There's nothing wrong with that sentence. I don't do those corrections, as in, I don't do that thing where you pedantically correct every little tiny "error" I can find. Got it smart guy?
No need to apologize, thanks actually. I wish people would correct grammar more often, certainly mine, and doubly so when it comes to names.. why get used to writing stuff wrong, when I can get used to writing them right :)
why get used to writing stuff wrong, when I can get used to writing them right
In that case....
"wrong" and "right" are adjectives, while "writing" is a verb which you are using the words "wrong" and "right" to modify. However, adjectives should only be used to modify nouns and pronouns, not verbs. In this case you should use an adverb:
why get used to writing stuff incorrectly, when I can get used to writing them correctly
If you prefer, you can use "writing" as a noun and continue to use "right" and "wrong":
why get used to the wrong way of writing when I can get used to the right way
I hate people who correct grammar on the internet, but you did make the mistake of asking. Sorry.
Why, I thank you! But I will also have you know that "Sorry." is a sentence fragment. When correcting others, you should always try to correct them rightly, not wrongly, even if it may sound odd sometimes.
In case you intended to take that advice to heart, you can use 'right' and 'wrong' as adverbs in all but the most formal contexts, and possibly even then too. They're called 'flat adverbs,' and there's a great video post from MW that you can find if you Google the term.
Please, no. I avoid taking part in grammar threads, but a plea for more has drawn me out. There are few things that derail conversations more than pedantic quibbling about "do" or "make". Take a look at this subthread: a bunch of people who feel better about how they've shown themselves able to one-up others but zero interesting discussion.
</rant>
My biggest feature request for HN: private comments. Let me reply to a poster privately. Then if I see somebody who looks like a non-English speaker who has made a mistake or somebody who has misspelled a name, I can correct them without causing this kind of useless thread. Not to mention private conversations (where you could say more than you are willing to say publicly) started around interesting comments could turn epic.
Please pursue your private comment idea further than this comment. I think it's a fantastic idea. Would you be able to (or know someone who could) make that change? http://ycombinator.com/arc/arc3.tar
Way to quote me out of context.. I specifically said I wish they'd correct me more often. I never mind, and wish people could flag themselves as language learners or forgetful ^^
That said, I still agree with your complaint. Marking a reply as off-topic (voluntarily, though of course admins should be able to override this), with each comment potentially having a sub-thread with off-topic replies, is something I'd like to see here, and have planned for my own CMS. Best of both worlds, and with unlimited nesting of that, you could even go off-off-topic, or off-off-off-topic.
In general it's a fine balance of what makes a v1. It's a huge challenge to identify those features that are must have vs those that are good to have. A poor v1 experience will chase your early adopters away and I doubt many people give a second try at all. But a delayed product and late or no feedback from users would result in building a product that is tangential to what the user actually wants. No amount of user studies would fill in that gap.
In this particular case, however, if I'm listing down all my expenses, I definitely would also want to sum it up and expect that sum to automatically update too. If I and those who think so are in the minority, well and good. For an app so elegant, no one would want or hope it to fail. But if you are releasing the app and not expecting or ready for honest feedback, I can't see a point in releasing it in the first place.
How does it matter if I use data for my phone or my computer? To some extent I agree that this would end up costing higher when the carrier has unlimited data. But even there, if more people start "misusing" the connection (download songs, movies?) the price is going to go up and you don't need tethering to do that.
To give you a perspective: Tethering is available in India with every single connection. You just need a supporting phone (USB or WiFi). The plans are all capped there but so are most plans here. You guys seriously have to wake up and realise that you are severely restricted on everything from which phones you can buy to how you use your phone and what apps are installed. I mean, seriously!
What you say makes sense for the screening rounds - resume shortlisting and a phone screen. These are centered around rejecting candidates. But face to face interviews are supposed to be the other way. As far as I know, Google asks for the GPA mostly towards the end. That doesn't save them any time. It shows they care about academics.
On a general note, is there any company that tries to extract patterns out of their employees performance track records; like a feedback loop into their interview process?
