Surprise no one is calling out TC on their BS, yet again.
Lets face it, TC is a tech tabloid and HN's fascination with TC (majority story makes FP) is akin to teenager's fascination with celebrity gossip magazine.
No substance, nothing insightful, just pure unadulterated BS. And HN is all over it, every-time.
Note: I am not in law enforcement, just going by my instinct here. Observe:
> I am offering to back up to 160 gigs to another hard drive. There is only about 240 gigs worth of information. I see that you have backed up most everything using time machine. If there is anything smaller like 4, 8, or 10 gigs worth I can do that faster to DVDs or flash drives. I would have to buy another hard drive to get you the 160 gigs. Which i would if you need the info.
This combined with the supposed very quick rapid sale of the laptop has me suspicious - I would bet it's the original thief emailing you. Since he mentions time machine right away and found your email quickly - this is a computer sophisticated person, who possibly has done this before. "Berating me for my actions is useless" is also well written English. This is not a run of the mill stupid person. You're likely dealing with someone intelligent with very bad intentions.
I'd be scared now if running into another scam - I'm guessing, again I'm not in LE, but I'm guessing that the offer to buy a hard drive and back up for you will ask of you cash to be sent to a Paypal or Western Union or something, that you'll never see again, nor your data.
> what would you do?
First, pause and reflect. You don't need to hurry, it's more important you don't do anything stupid.
Second, get law enforcement involved. Now, I had my car window smashed once and had a bunch of stuff grabbed when I lived in a bad neighborhood, they took my stereo and cigarettes. Police are good people, but they tend to realize there's not much they can do about something like this, and they have limited resources. So, think about how to approach the police to get them interested - maybe talk to a computer crimes person online who would be interested in helping out, and get all the information you can. If this is a scam or a common thing (again, my intuition says so), then the police will be a lot more interested. Maybe you can put a sting together and get your computer back and/or put this bastard in jail.
I think your next two steps should be contacting people online who deal with this sort of thing, and contacting local law enforcement. Maybe the FBI would be interested actually, if you find the right agent and ask if this looks like a pattern/regular thing. Police love to catch and lock up repeat offenders, especially sophisticated ones.
Contact a lot of people - people tend to be sympathetic to when crime happens, and hate criminals. Whatever you do, don't contact this person on your own before consulting experts on the matter and law enforcement. It puts you in harm's way. Whatever you do, don't meet them or send any money or resources before contacting experts and law enforcement. Good luck and sorry this happened to you.
I don't understand where they're coming from. Android's Facebook integration is a little rough, but all the problems are with the Facebook application.
When it comes to the article's touted benefits of deep integration in the OS - calling a friend, deep syncing contacts, etc, Android does it all already.
I have it set to only sync contacts that are already in my phone, but if a friend texts me who has their number on Facebook, their picture shows up instantly, no syncing required. It's downright creepy to the point of making me seriously consider turning it off. OS integration is a solved problem. It's actually browsing Facebook that doesn't work.
I'm a reasonably experienced consumer and until now I always would have answered "yes" if someone asked "is cancelling your credit card an acceptable way of terminating a monthly service?" I'm also a reasonably experienced seller of recurring services... and my answer would have been the same.
If I'm pre-paying a service each month and I cancel my card, getting threats about collections is the exact opposite of what I expect. What I usually expect is for the service provider to either cancel my service or put it in some kind of suspended mode and then follow up with me to see if I really meant to cancel. Good billing providers would actually do this automatically: http://chargify.com/features/dunning-management/
As an aside, half the purpose of Zipcar is that it isn't a critical account. It's an easy-to-use convenience that saves you from the complexities of owning a car or making arrangements with a traditional rental service.
My ZipCar experience: I rented a car for a full weekend last October, and returned it several hours before it was due back. I forgot to "tap out", though, and ZipCar sent me a late return notification and charged my credit card. No big deal, just a simple mix-up, so I called customer service.
Unbelievably, they couldn't do anything about it from the national help line, and when I was redirected to the NY office, I got more runaround. It got to the point where I called my credit card company to do a stop payment, as it was clear that I wasn't going to get help from ZipCar.
