Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | enscr's comments login

This happened to a friend a few months ago. He has a SaaS business, working remotely out of France (uses Stripe + US bank accounts as he lived in US for sometime).

One day suddenly, he got locked out of his bank account (a major US bank) and the only way to restore the access was to walk into a branch physically. This meant dropping all work and flying to US at a day's notice, assuming you are granted a Visa. He was fortunate that the customer service listened (though they were not the politest people on the planet). After jumping a few hoops and following some unconventional methods of verification, the access was restored, but the situation was scary for a few days.


Is it like the Chrome "People" (or profiles or user) feature ? Suggesting that "user won’t need to use multiple browsers" seems like a problem that didn't exist if you used chrome.


One notable difference is that those identities are tied to tabs instead of windows. Chrome doesn't let you mix tabs from different "profiles" within the same browser window.


No, your history, bookmarks, and add-ons will be shared among all the Containers.


Revenue details of Buffer : https://buffer.baremetrics.com/


> ConferenceBadge.com ... projected to make around $750 000/year

Nice ! Love how the quarters accumulate (reference to your $.25 pricing per badge)


> I wonder what features Dropbox can offer that won't inevitably be surpassed by Google Drive, iCloud Drive, and OneDrive.

It's strange but it seems like others aren't trying hard enough or simply aren't interested in making a great product. My experience with dropbox has been better than with any other cloud backup service. For instance, I can move my cloud folder around without forcing a re-sync of the entire data. I can manually copy data to a new computer & it'll be magically sync'd without re-downloading everything. Dropbox also does a great job of incremental updates on binaries.


My biggest gripe with the previous versions was the amount of memory it consumed (v 10). Hopefully they've resolved it.


Why would you call this garbage & bigotry. There seems to be evidence supporting Churchill's attitude towards Indians:

"Churchill’s excuse — currently being peddled by his family and supporters — was Britain could not spare the ships to transport emergency supplies, but Mukerjee has unearthed documents that challenge his claim. She cites official records that reveal ships carrying grain from Australia bypassed India on their way to the Mediterranean"

&

"Churchill’s hostility toward Indians has long been documented. At a War Cabinet meeting, he blamed the Indians themselves for the famine, saying they “breed like rabbits”. His attitude toward Indians may be summed up in his words to Amery: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.” On another occasion, he insisted they were “the beastliest people in the world next to the Germans”.


So what if he didn't like Indians? How do you go from that claim, to the claim that he perpetrated a "holocaust" against them? It's a monstrous calumny.


'Not liking' is not the same as 'hostility' & 'hate' ! I don't know what's your source of information but you are quite misinformed about how British ruled in India. There's no point in debating all this here. This is not the right forum. But you are wrong about your statements. You need to read more on British Indian history.

Unrelated to Churchill but worth reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre


You forget, this guy is western, and must be guilty of anything he could prevent.

By that standard, of course, Gandhi would also be worse than Hitler, as he could have prevented massacres during the partition that killed much more people than Hitler ever did. In fact, he is accused of directly instigating several massacres, a hell of a lot "more guilty" than Churchill would be even if this were true. If this is true, Churchill refused to get people out of a big mess they got themselves into (which, granted, does sound like something he might do).

https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/ProblemWithPacifism.HTM


> email has "been hacked".

But that's probably a big reason to _not_ let the orders through.


And contribute further to the customer's unhappiness? "I got hacked near Christmas, and then Amazon wouldn't help me so some of my presents didn't get delivered right."

I don't see why anyone cares if Amazon is liberal in replacements. So long they're not somehow hurting your account standing with Amazon, it's Amazon's choice.


I wouldn't want my e-commerce store to fulfill orders for a compromised account without talking & confirming some key details with the customer. This HN post is testament to some funky ordering going on.

My experience has been positive with Amazon and there has been situations where they've gone out of their way to make the customer happy. I'm fairly confident that a situation like yours can be resolved with Amazon over phone.


> Amazon is out quite a bit of product and a lot of trust from me.

The product is still a drop in the bucket for Amazon. Hopefully some of you actions will trigger their fraud protection dept. to blacklist the address or maybe they think it's not worthwhile blacklisting a whole address with multiple suites for a tiny amount. Anyway, I don't think it's reason enough to lose trust in Amazon. As long as they got the honest customer covered, it's OK to lose some when you are running a business of Amazon's scale.

As @sdrinf mentioned, it's social engineering at play. Maybe they can raise the bar to placing phone orders/replacements. Or maybe they think, they'll lose more business by adding a teeny hurdle than gain on fraud recovery.

A times B times C equals X. If X is less than... we don't care kind of thing (Fight Club recall reference)


Amazon might not even loose money from this at all. It is common for retailers to charge these costs back to the supplier.


This is a logistics issue: shipping to an unverified address before receiving back the original product. Amazon should be solely responsible for it.


Amazon almost certainly has many customers using shipping forwarders. In Central America, I see banks advertising cards with a US shipping-forwarding address, specifically to buy from Amazon.

Amazon would have to be taking in huge amounts of losses due to fraud to consider killing off all these customers.


Most of them are very generic, pragmatic & terse statements. It depends on which side you are looking at.

> 14. Do something creative with the design of the box and separate yourselves from the pack.

99% companies would benefit from this.

> 10. Get a great image campaign

Sure, why not? That's true for every company, Intel, BMW, Microsoft, you name it. All want a great image campaign. Ultimately it's the product that makes the image campaign 'exclusive'

> 34. Port the OS to the Intel platform

That was an obvious one.

>> Apple switched to USB pretty quickly if I remember correctly

The 30-pin dock & then the lightning connector. Not exactly industry standard at both ends


>> The 30-pin dock & then the lightning connector. Not exactly industry standard at both ends

This was before the iPhone. They switched to USB on Macs at least. At that time they were using other proprietary connectors like ADB and Firewire.


Firewire (IEEE 1394) didn't show up on Macs until 1999, well after they had begun to support USB.


>>> 34. Port the OS to the Intel platform >>That was an obvious one.

in hindsight, yes. At the time, many people thought it was crazy.


It was crazy but it was also the right way forward. People speculated & desired this for a long time.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: