious threat to economy, national security
Take the elevator :)
Again you expect the interviewee to read your mind that he should ask a particular question. The puzzle is set up with certain conditions and boundary to see how the interviewee performs with those constraints. If one of the terms of the puzzle can be changed, then other terms can be changed, too. I would just replace the egg with a steel ball and be done with it, like just in real life you can just push the boundary and replace the meaning of the question completely.
Defending a patent suit costs millions. Settling may simply have been cheaper, while still giving a big payday to the troll.
Sparrow’s acquisition is a success story. Indie devs make a great product,
build a customer-base, and are rewarded with a buy-out from a big company
and they get new jobs with that company. It might not be what your
particular goal or end-game is, but it is a success.

From an end-user perspective, having software you use and rely on on a daily basis completely abandoned is not a successful outcome. The Sparrow devs may have won, but Sparrow users have lost.
"Cue predictable squawking on the internet."

And cue predictable anti-squawking squawking on the internet. The internet is a place for communication and people are allowed to express themselves. It's not entitlement. The entire goal of a software company is to make software people love so much they will complain when you take it away.

Congrats to Google for a smart talent buy, and the Sparrow team for catching the notice of Google and building something people will miss.

Now there is a clear market gap for someone else to reinvent email clients. Again.
They still complain about its loss... in the years since it has never been replaced. As an employee, I had no choice in the decision.
That may be true. Lunchbox's point holds true regardless: the problem statement is ambiguous, and is easy to correct so that it is not so.
Colin, How about putting a spin on the perspective...Would you "acquihire" other independent developers as part of your growth strategy?
"What currently happen to be the rules of the business game are not grounds for telling people what they should or should not want"

I've not ever heard anyone say that. OP included.

There are no "rules of the business game", other than an obligation to make money. And other than abiding by the law, there are no rules on how that money should be made.

Whether you consider the process moral or not makes no difference. The metric is $.
Online Media Pricing is Broken
The "It's business" attitude has been popping up a lot. Nobody seems to be making the distinction between good business and bad business. Everything I've seen around the Sparrow sale has been bad business. The told users they were working on push notifications and an iPad app. They had a half price sale last weekend! And even though they were charging a premium price and clearly had a sustainable business (they were one of the top grossing apps and were highly rated and publisised) they still screwed their customers.

There was a good way to do this. Finish push notification and iPad support before discontinuing development (i.e. keep your promises). Don't have a half price sale days before you are acquired without informing the users the product will be discontinued.
Recover hidden files & folders from virus infected devices.
So for one specific example where there was one data source partially copywritten, the open content was used and the copywritten information wasn't. Thus, sweeping conclusion about copyright law.

And this is why economists are useless.
GitHub's value is not what you think it is. It goes beyond Git hosting, being a social network for developers and OSS projects. Anybody can setup their own remote git repo on a cheap Linode or EC2 micro instance, but replacing a social network is almost impossible.
I think part of the problem in all the hubbub around the Sparrow acquisition is the attempt to represent people's apprehension as a single entity. The reality seems to be more complicated than that.

Some people are probably just upset because of an irrational sense of entitlement ("I paid for X, and now I won't get free updates forever as the product is being abandoned")

But there's lots of other reasons that people can be bothered by this.

I use the Mac version of Sparrow (without using Gmail), and the entirety of my reaction when reading about the acquisition was "Oh well, I guess at some point I'll have to find a new desktop email client. That sucks, I liked Sparrow."

I do wonder what the community reaction would be if it was a different product though.

If Sublime Text (which seems to be attracting a good following) announced tomorrow that they were being acquired, and that the product was being abandoned, would people complaining about it really be that surprising?

Even assume that they were also going to continue with maintenance on it, but stop active development of new features. People would be upset. People on here would say "You should never have assumed that Sublime was going to get new features before buying it, if it didn't do what you wanted now, you shouldn't have paid money for it" (I've found myself actually giving similar advice in the past regarding buying smartphones).

People would write asshole-ish blog posts saying that those people were whining.

I don't think this is actually an indictment on the "paid vs. ad supported" dichotomy. Other people have rightfully pointed out that companies get acquired like this all the time, regardless of whether their products are free, cheap, or expensive.
While I love the Nexus 7 tablet's pricing, ultimately I think it's going to hurt the Android tablet ecosystem. With wafer-thin (non-existent?) profit margins on the hardware, only companies like Amazon and Google, which have content to sell at a profit, will be able to compete in the market.

I don't think any company that is not subsidized by Google (i.e. Asus in this case), is going to get out of the tablet business.