Then I tweeted about it. Someone at ZipCar saw the tweet, and the whole problem got fixed pretty much immediately - I got an email saying my case had been reviewed, that the computer showed I did in fact return the car on time, and that if I could cancel the stop-payment, I'd get my money back (which I did).
It was awesome to get the problem fixed with just a simple tweet, but I wasted hours on the phone and would have wasted hours more dealing with the stop-payment fallout, when they already had the information that I hadn't actually returned the car late. I'm still a member, but I think I've used them only once or twice since. The whole experience left me pretty soured on them.
The takeaway is: if you're only giving good customer service to the people who complain publicly, you're doing it wrong.
I'm not really qualified to comment on programmers per se. But I am reminded of a personal anecdote:
In my mid-twenties, I had to have minor surgery on my face. My looks were very important to me. I thought I was quite beautiful and this was upsetting to me. I was concerned I would be disfigured but I really had to have the surgery. Trying to make my peace with it, I commented "I guess I can always have cosmetic surgery later." The surgeon was quite affronted and said "You won't need cosmetic surgery when I am done." The scar is nearly invisible -- less visible than the cyst that was removed. Even people who knew me before the surgery and know I had my face cut on have difficulty finding the scar.
I concluded that if you can bring it, maybe you aren't actually arrogant. Maybe you are just stating the facts, regardless of how it might sound to other people.
She's got quite an entitlement issue going on there, doesn't she?
Apple owes her nothing, least of all helping her get a good grade, just like Jobs says. Her 'problem' has nothing at all to do with Apple, no matter what she thinks.
The fact that she ends with the tidbit that the first 5-10 voicemails in the PR department's box is very telling.
This doesn't seem so terrible to me. You entered a contract with Zipcar where you pay them an annual fee for their services. Failing to pay the fee doesn't automatically break that contract.
Think of this way: what if you could simply stop paying rent when you want to move out of an apartment? Or you just stopped paying your cell phone bill when you want to cancel it? What if you forgot to pay your health care premium and you lost your health insurance??
Clearly these aren't acceptable ways to break out of a contract.
The author's trick to "lose" your card to prevent auto billing is inviting issues like this. It seems so much smarter to just check your credit card statement each month. That would be much less work than having to update your credit card number everywhere you do want to renew a service.
Your credit card failed processing and Zipcar kept your service up and prompted you to update the card. That seems like a great way to go. If they had simply cancelled your account, I could imagine this blog post going the other way. "I forgot to update my card and zipcar cancelled my account, leaving me stranded when I really needed a car!!"
With critical accounts like your car, apartment, cell phone... it seems best to be explicit when you want to cancel your account.
It's amazing how much the wonders of technology and readily accessible information have screwed up the value many children in the past 3ish generations (my marker for the beginning of the decline is WWII reconstruction). A "renaissance man" now is a dilettante. In Jefferson's day it meant having both broad and deep knowledge.
One could argue that the advances of science have made this impossible in modern times but I disagree. Regurgitating the fractured work of others isn't intelligence. Applying this information as a tool to advance oneself and the human good is the goal of education. Most children not only don't get this, they aren't even being taught the basic building blocks.
I think this is the biggest incentive for the non-school movement, as well as the increase in other alternative [to governmental SOLs] programs. Those parents value an education for what it allows their children to contribute creatively, not just use the tools of others before them.
I have exactly the same problem recruiting programmers. Like many large corporations we are primarily a Java & .Net shop and it is incredibly disappointing when 50% of the candidates can barely do more than drag controls out of the toolbox (<--- slight exaggeration, but not too much. I hire mostly in MX, BR, and IN and skilled folks are hard to come by. Ironically, this is usually because the cream are already working in the US/EU or earning US/EU pay in consulting gigs that are geography independent. Good for them.)
My apologies for the rant, but this struck a nerve.
"What's wrong with having one founder? To start with, it's a vote of no confidence. It probably means the founder couldn't talk any of his friends into starting the company with him. That's pretty alarming, because his friends are the ones who know him best."
Someone else mentioned it on this thread, but I'll expound. The majority of good solid people who are capable of being 'co-founders' of something are likely already doing it. 'Capable' has many dimensions - financial stability, personal drive, motivation, risk tolerance, etc. This notion of 'get your friends to join you' is extremely narrow, and while this may be how life in the Valley is, I can assure you it's not like that in most of the country where the rest of us live.
Also: "And you learn a lot more about yourself and your limits." That's right. One of the things that happens with 'co-founder' situations is that you're both learning about yourselves and each other at the same time. Taking on a 'co-founder' who's "good with sales" - unless there's a demonstrable (and ideally long) track record is essentially a huge gamble, as both of you are making a guess about someone's ability. Personally, I tend to discount anyone's self-estimate about their own ability - show me the track record.
As for the other comment about 'only being able to do so much on your own' - that's what hiring other people is all about. I understand there's not always money up front to do that. But I'd say you'll be in a much better position to contract out the bits you can't do, either at a reduced rate or some sort of time-limited profit sharing, but in no way just bring someone on as a 'co-founder'. If they are truly starting at the beginning, that's different, but bringing someone on after you've done much of the hard work - nope. Yes, you might not be able to find quality talent, but you couldn't find it in the beginning anyway.
My own view is I'd be much more likely to want to work with someone after they've demonstrated the ability to do something on their own which produces revenue (or something insanely innovative from a technology viewpoint that I grok instantly and see a distinct vision for, but that's not crossed my path yet). If you've got 'a cool idea', and want me to come on board as a 'co-founder' and do all the hard tech work, and you've never sold anything to anyone, and want to veto every suggestion I have, we're not co-founders - you're looking for hired help. And that's fine, but the hired help need to be paid.
I've been approached numerous times over the past few years about coming on as a 'technical cofounder'. Only once did someone even have a proof of concept put together that was demonstrating the idea in rough form (including a revenue stream, however meager it was). In all other cases, the execution onus is entirely on me, and in every case, there were some rather odd directions people wanted to move in. When questioned, in every case the 'founder' (who hadn't done anything except float an idea by people) was adamant that the vision was great and couldn't be changed. And without me (or someone) it couldn't be executed, but that point seemed to be lost. It seemed people I was talking to would generally rather have 100% control of an idea rather than, say, 80% control over an actual working service/product. Maybe my experiences are radically different from others who get approached about being 'co-founders'?
Short view - I agree with the notion of 'DIY' as far as you can as a single founder in your enterprise before you start looking for help. With the luxury of some initial success behind you, you'll be in a much better bargaining position when bringing help on board in whatever capacity (paid, equity, etc).
In the culture of the day (middle-east, thousands of years ago) many arguments - even little ones - would escalate, sometimes into generations-long blood feuds. The "eye for an eye" law was a law of peace! Even if someone did something incredibly painful, disfiguring, and debilitating as gouging out your eye, you weren't allowed to extract revenge on their family or property, or even to torture or kill the guy. The most you were entitled to was his eye. No more blood feuds allowed.
Young people with a natural affinity for an in-demand skill often are. A hundred years ago you could have written this about pilots. 500 years about painters (apprentices to the great masters in the Renaissance were notorious for it).
As an aside, for every genuine Aspbergers case, there are 10 who simply think they have a god-given right to act like dicks. It's like dyslexics, you can always tell the real ones because they're quietly getting on with it, not making a huge attention-getting fuss.
This is just getting stupid. This wasn't a "little fight". It was a dismissal.
I'm a small time guy running a tiny little company that is just trying to get by, and honestly, I don't have time to reply to every person that emails me. Unfortunately, we are so reachable today that one must consider a non-response a negative. As in, "no". Apple's primary responsibility is to customers in honoring their purchase and providing a quality, reliable product that meets their expectations, and to their shareholders in delivering value on their investment.
Ms. Isaacs is rude in her presumption that anyone at Apple is in any way obligated to reply to her. People wonder why those of us who have graduated and are well in to our working careers rant about the sense of entitlement we see in today's youth. This is a great example. "Leave us alone" is exactly the sentiment I would feel were I in Jobs' position.
Reading through the comments from developers on Reddit, I'm shocked at the cavalier attitude towards users.
One comment talks about a Monkey Island update that destroyed users' saved games. The comment remarked it didn't seem fair to rate the game down from 4.5 stars to 3 stars for something that would get fixed on the next update.
The app may have been 99 cents, but the user's saved game represents a significant investment of time (the most fundamental unit of value since all of us have only a limited supply).
The app may be only 99 cents but costing a user hours or days of investment is going to get you ranked down, and should.
