Or at least, we’ll tell you whatever they’re about to tell us, and it appears more than likely that it’ll have something to do with phones, contact lists, and a mysterious connection to Firefox, iPhone, Google Chrome OS, and two of the most rock and roll developers in the world: Joe Hewitt and Matthew Papakipos. We’ll be at a special Mobile Event at Facebook HQ on November 3rd and we’ll be able to tell you all about it. Until then, speculation below!
Informed speculation time! That’s almost the best kind, right? Let’s take a quick walk back to mid September, where our pals at TechCrunch were tipped by an anonymous source that Facebook was building a phone. This was the same sort of situation that went down less than a year ago when the world received secret news that Google was building a phone. I think you know how that turned out.
It is sais that Joe Hewitt and Matthew Papakipos, both of them high level employees at Facebook, are said to be secretly working on this project, and that because of their fabulous super powers in mobile OS, they’re going to rock it really hard. Both of them have a whoa-is-who list of accomplishments that’d make them powerhouse additions to any developer team for a phone.
Papakipos was leading the Google Chrome OS project for a while until he quit that project in June 2010. He quit and joined the Facebook team instead. Hewitt, on the other hand, helped create the Firefox browser and worked on “web-based operating system” Parakey before it was acquired by Facebook in 2007. Hewitt is also responsible for designing all of Facebook’s iPhone web apps and native apps, but quit that particular job late 2009.
So boom, baby. How realistic is this? Very. The other thing is that this doesn’t necessarily have to be a phone. It could be a giant addition to Facebook in the form of an app that works everywhere, including your desktop, working as a big fat list of your friends with whom you can now not only message and post on walls for free, you can now call. Face to face, Facebook. That’s my informed guess for the day.
One more addition from the streets is that there’s a man named Li Ka-Shing possibly in on this equation. This man is a very big investor who very recently was said to be putting money in a pot with some other folks going toward a phone project with INQ and Spotify. Li Ka-Shing is also a bigtime investor in Facebook. Is a phone developed between INQ and Facebook in the works? Spot gets the square.
Again let me remind you to be around here on SlashGear all day November 3rd. We’ll be at the Facebook Mobile meeting at Facebook headquarters, and you can bet we’ll be relaying the info they give to us quick as a bunny!
[Via TechCrunch]
If you’re living in the United States right now, chances are you’re sick of hearing about elections and politics. That’s why I’m writing this today, instead of last week. I want to ride the coattails of that nausea and make a suggestion for the future of voting. The problem, I think, is that politicians do not care about you. They are ignoring you, and right they should. You don’t matter. Your issues don’t matter. Your concerns don’t matter. Politicians only care about one type of person, and it’s not you, because chances are, you didn’t vote.
[Image credit: Amelia E]
I haven’t seen official estimates on voter turnout this year, but I’m guessing it was embarrassingly low. I know it seems like there was more interest in a mid-term election this year than any year in the past, but that doesn’t mean much, because mid-term elections are very unpopular with voters. The last presidential election, in which record numbers of people voted, only drew 56.8% of the population to the polls, according to this page at infoplease.com. That was the highest percentage in 40 years, since 1968, when Nixon ran against Democrat Hubert Humphrey and segregationist George Wallace at the height of the civil rights movement and the protests against the Vietnam war. Before Nixon’s first election, voter turnout for the presidential election was just a bit more than 60%.
So, my guess is that voter turnout for this mid-term election will be less than 50%. When I make the assumption that you didn’t vote, I’ve got a better chance of being right than I do calling a coin toss.
It was the most expensive mid-term election in history, with candidates dumping millions of dollars into their campaigns. Some of the richest candidates lost, of course, but that doesn’t mean that money can’t help you win an election. Because of these expenditures, you might think that money is the most important thing to a politician. It seems like politicians follow the money interest, and that’s what controls their voting and behavior. But that’s not true.
There is one thing politicians want more than money. They want votes. Votes keep politicians in power, and power is the most addictive drug imaginable. Politicians can have all the money in the world, but that doesn’t guarantee they will win elections. To win an election, they need votes. That is why the only people who matter to politicians are people who vote.
The money is important, sure. But most of that money is spent on television commercials. It’s not used (hopefully) to buy fancy cars and big houses. The money isn’t a luxury, and political donations are not how politicians end up getting rich. The money from political spending pays for TV ads, and those ads exist to convince the voters.
