Electronics retailer Best Buy is headed for the exits. I can’t say when exactly, but my guess is that it’s only a matter of time, maybe a few more years. Consider a few key metrics. Despite the disappearance of competitors including Circuit City, the company is losing market share. Its last earnings announcement disappointed investors. In 2011, the company’s stock has lost 40% of its value.
This fits in well today just as it fit when the term was introduced in the 18th century. The question really comes down to delivery of rights. Rather than trying to play around with semantics, we should be looking at the results of the last couple of years and make the determination based upon three questions:
1.Is it possible in the near future to create an infrastructure that would make internet access available to nearly everyone in the world?
2.Would making internet access available worldwide to the vast majority of people foster positive changes in every culture and every society?
3.Are those without internet access less able to prosper?
An original song about D&D… Very well done.
I’m sure they must forgot to put something…
1. Have a real picture of yourself as a profile pic. I need to know what you look like. It’s only fair. If your Facebook photo includes a picture of your significant other, I know that you are seriously codependent. If it is a picture of your baby, I know I’ll have very little to say to you at a dinner party. Also, offer me a few options. If all of your pictures are from the same angle, I know that you are ugly and have figured out that one angle that makes you look less ugly.
2. Don’t give me constant updates of where you are eating or shopping. The only person who cares about that is your stalker, and the real joy for him is the hunt.
3. If I send you a text and you don’t respond and then I see you tweet something or post something on Facebook, I know that you are straight up ignoring me. Just remember that everyone on the Internet is taking note of your goings-on and judging you all the time. Isn’t that comforting?
The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Northern California on behalf of an Arizona man, gives the example of someone who is willing to pay up to $100 for an item. But even though eBay’s automated system knows this maximum, it only incrementally increases the buyer’s base bid to the level at which it beats other existing bids. So if, because of this system, the buyer only pays $95 for the item, the plaintiff believes “the seller is shortchanged $5.00 solely as a result of intermeddling by the purportedly neutral auctioneer.”
