Live data from Hacker News

Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

blog.last.fm

41–50 of 107 posts

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#41
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are. Hacker News is the top spot for getting news relevant to startups.

well we are more of a news aggregating service, need some original content. Need more stories to break on HN

You don't have to have the same form as something in order to replace it. I don't think the number of breaking stories has any effect on the quality of HN.

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#42
Overall, not a bad deal for TC, I'd say. Checking on the twitter stream shows that there's a lot of RT of this headline - which will only serve to spread TC's name around. It may be bad in the long run, but they may be able to issue some muted apology, patch things up, and restore their standing. More coverage, etc.

Of course, with MA's combative personality, it may go slightly differently, but it's probably a net positive for TC. Sadly enough.

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#43
post #34
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TechCrunch is awful, but there's no excuse for the spit in the face incident. I don't give a damn what lousy, fabricated article TechCrunch might have published to precipitate that. It's disgusting and totally uncalled for.

who knows if that really happened, or if Arrington was just linkbaiting to make money

Don't treat Arrington like some soulless mythical creature. He's a real person. He's susceptible to being offended enough to get pissed off at people and to rant even when he's been in the business for a long time.

Can you imagine how low you'd have to be to fake an incident like that just to get a few hits? Arrington has his faults, but he's not a showboater.

(Also remember that this article was posted while he's taking a break from TechCrunch entirely. Don't blame him for this story.)

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#44
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is strange, because the whole concept behind the British invention of the "corporation" is to address a group of people as a singular entity.

Not quite -- the underlying concept is a "company" in the sense of a troupe, band, eg "The King's Men", the "Dorrit's Chalk-Weavers", "Harold & Sons". The idea of a "corporate person" is much more recent, like 1880's, and I think started in the US.

No, you're wrong. The concept of corporate singularity started in the 1600s in England.

From wikipedia:

In the late seventeenth century, Stewart Kyd, the author of the first treatise on corporate law in English, defined a corporation as,

"a collection of many individuals united into one body, under a special denomination, having perpetual succession under an artificial form, and vested, by policy of the law, with the capacity of acting, in several respects, as an individual, particularly of taking and granting property..."

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#45
post #43
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who knows if that really happened, or if Arrington was just linkbaiting to make money

Don't treat Arrington like some soulless mythical creature. He's a real person. He's susceptible to being offended enough to get pissed off at people and to rant even when he's been in the business for a long time. Can you imagine how low you'd have to be to fake an incident like that just to get a few hits? Arrington has his faults, but he's not a showboater. (Also remember that this article was posted while he's ta…

yes, but don't you think if someone spit on you, that you would have at least chased them down to kick their ass? I mean the guy must have been pretty close to land a hit.

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#46
post #45
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't treat Arrington like some soulless mythical creature. He's a real person. He's susceptible to being offended enough to get pissed off at people and to rant even when he's been in the business for a long time. Can you imagine how low you'd have to be to fake an incident like that just to get a few hits? Arrington has his faults, but he's not a showboater. (Also remember that this article was posted while he's ta…

yes, but don't you think if someone spit on you, that you would have at least chased them down to kick their ass? I mean the guy must have been pretty close to land a hit.

I'll assume Arrington is a nerd, like me, and that he's not the sort of person who'd kick anybody's ass.

Frankly, I think that people who react to aggression with more aggression are wasting their time and looking pretty stupid.

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#47
post #46
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, but don't you think if someone spit on you, that you would have at least chased them down to kick their ass? I mean the guy must have been pretty close to land a hit.

I'll assume Arrington is a nerd, like me, and that he's not the sort of person who'd kick anybody's ass. Frankly, I think that people who react to aggression with more aggression are wasting their time and looking pretty stupid.

Not as stupid as the guy covered in someone's possibly HIV infected spit.

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#48
post #47
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll assume Arrington is a nerd, like me, and that he's not the sort of person who'd kick anybody's ass. Frankly, I think that people who react to aggression with more aggression are wasting their time and looking pretty stupid.

Not as stupid as the guy covered in someone's possibly HIV infected spit.

I fail to see how HIV came into this conversation.

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#49
post #48
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not as stupid as the guy covered in someone's possibly HIV infected spit.

I fail to see how HIV came into this conversation.

you never know what the other person has, doesn't hurt to be careful in this day and age

Re: Last.fm: "Techcrunch are full of shit"

#50
post #49
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see how HIV came into this conversation.

you never know what the other person has, doesn't hurt to be careful in this day and age

Right now you're espousing rampant paranoia. First you suggest that he would make up a story like this despite no precedent on his part at all. Then you say that the proof is that he didn't react violently to somebody spitting on him. Then you say that he's stupid for not doing that because the spitter might have been HIV-positive.

I live in a world where people are innocent until proven guilty, people are all generally trying to do the right thing, the average man on the street doesn't like physically hitting other people, and most people don't have deadly diseases, and that the ones that do don't spit.

Post reply on HN