I’m not making a campaign finance reform argument here, though I think the argument practically makes itself when you realize how much money it takes to run continual television ads during the long campaign season in this country. If we could take that incredible expense out of the mix . . . but I digress.
If we can’t fix the money problem in politics, maybe we can fix the voter turnout problem. One of the most annoying trends in this election was the constant bombardment of voting and political messages from all of my friends and colleagues on Facebook and Twitter. I’m not going to rehash them here, you can imagine the most partisan or the most tenacious of these, and I’m sure you had to deal with them yourself. Clearly, they didn’t work if voter turnout ends up as low as I predict.
One message did catch my eye, however. At first it annoyed me, but then it made me reconsider. Someone on my Twitter feed (I apologize to my readers and my source for not remembering who exactly) retweeted a messages saying something like: “If voting was as easy as signing up for Twitter, I would vote today.”
It makes you nauseous, right? You might argue that voting is as easy as signing up for Twitter, and more secure about privacy. But in fact, it’s not. Voting is an annoying process. It takes a lot of time. It’s a hassle, because too often there is a paperwork problem. I have been voting regularly for the past 16 years, and in the past two presidential elections, my voting eligibility was challenged at the polls by the workers there who could not find me on the voting rolls. I was registered, I had received confirmation, I had my driver’s license on me (once I even had my passport), but they still gave me trouble. In the last election, I had to submit a special ballot, and I was given the promise that if they ever found me on the voter registration logs, my vote would be counted.
Gee, I feel so . . . enfranchised?
Here’s my suggestion: we need to vote electronically over the Internet. Forget about voting booths, electronic voting machines and all the paperwork that accompanies them. We need to vote the same way we do everything else today. Why do we not trust the Internet for voting?
We trust the Internet for everything else. Voting seems like it demands the least privacy of all the private things we use the Internet to accomplish. I manage all of my finances over the Internet. I have never been to the actual bank where I have a credit card account, a car loan, or student loans. I manage all of those accounts electronically. I’ve received health records electronically. I send the most intimate and personal of correspondence over email without a second thought.
If we can manage our sex lives over the Internet, surely we can create a system for voting.
I don’t believe any of the obstacles to Internet voting are insurmountable. Security concerns about hacking and voter fraud, voter identification, all of the issues that would cause problems in a national election are problems we can tackle and defeat. It’s not like the paper balloting and electronic voting machines have been even close to flawless. How could we make things worse by moving voting online.
If we could vote online, we wouldn’t have to take time off of work to vote. We wouldn’t need to stand in line with our kids in tow, or stand in line behind someone with their screaming children. We wouldn’t have to explain to the stupid person handling the voter registration logs for the third time that our last name is spelled B-E-R-N-E, not B-U-R-N-S. Is that so hard to remember? It’s Berne, like the capital of Switzerland, not Burns. Do I look Scottish?
Again, I digress. I’ve tried to avoid taking partisan sides in this column, but if there is one theme we can all take away from the last election, it is that a great number of voters feel like their elected officials are not representing their interests. I don’t disagree, but it’s not because the politicians don’t care. It’s because you don’t vote.
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger
Or at least, we’ll tell you whatever they’re about to tell us, and it appears more than likely that it’ll have something to do with phones, contact lists, and a mysterious connection to Firefox, iPhone, Google Chrome OS, and two of the most rock and roll developers in the world: Joe Hewitt and Matthew Papakipos. We’ll be at a special Mobile Event at Facebook HQ on November 3rd and we’ll be able to tell you all about it. Until then, speculation below!
Informed speculation time! That’s almost the best kind, right? Let’s take a quick walk back to mid September, where our pals at TechCrunch were tipped by an anonymous source that Facebook was building a phone. This was the same sort of situation that went down less than a year ago when the world received secret news that Google was building a phone. I think you know how that turned out.
It is sais that Joe Hewitt and Matthew Papakipos, both of them high level employees at Facebook, are said to be secretly working on this project, and that because of their fabulous super powers in mobile OS, they’re going to rock it really hard. Both of them have a whoa-is-who list of accomplishments that’d make them powerhouse additions to any developer team for a phone.
Papakipos was leading the Google Chrome OS project for a while until he quit that project in June 2010. He quit and joined the Facebook team instead. Hewitt, on the other hand, helped create the Firefox browser and worked on “web-based operating system” Parakey before it was acquired by Facebook in 2007. Hewitt is also responsible for designing all of Facebook’s iPhone web apps and native apps, but quit that particular job late 2009.
