Livefyre Profile

Activity Stream

Personally, I don't object to the addition of the fee. While I am dismayed that they were not already providing a safety oriented service, it seems entirely reasonable that if they are adding an additional service which costs them money, that they would in turn charge the customers more to maintain their own margins. The amount of funding they have is irrelevant when it comes to setting up a sustainable business model.

5 days, 15 hours ago on uberXtortion: new Uber policy forces riders to pay $1 safety fee

Reply

@paulcarr @Songhua Hu  I suspect he isn't doing an author by author comparison. One speculative reason this might also be the case would be if these sponsored pieces are planned further in advance than some other content. Many of Adam's articles show similar signs of long planning. Others, such as today's articles on Buffet and FiveThirtyEight, were likely conceived of and written in a shorter period. This does not inherently make either of them bad pieces (I liked Mott's piece), but does lead to them being less meaty.


Also, a typo above. Should say 425 million active users, not 425. That wouldn't be a very valuable product. ;)

1 month ago on Dancing Giants: Can big companies still innovate?

Reply

Wishing the law were different is no reason for someone to not obey and use the law as it stands to their full benefit.

1 month ago on Warren Buffett says he wants to pay more tax (then structures a deal to ensure he does the exact opposite)

Reply