Most of the information is voluntarily given and money is worthless in the hands of a very few. In the foreseable future someone will draw users with some kind of financial compensation and things will swing back the other way.
I really dislike it when 'visionaries' declare doom at a period's inception.
"Trusting your doctor when you are sick is not an instance of fallacious reasoning."
Nor is it an argument. It's an action based on a personal risk assessment.
If you said "The cancer studies are trash because my doctor says they are." Then you would be making a fallacious argument. Authority is only rational as a screening tool in the evaluation of large amounts of after information. It most definitely is not a proof.
1. Too expensive for the seller. Lots of games are played with the rating system - discerning who is honest and who isn't gets to be about reading between the lines in the comments rather than using the star system. The 'local only'function works poorly.
2. I like the auction house paradigm, but would like one that was more third party friendly so people could personalize the experience.
3. No. I don't want to be separated from that transaction.
4. Nothing that I haven't covered above, but I'm happy to answer any other market research questions.
Arguably making lists for the pleasure of crossing items off is a form of gamefication that pre-dates the dialogue. Like tic-tac-toe it is both popular and lacks narrative.
I guess it was raided but not arrested. Apparently Apple was not pleased and had their private police - the US Secret Service break in to his appartment