So boom, baby. How realistic is this? Very. The other thing is that this doesn’t necessarily have to be a phone. It could be a giant addition to Facebook in the form of an app that works everywhere, including your desktop, working as a big fat list of your friends with whom you can now not only message and post on walls for free, you can now call. Face to face, Facebook. That’s my informed guess for the day.
One more addition from the streets is that there’s a man named Li Ka-Shing possibly in on this equation. This man is a very big investor who very recently was said to be putting money in a pot with some other folks going toward a phone project with INQ and Spotify. Li Ka-Shing is also a bigtime investor in Facebook. Is a phone developed between INQ and Facebook in the works? Spot gets the square.
Again let me remind you to be around here on SlashGear all day November 3rd. We’ll be at the Facebook Mobile meeting at Facebook headquarters, and you can bet we’ll be relaying the info they give to us quick as a bunny!
[Via TechCrunch]
If you’re living in the United States right now, chances are you’re sick of hearing about elections and politics. That’s why I’m writing this today, instead of last week. I want to ride the coattails of that nausea and make a suggestion for the future of voting. The problem, I think, is that politicians do not care about you. They are ignoring you, and right they should. You don’t matter. Your issues don’t matter. Your concerns don’t matter. Politicians only care about one type of person, and it’s not you, because chances are, you didn’t vote.
[Image credit: Amelia E]
I haven’t seen official estimates on voter turnout this year, but I’m guessing it was embarrassingly low. I know it seems like there was more interest in a mid-term election this year than any year in the past, but that doesn’t mean much, because mid-term elections are very unpopular with voters. The last presidential election, in which record numbers of people voted, only drew 56.8% of the population to the polls, according to this page at infoplease.com. That was the highest percentage in 40 years, since 1968, when Nixon ran against Democrat Hubert Humphrey and segregationist George Wallace at the height of the civil rights movement and the protests against the Vietnam war. Before Nixon’s first election, voter turnout for the presidential election was just a bit more than 60%.
So, my guess is that voter turnout for this mid-term election will be less than 50%. When I make the assumption that you didn’t vote, I’ve got a better chance of being right than I do calling a coin toss.
It was the most expensive mid-term election in history, with candidates dumping millions of dollars into their campaigns. Some of the richest candidates lost, of course, but that doesn’t mean that money can’t help you win an election. Because of these expenditures, you might think that money is the most important thing to a politician. It seems like politicians follow the money interest, and that’s what controls their voting and behavior. But that’s not true.
There is one thing politicians want more than money. They want votes. Votes keep politicians in power, and power is the most addictive drug imaginable. Politicians can have all the money in the world, but that doesn’t guarantee they will win elections. To win an election, they need votes. That is why the only people who matter to politicians are people who vote.
The money is important, sure. But most of that money is spent on television commercials. It’s not used (hopefully) to buy fancy cars and big houses. The money isn’t a luxury, and political donations are not how politicians end up getting rich. The money from political spending pays for TV ads, and those ads exist to convince the voters.
I’m not making a campaign finance reform argument here, though I think the argument practically makes itself when you realize how much money it takes to run continual television ads during the long campaign season in this country. If we could take that incredible expense out of the mix . . . but I digress.
If we can’t fix the money problem in politics, maybe we can fix the voter turnout problem. One of the most annoying trends in this election was the constant bombardment of voting and political messages from all of my friends and colleagues on Facebook and Twitter. I’m not going to rehash them here, you can imagine the most partisan or the most tenacious of these, and I’m sure you had to deal with them yourself. Clearly, they didn’t work if voter turnout ends up as low as I predict.
One message did catch my eye, however. At first it annoyed me, but then it made me reconsider. Someone on my Twitter feed (I apologize to my readers and my source for not remembering who exactly) retweeted a messages saying something like: “If voting was as easy as signing up for Twitter, I would vote today.”
It makes you nauseous, right? You might argue that voting is as easy as signing up for Twitter, and more secure about privacy. But in fact, it’s not. Voting is an annoying process. It takes a lot of time. It’s a hassle, because too often there is a paperwork problem. I have been voting regularly for the past 16 years, and in the past two presidential elections, my voting eligibility was challenged at the polls by the workers there who could not find me on the voting rolls. I was registered, I had received confirmation, I had my driver’s license on me (once I even had my passport), but they still gave me trouble. In the last election, I had to submit a special ballot, and I was given the promise that if they ever found me on the voter registration logs, my vote would be counted.
