Try Hacker News at https://news.ycombinator.com/ for better submissions - and also for much better discussions. I don't want to advertise it too much though, let the "funny" commenters and over-emotional downvoters who can't say anything technical about the subject(s) being discussed remain on all the other websites... :)

I think that technique is this: Post in Internet forums that you know a sales technique that is sooo effective it's forbidden. Don't go into any specifics! Just give enough pointers that people can find the book. Sold!

Really, the website I found after actually googling your hints had no useful content whatsoever, and did not talk about any ingenious sale strategy. What it said could be on any generic sales newsletter.

Only among equals. There are different rules for employers and employees too. China is stronger than a decade ago but still far behind the US.

GDP per capita (2015 in USD) USA: $55,805, China: $7,990

Protecting a growing and still weak market is normal and proven to be a necessary step when growing an economy. There is no "equality" when you have "equal" access (which is anything but) between two highly unequal economies. The reason China seems so strong - with so much in the US marked "Made in China" - isn't because China is an advanced economy but because China is a huge country with a billion(!) more people than the US.

It's nice to see that recycling between the various forum sites works well. I don't really mind, I don't even ever complain about reposts unless they are too frequent, but here's the link to the long discussion of the exact same article:

https://news.ycombinator.com/i...

You assume people don't change their mind. Young people have different needs and experiences. You can't just make such an assumption based on no information but age, you will have to do the boring and very work of actually looking of looking at the details - the "Why?".

You say "them" - like everybody else who is about to find out they are "them" or will be shortly. Unless you are a capitalist *you are "them"*. I'm a 6-figure making IT specialist with broad knowledge - and I feel concerned. Ones abilities are secondary to "the market" - as well as to biases. Above 40 you can easily fall through the cracks no matter your qualification (unless it's really extraordinary AND happens to be in demand too). There are lots of factors beyond your control.

Plenty of high-paid people who were laid off in their fifties who ranted about the lazy people unwilling to work found out that "them" is them when they were laid off and job application after application was rejected, often without even getting a response.

...the recipient to *feel* defrauded. It doesn't count if you as an uninvolved 3rd party feels a transaction between other people is fraud.

...is objectively a punishment making a statement such as yours ("I have no idea how anyone could say it's about punishing the company.") takes an extraordinary level of cognitive dissonance. You are quite amazing.

It's a statistical rule, not an absolute. Individual examples are useless, it's all in the numbers.

Second, even if there was a 100% turnover in the circle of billionaires, what would that change? Nothing! It would still be just es exclusive and heavily luck-based.

"All vs. Any": *Anyone* can become a millionaire in the lottery, but what does that doe for *everyone*?

So you are saying those theories were NOT TESTED?

> Purely empirical science gave us the "element of fire", phologoston.

The reason we went beyond that is because It could be tested and proven wrong.

The discussion is about "testing no longer needed", not "testing done later". As it clearly says in article and even summary.

> There was value there

There was just rambling! ZERO arguments, 100% opinion. You seem to be of the *opinion* that having a string feeling equals "arguments": It doesn't. I'm modded troll by a troll, and the parent post this is about is the biggest troll post of all. More and more little kids on Slashdot with "opinions" unable to express ANY argument.

...a "thorough and insightful analysis", but I only got a rambling post of ZERO value.

"Impoverished people in rural areas" likely have ZERO Internet access. And poor people especially might be hit: Because they are the ones with that limited Internet access, and they often try to gather the last dime to send the kids to get a better education then they themselves did.

For example, the people coming to Europe illegally via Mediterranean Sea routes pay several thousand Euros per person for the trip. Does that mean your conclusion is those are the "rich people of Africa"?

Here, just for you, a quote from the Slashdot headline itself, not even the article:

> India is one of the countries where tens of millions of Internet users have free access to Wikipedia Zero, but cannot afford the data charges to access the rest of the Internet, making Wikipedia a potential gatekeeper.

...anything in the comment you replied to??? Apparently not.