What I don't understand is why the content producers go along with it. By giving an exclusive rights to one distributor they are cutting the audience for their product. Sure they can charge over the odds to that one distributor but ultimately the more people see your product the more money in total comes in so surely it would be better for them to distribute their content widely at a reasonable price than to rely on one big payment from one distributor.

Even though I am a Netflix subscriber I completely disagree that this is a good move. My problem is with the word "exclusive". As long an individual distributors get exclusive rights to content it means that large groups of consumers (those who choose for various reasons to go with another distributor) are blocked from getting the content they would like. In my country for example I can't watch most HBO shows because HBO has signed an exclusive deal with a different cable provider but if I switched to that provider I would lose other stuff instead.

This has a long term distorting effect on the market. Instead of distributors competing against each other by "being a better distribution service" they spend all their money trying to lock up exclusive rights to content and we customers are forced to put up with a crappy service just to see the content we want to watch.

If you only use your phone to take drunken snapshots down the pub this won't bother you but quite a lot of folks care about the quality of their phone photo's. Instagram's 1 billion dollar success story was largely built on Iphone pictures. Up to now the Iphone camera has been rated as best in class but not any more it seems. Worst of all it doesn't sound like it will be easy to fix.

The original article seems to have raised a lot of geek hackles because of the implication that you need to con bright people into performing miracles to get your company off the ground and then promptly fire them as soon as the company starts to grow.

What every one seems to be missing is that there are plenty of brilliant people who are not jerks and there are plenty of jerks who are far from brilliant. I would strongly support the idea of getting rid of jerks because I have seen the damage they can do to organisations but you are firing them because they are jerks not because they are brilliant.

Sorry but since you don't pay them any money you are not entitled to call yourself a customer and your opinion is irrelevant.

Can't you just upgrade the memory with a microSD? You certainly could with the original Galaxy.

I hope this shames Dropbox into implementing proper client side encryption.

I like many others have become dependent on Dropbox for my work because it is so darn convenient but I know in the back of my mind that it poses a security risk. I would feel much more comfortable if everything was encrypted on my PC (and under my control) before it was transmitted.

You say that the information didn't come out to every one but nevertheless there was plenty written over the last few weeks saying that Facebook was overvalued. There was no shortage of warning signs so it is hard to feel sympathy for those who lost money on this. Caveat Emptor and all that.

This seems relevant to me even if it dates from the dawn of computer time:
http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html

I am surprised it hasn't been linked to yet.