Gee, I feel so . . . enfranchised?
Here’s my suggestion: we need to vote electronically over the Internet. Forget about voting booths, electronic voting machines and all the paperwork that accompanies them. We need to vote the same way we do everything else today. Why do we not trust the Internet for voting?
We trust the Internet for everything else. Voting seems like it demands the least privacy of all the private things we use the Internet to accomplish. I manage all of my finances over the Internet. I have never been to the actual bank where I have a credit card account, a car loan, or student loans. I manage all of those accounts electronically. I’ve received health records electronically. I send the most intimate and personal of correspondence over email without a second thought.
If we can manage our sex lives over the Internet, surely we can create a system for voting.
I don’t believe any of the obstacles to Internet voting are insurmountable. Security concerns about hacking and voter fraud, voter identification, all of the issues that would cause problems in a national election are problems we can tackle and defeat. It’s not like the paper balloting and electronic voting machines have been even close to flawless. How could we make things worse by moving voting online.
If we could vote online, we wouldn’t have to take time off of work to vote. We wouldn’t need to stand in line with our kids in tow, or stand in line behind someone with their screaming children. We wouldn’t have to explain to the stupid person handling the voter registration logs for the third time that our last name is spelled B-E-R-N-E, not B-U-R-N-S. Is that so hard to remember? It’s Berne, like the capital of Switzerland, not Burns. Do I look Scottish?
Again, I digress. I’ve tried to avoid taking partisan sides in this column, but if there is one theme we can all take away from the last election, it is that a great number of voters feel like their elected officials are not representing their interests. I don’t disagree, but it’s not because the politicians don’t care. It’s because you don’t vote.
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger
Or at least, we’ll tell you whatever they’re about to tell us, and it appears more than likely that it’ll have something to do with phones, contact lists, and a mysterious connection to Firefox, iPhone, Google Chrome OS, and two of the most rock and roll developers in the world: Joe Hewitt and Matthew Papakipos. We’ll be at a special Mobile Event at Facebook HQ on November 3rd and we’ll be able to tell you all about it. Until then, speculation below!
Informed speculation time! That’s almost the best kind, right? Let’s take a quick walk back to mid September, where our pals at TechCrunch were tipped by an anonymous source that Facebook was building a phone. This was the same sort of situation that went down less than a year ago when the world received secret news that Google was building a phone. I think you know how that turned out.
It is sais that Joe Hewitt and Matthew Papakipos, both of them high level employees at Facebook, are said to be secretly working on this project, and that because of their fabulous super powers in mobile OS, they’re going to rock it really hard. Both of them have a whoa-is-who list of accomplishments that’d make them powerhouse additions to any developer team for a phone.
Papakipos was leading the Google Chrome OS project for a while until he quit that project in June 2010. He quit and joined the Facebook team instead. Hewitt, on the other hand, helped create the Firefox browser and worked on “web-based operating system” Parakey before it was acquired by Facebook in 2007. Hewitt is also responsible for designing all of Facebook’s iPhone web apps and native apps, but quit that particular job late 2009.
So boom, baby. How realistic is this? Very. The other thing is that this doesn’t necessarily have to be a phone. It could be a giant addition to Facebook in the form of an app that works everywhere, including your desktop, working as a big fat list of your friends with whom you can now not only message and post on walls for free, you can now call. Face to face, Facebook. That’s my informed guess for the day.
One more addition from the streets is that there’s a man named Li Ka-Shing possibly in on this equation. This man is a very big investor who very recently was said to be putting money in a pot with some other folks going toward a phone project with INQ and Spotify. Li Ka-Shing is also a bigtime investor in Facebook. Is a phone developed between INQ and Facebook in the works? Spot gets the square.
Again let me remind you to be around here on SlashGear all day November 3rd. We’ll be at the Facebook Mobile meeting at Facebook headquarters, and you can bet we’ll be relaying the info they give to us quick as a bunny!
[Via TechCrunch]
If you’re living in the United States right now, chances are you’re sick of hearing about elections and politics. That’s why I’m writing this today, instead of last week. I want to ride the coattails of that nausea and make a suggestion for the future of voting. The problem, I think, is that politicians do not care about you. They are ignoring you, and right they should. You don’t matter. Your issues don’t matter. Your concerns don’t matter. Politicians only care about one type of person, and it’s not you, because chances are, you didn’t vote.
