21–28 of 28 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could always turn Adblock back on. I think it's fair for them to make some money to support the site.
It's OK to charge people money to answer questions for free? OK, sure...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spolsky has said that every job that gets posted requires the company name, ditto for companies using Careers. Ergo, it's no use to recruiters because they can go around the posting straight to the company. He (correctly) believes that recruiters destroy value for job seekers and companies and keep markets from working. About the slap in the face, it's necessary to filter out bad developers who won't get value from p…
How exactly does willingness to pay $100 correlate to developer ability? Edit: and it's funny that Spolsky would complain about recruiters when that's exactly when he's trying to become on a larger scale. A middleman by another name would smell so foul...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. StackOverflow provides tremendous value to the tech community. However, the idea of charging participants in that community $100 per year for the privilege of having their resumes searchable by employers seems like a bit of a slap in the face. Especially since the Careers site doesn't even seem to try to distinguish between employers and recruiters.
Spolsky has said that every job that gets posted requires the company name, ditto for companies using Careers. Ergo, it's no use to recruiters because they can go around the posting straight to the company. He (correctly) believes that recruiters destroy value for job seekers and companies and keep markets from working. About the slap in the face, it's necessary to filter out bad developers who won't get value from p…
Paying to post your CV is a fantastic filtering service to provide to companies looking to hire. Resume spam is even worse than email spam. See also Local Bacon for more evidence on this approach. While they will make money from the people that post CVs, much, much more money will come from the companies that pay to search those resumes. I'm sure they set the price at wherever they expect the best filtering to be. If…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's OK to charge people money to answer questions for free? OK, sure...
Huh? The advertisers are the ones paying money to place ads, they aren't the ones answering questions.
Just sayin', it's not sustainable. Why shouldn't I get a cut? What do I get for continuing to answer questions on Stack Overflow (instead of on free mailing lists, or on my own blog, or in a magazine)?
Karma is nice and all, but the only reason I bother writing here is because there are no ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh? The advertisers are the ones paying money to place ads, they aren't the ones answering questions.
I am the one answering questions. I have to pay (i.e., look at ads) for the privilege of doing so. Then, my work is used to lure in eyeballs that look at the ads. Just sayin', it's not sustainable. Why shouldn't I get a cut? What do I get for continuing to answer questions on Stack Overflow (instead of on free mailing lists, or on my own blog, or in a magazine)? Karma is nice and all, but the only reason I bother wri…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am the one answering questions. I have to pay (i.e., look at ads) for the privilege of doing so. Then, my work is used to lure in eyeballs that look at the ads. Just sayin', it's not sustainable. Why shouldn't I get a cut? What do I get for continuing to answer questions on Stack Overflow (instead of on free mailing lists, or on my own blog, or in a magazine)? Karma is nice and all, but the only reason I bother wri…
Oh come on. You're not 'paying money' because a bitmap is rendered in part of an html page. Get over yourself.