This is one of the most careless mistakes devs make especially those not so experienced with security. Not without a reason it is there in the fourth spot of OWASP top ten: https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2010-A4
I really love Github and have been trying to get it adopted in my organization. After the recent events though I'm having second thoughts. I don't think any application is 100% fool proof. But a well known vulnerability; one that is always brought up in any audit, going unnoticed for so long? I honestly did not expect this from Github.
Anyone who remembers the initial events would remember very well that the Nano was overbooked initially. So it is not the price point that led to lowered sales.
Cheap in price is in general associated with cheap in quality as well - market psychology. People buy it only when they feel it is good enough. Nano having been already branded and popularized as cheap in price got severely damaged by a few glitches and got rebranded as cheap in quality.
Essentially, production delays and a few unpopular news items made people reconsider their choices and before Nano could recover the market is filled with cars in the small segment made by Honda (who thought of a Honda car in small segment), Maruti/Suzuki, Ford, Hyundai...etc. Also remember that it was Nano which spawned a new generation of small segment cars by various manufacturers who would otherwise have not considered the option at all.
India is doing good in software patents and drug patents as well. Software cannot be patented and drugs have to be innovative (incremental is not good enough).
May be someone could answer a question I have for a long time.
There are two different modes of operations wrt the mobile phone industry. US and most other European countries package phone and services together. Whereas in a lesser sophisticated market like here in India phone and services are independent of each other.
Both have their own pros and cons -
Here I would never choose a crappy network because they have a better phone (I buy the phone of my choice) but at the cost of paying an extra premium (and that's quite a bit) for the phone (and the freedom to switch network anyday).
The advantage wanes away as more operators provide better choice (but there is always the possibility that a phone maker could enter into an exclusive agreement).
Which of these models would result in a better service for the customer? Which is likely to succeed (or rather, be more successful)?
I worked with carriers on handset pricing strategy so I'm familiar with this issue. There is a reason many country telecom regulators ban subsidization of handsets - in most cases bundling is anti-consumer.
Bundling uses a common pricing psychological trick - by reducing the fixed price (i.e. the phone price) but increasing the variable charge (i.e. the monthly bill) the consumer has a perception that the deal is "cheaper". I'd venture to say that the wealth level of consumers who buy high end smartphones in the US is lower than those who do in other markets - essentially the lower one time charge encourages consumers to buy phones they really can't afford (it's like layaway for mobile phones). Furthermore, the consumer is locked into a long term contract (usually 2+ years) so they can't churn.
Finally, carriers can exploit uninformed consumers. For example, you can offer two free phones with a plan, one of which has a cost of $300 and the other $200 to the carrier. You can list both phones at a fake MSRP $350 making both phones seem like equivalent deals when in fact consumers who buy the $200 phone are essentially writing a $100 check to the carriers. Since carriers bundle phones with the service and most models are carrier specific, there is no perception of the actual value of a phone and thus, it's really easy to do this.
In general, the US market is pretty anti-competitive because of
i) bundling
ii) carrier locked phones
iii) lack of pre-paid options (esp on the high end)
iv) long term contracts
v) CDMA networks which prevent re-using phones with another carriers
So in general US customers get a raw deal when compared to other markets (don't get me started on how we get charged for incoming calls and SMS). On the plus side, we do tend to get coolest phones first.
Actually, the way it works in the US ends up being a lose-lose situation for consumers. Phone prices tend to be lower, but at a cost of an increased contract price. Over the course of a two-year contract, people will pay more than the cost of the subsidy of the phone.
The only way to beat this is to buy phones out of pocket and get a plan that doesn't require a contract. However, you'll still lose out on flexibility, because the companies in the US use incompatible technologies.
Fun fact: the incompatible technologies were originally conceived of as a way to increase competition between phone companies. Guess what effect they actually had!
> US and most other European countries package phone and services together. Whereas in a lesser sophisticated market like here in India phone and services are independent of each other.
A lot of Europe also purchases the phone and the services separately.