[Image credit: Amelia E]
I haven’t seen official estimates on voter turnout this year, but I’m guessing it was embarrassingly low. I know it seems like there was more interest in a mid-term election this year than any year in the past, but that doesn’t mean much, because mid-term elections are very unpopular with voters. The last presidential election, in which record numbers of people voted, only drew 56.8% of the population to the polls, according to this page at infoplease.com. That was the highest percentage in 40 years, since 1968, when Nixon ran against Democrat Hubert Humphrey and segregationist George Wallace at the height of the civil rights movement and the protests against the Vietnam war. Before Nixon’s first election, voter turnout for the presidential election was just a bit more than 60%.
So, my guess is that voter turnout for this mid-term election will be less than 50%. When I make the assumption that you didn’t vote, I’ve got a better chance of being right than I do calling a coin toss.
It was the most expensive mid-term election in history, with candidates dumping millions of dollars into their campaigns. Some of the richest candidates lost, of course, but that doesn’t mean that money can’t help you win an election. Because of these expenditures, you might think that money is the most important thing to a politician. It seems like politicians follow the money interest, and that’s what controls their voting and behavior. But that’s not true.
There is one thing politicians want more than money. They want votes. Votes keep politicians in power, and power is the most addictive drug imaginable. Politicians can have all the money in the world, but that doesn’t guarantee they will win elections. To win an election, they need votes. That is why the only people who matter to politicians are people who vote.
The money is important, sure. But most of that money is spent on television commercials. It’s not used (hopefully) to buy fancy cars and big houses. The money isn’t a luxury, and political donations are not how politicians end up getting rich. The money from political spending pays for TV ads, and those ads exist to convince the voters.
I’m not making a campaign finance reform argument here, though I think the argument practically makes itself when you realize how much money it takes to run continual television ads during the long campaign season in this country. If we could take that incredible expense out of the mix . . . but I digress.
If we can’t fix the money problem in politics, maybe we can fix the voter turnout problem. One of the most annoying trends in this election was the constant bombardment of voting and political messages from all of my friends and colleagues on Facebook and Twitter. I’m not going to rehash them here, you can imagine the most partisan or the most tenacious of these, and I’m sure you had to deal with them yourself. Clearly, they didn’t work if voter turnout ends up as low as I predict.
One message did catch my eye, however. At first it annoyed me, but then it made me reconsider. Someone on my Twitter feed (I apologize to my readers and my source for not remembering who exactly) retweeted a messages saying something like: “If voting was as easy as signing up for Twitter, I would vote today.”
It makes you nauseous, right? You might argue that voting is as easy as signing up for Twitter, and more secure about privacy. But in fact, it’s not. Voting is an annoying process. It takes a lot of time. It’s a hassle, because too often there is a paperwork problem. I have been voting regularly for the past 16 years, and in the past two presidential elections, my voting eligibility was challenged at the polls by the workers there who could not find me on the voting rolls. I was registered, I had received confirmation, I had my driver’s license on me (once I even had my passport), but they still gave me trouble. In the last election, I had to submit a special ballot, and I was given the promise that if they ever found me on the voter registration logs, my vote would be counted.
Gee, I feel so . . . enfranchised?
Here’s my suggestion: we need to vote electronically over the Internet. Forget about voting booths, electronic voting machines and all the paperwork that accompanies them. We need to vote the same way we do everything else today. Why do we not trust the Internet for voting?
We trust the Internet for everything else. Voting seems like it demands the least privacy of all the private things we use the Internet to accomplish. I manage all of my finances over the Internet. I have never been to the actual bank where I have a credit card account, a car loan, or student loans. I manage all of those accounts electronically. I’ve received health records electronically. I send the most intimate and personal of correspondence over email without a second thought.
If we can manage our sex lives over the Internet, surely we can create a system for voting.
I don’t believe any of the obstacles to Internet voting are insurmountable. Security concerns about hacking and voter fraud, voter identification, all of the issues that would cause problems in a national election are problems we can tackle and defeat. It’s not like the paper balloting and electronic voting machines have been even close to flawless. How could we make things worse by moving voting online.