The other point devs miss is that the absolute ranking of their app doesn't matter. What matters is that all apps are in the same system. If users rate your app on delete, they rate everyone else's app on delete too. If you're getting a lot of bad reviews from that, perhaps more people are deleting your app than other apps.
This is one reason free apps rank lower -- they're deleted more often, hence ranked more often, and ranked at delete time, so ranked low. But even so, free apps are ranked against other free apps, so your stars are only relative to the other free apps' stars. A star itself is meaningless. How your app does within the same system as the other apps is what matters.
TL;DR: Delight your users or at least respect their time.
For the most part you are smack on! However I suspect this is ''not'' the thief - even after such a short time. As pointed out elsewhere they will shift it off pretty quickly.
From the text of the mail the person probably knew it was dodgy. So it's probably been fenced and then sold on - the person probably knows or has a friend who knows the fence (but not the thief) [this is just a guess, but it is usually what happens].
Second the advice to get LE involved; in fact it is crucial that he does so. By reporting as much as possible the police know about all the crimes. So, for example, if they grab someone on theft and can't link him to the specific incident they are investigating they may still be able to link him to your theft - because it is on record (this happened the other month, we had a stolen laptop to examine, no evidence... but the serial number of the external HDD with it matched on reported stolen 10 months ago).
In terms of tracking down this person, there are a few ways to do it. Where did the email come from (i.e. webmail, or the PC?) and from what address? You might be able to geolocate an IP address to get a rough location (this is useful information for the police because they may be aware of fences/thieves in that area to question). If it is webmail the police would need a warrant, which they might get in this case due to the explicitness of the case.
If the laptop is signing into chat etc. then perhaps you could convince the person to talk directly to you via that - at which point the police could try to get a warrant for the chat providers records and track him down.
Move quickly, the IP information can go stale very quickly.
I actually set out looking for a co-founder a few months ago when I was starting to build the product. Since most of my friends went to big-name jobs right after graduation, nobody was particularly keen on starting up.
I hit up all the networking events - barcamps, startup events, and other miscellaneous meetups. I met a lot of people, offered to buy them beer in exchange for hearing out my idea, and made some great friends. The people who were capable and experienced were already in a job, or a startup of their own. The ones who were interested to join me were ready to do it part-time and half heartedly. The two people who were enamored by the idea and wanted in couldn't code for nuts.
Two months later, I am still single, two weeks away from launch, and things are going great. I have some unconventional little discoveries by my tiny amount of experience:
1. Go somewhere you'll be surrounded by people. I went back to college and have friends all around. In the event that I get bored or need to take a break, a coffee break with five people is just a phone call away.
2. I realized that it's hard to stay fully motivated through the entire thing. Talk to your friends and family about it and tell them it'll take their help. My parents were extremely helpful, and my mother patiently used to listen to my ideas, even though she couldn't really understand what an alpha release is.
I actually found some minor advantages of being a single founder. For instance - you get the flexibility to travel around and relocate if you want. But the disadvantages far outweigh the advantages.
In programmerspeak - I felt being a single founder instead of having a co-founder is somewhat like writing a web application in C++ instead of Rails. It's harder, though not impossible. And you learn a lot more about yourself and your limits.
First: Gene Weingarten is always a pleasure to read.
I know it is not relevant to his main angle, but I wish he had followed up on this part: In 1959, many of the old Hardy Boy books were redone, streamlined, modernized, sterilized.
I, like many HNers, I imagine, first read the Hardy Boys in the post-1959 editions. A couple decades ago, when I learned about the rewrites, I decided to collect the originals, and compare them. It was a fascinating experience.
Weingarten's phrasing above gets to the key elements. Racial stereotypes were removed-- the old versions were quite offensive to modern sensibilities at times-- along with about 1/3rd of the text. Plots were simplified, and a much more formulaic approach to action (from one mini-cliffhanger to another) took over. Descriptive passages were omitted, more often than not.
So: if you really want to read Leslie McFarlane, be sure to check out the pre-1959 editions.
Lets face it, TC is a tech tabloid and HN's fascination with TC (majority story makes FP) is akin to teenager's fascination with celebrity gossip magazine.
No substance, nothing insightful, just pure unadulterated BS. And HN is all over it, every-time.