So yes, the Nexus is a fantastic device at a fantastic price, but my hopes of a vibrant ecosystem for Android tablet -though previously low- seems further diminished.
I think a big problem to solve also is the decoding of the external world, so that the AR knows what is empty space, what is floor, what is a wall, etc.
RACCOLTA DI DOLCI SENZA ZUCCHERO|SEMI DI GIRASOLE BY MIRACUCINA
This doesn't address the OP's post but here's a quote from Iain M. Banks along your line of thinking:

The market is a good example of evolution in action; the try-everything-and-see-what- -works approach. This might provide a perfectly morally satisfactory resource-management system so long as there was absolutely no question of any sentient creature ever being treated purely as one of those resources. The market, for all its (profoundly inelegant) complexities, remains a crude and essentially blind system, and is - without the sort of drastic amendments liable to cripple the economic efficacy which is its greatest claimed asset - intrinsically incapable of distinguishing between simple non-use of matter resulting from processal superfluity and the acute, prolonged and wide-spread suffering of conscious beings.
All of the available CSS color names
A Web of Extraction
A sensible attempt to promote growth - the vast number of systems that will need complete replacement would dwarf green tech for a decade.

Of course you will need to force the change over and getting the DHS to regulate it is probably theworst ever idea
“Android handles phone-tablet scaling much better than iOS does: the UI properly fills the screen, text isn't pixelated, and you aren't forced into a phone-size keyboard that doesn't even reach the screen edge.”

iOS has none of the problems you mentioned, so what exactly makes Android better than iOS in that regard?
Why don't you try to go around the recruiter entirely and figure out how to get ahold of the hiring manager actually trying to fill that position.

With a little bit of research, I'm certain you can get to someone who can put you directly in contact with the person filling the position.

In fact, I would would give major kudos to people who are clever enough to figure out how to get around HR. That's a useful skill in and of itself.
Show HN: what you can build with themoviedb.org api: sharemovies
Introducing Access iQ, a web accessibility resource
No they won't. They will reject any app containing a mic icon that is not being used for dictation. The Chrome app uses a mic icon for dictation.
I look forward to a future where everyone producing every product and offering every service comes to the conclusion that product and service discovery tools are so effective that they render the concept of advertising completely inept and the only two vectors on which they can realistically compete are value (price x quality).
Serendipity Isn’t A Use Case
How the Mormons Make Money: a look into the business empire of the Mormon Church
This isn't about copyright, really. Wikipedia has a faction that dislikes fair-use non-free images. This faction is largely political in nature. It's not about the actual laws.
Does Sparrow's shelving completely block your access to your favorite email service?
To my surprise, Nielsen have (after a delay) published all comments AND fixed the graphic.

> Update 7/16: The original graphic in this post included a chart depicting U.S. smartphone manufacturer share which did not scale proportionately. While all data points in the original post and graphic remain accurate, the post has since been updated with a correctly scaled image.
The entry level iPad costs $399, not $499. That makes it twice as expensive as the N7, but it also has twice the screen area.

http://store.apple.com/us/buy/home/shop_ipad/family/ipad/ipa...
It's possible. I don't think acquihires are wrong (although I do wish that job-hunter acquihires were more up-front about the fact that they're building a portfolio rather than a company) -- they're just not the direction Tarsnap is headed.

But I think it's far more likely that I'd hire out of the open source community than out of the startup community.
Cute.

Kinda annoying that it loads all its page content from www.colors.commutercreative.com, which RequestPolicy blocks by default, being an external domain.
Odd.. some sites look optimized, while others do not.

When i view the homepage and zoom in, it starts to do funky things

Screenshot - http://cl.ly/image/2Z3v3B2F3R0z

When I view the individual contributors sites on my mobile device it renders properly.
Free content is not always necessarily honest content, especially at scale. Large sites aren't charities, but a personal blog often can be.

Free content will never dry up. Free content from organizations that produce at scale will dry up.
Apple’s App Discovery Lead On Google Shrinking. Publishers: Not to worry
I still wonder how much they got :)
I can understand not selling out if you don't like the conditions. But if the conditions allow you to do whatever you'd have done anyway, why not?
Only on tablet-built apps. Foursquare (for example) only has a phone app.

on a N7: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vhy3ucrsmvtui76/Screenshot_2012-07...

and on an iPad 3: https://www.dropbox.com/s/gao416zu3ltikra/Photo%20Jul%2021%2...
Optimisation lessons learned (part 3)
Freemium has run its course
Since when does "put in maintenance mode" equal to "completely abandoned"?
It's also why generalizations are awesome!
Should we make an effort to produce technology to help people cheat on their spouses and not get caught? I'm not saying you're off-base, but pick better examples.
I have, especially in B2B scenarios. "How do I know you'll be around in 3 years?" was a very common question when we started our business (niche web design and hosting).

If you're software gets used daily (think POS) or touches important data (think CRM, help desk), people absolutely care if you'll be around some day.
Evidence Facebook is porting Instagram to the Web