If we could vote online, we wouldn’t have to take time off of work to vote. We wouldn’t need to stand in line with our kids in tow, or stand in line behind someone with their screaming children. We wouldn’t have to explain to the stupid person handling the voter registration logs for the third time that our last name is spelled B-E-R-N-E, not B-U-R-N-S. Is that so hard to remember? It’s Berne, like the capital of Switzerland, not Burns. Do I look Scottish?
Again, I digress. I’ve tried to avoid taking partisan sides in this column, but if there is one theme we can all take away from the last election, it is that a great number of voters feel like their elected officials are not representing their interests. I don’t disagree, but it’s not because the politicians don’t care. It’s because you don’t vote.
eric seiger
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
Introduction Making money online is practically everyone's dream. However, just like starting a brick and mortar business, it isn't going to be easy. There are a lot of people out there trying to capitalize on your dreams and make money from you in your desperate attempts to figure out how to earn money online. We've written this mini guide to help you avoid scams, know what to look for, and what it takes to earn money online. There are many legit and many not-so-legit ways of making money online. Some are expensive, some are low cost. We're going to explore each one. However, be warned that there may be laws in your local area that require you to have a special license for selling via online. Because this is beyond our expertise, you will have to check out your local business center for more information about required licenses and registration. Legit Ways of Making Money Online The best and most legit ways of making money online are to explore reseller programs, turnkey and affiliate programs. Both ways require time and energy to get off the ground. Have no fear, we are here! Reseller Programs Reseller programs are basically companies who provide a product or service and allow you to resell their inventory in smaller parts enabling you to earn a profit from them. You can have physical inventory or you can have services to promote. The good thing about reseller programs is that most will provide the customer service for you. Some will even allow you to co-brand your logo or name seamlessly into their product or service. Some popular reseller programs are: • Hosting: ResellersPanel.com, Host Gator, APlus.net • Domain Names: Wild West Domains, Enom, Tucows • Software: Cisco Systems Affiliate Programs These types of programs normally pay you per sale or per click. For each lead you send the company, you will get paid a commission. These types of programs are good if you have a lot of traffic going to your website or if you network with a lot of people. Here are some websites that list available affiliate programs: • Commission Junction • Affiliate Guide Some popular affiliate programs: • Ebay • Google Adsense Turnkey Websites Turnkey websites are websites that are ready to go, all you have to do is "turn the key". The majority of turnkey companies will allow you to co-brand your logo, set your own prices, provide your customers with support, include web hosting and a domain name. The downside is you may not have much control over the site content, display, colors and layout. Turnkey companies: • Wild West Domains Not-So-Legit Ways There are some misleading ways to make money online. Some ways are scams, others make it impossible for you to earn a decent return. The most common scams are: • working from home • multi-level marketing (also called MLM) • investing Of course, just being labeled these things does not mean they are not legit. But you should be wary. If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is. What To Look For Avoiding online scams means educating yourself about what to look for. Here are some things you can do to protect yourself. Simple Searching Search engines are powerful resource providers. Enter the URL or name of the business into the search engine and see what comes up. Better Business Bureau Research BBB.org to see if any complaints were filed against the company. If they do have complaints, see if the company attempted to resolve them and in what amount of time. Remember, just because a company doesn't have a record with BBB, it doesn't mean they have a satisfactory customer base. The Fine Print This has to be the most common mistake people tend to make: overlooking the fine print. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Read the fine print in user/buyer agreements. Look for any discrepancies and compare them to what they say versus what they actually provide. Ask questions. Conclusion Judge each opportunity you come across with skepticism and a closed wallet. Ask questions and tons of them. Good luck and may you have many profitable years ahead!
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger
JLS to appear on X Factor ahead of UK tour | Tixdaq.com Ticket <b>News</b>
JLS will perform on this week's X Factor results show along with Westlife and Take That.
Olbermann Suspension Helped Fox <b>News</b> | FrumForum
MSNBC isn't an impartial arbiter of news, at least not the sanctified area in which Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow inhabit. It never was. And you may not see flowing robes and white collars but they preach to the choir all the ...
Michael Jackson's 'Breaking <b>News</b>' Saga Continues With Tweets <b>...</b>
"Regarding the song 'Breaking News' I am so sorry you have to deal with this. My uncle loved you so much and would not want it this way," Jackson's nephew Taryll tweeted. There are songs that are my uncle singing on the upcoming album ...
eric seiger
No comments:
Post a Comment