<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: WSJ on Loopt, the mobile social network</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/19/wsj-on-loopt-the-mobile-social-network/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/19/wsj-on-loopt-the-mobile-social-network/</link>
	<description>Thoughts about information, social networks, and privacy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:54:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred Stutzman</title>
		<link>http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/19/wsj-on-loopt-the-mobile-social-network/comment-page-1/#comment-565</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred Stutzman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2007 16:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=375#comment-565</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t disagree - that&#039;s why my post was largely a call for Boost to keep Loopt free for the next year.  Doing so is good for both parties, but the argument needs to be made more persuasively to Boost, of course.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Of course, with all the time I said Boost and Loopt in that post I may have reversed them from time to time.  I will go back and see if anything needs clarification ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t disagree &#8211; that&#8217;s why my post was largely a call for Boost to keep Loopt free for the next year.  Doing so is good for both parties, but the argument needs to be made more persuasively to Boost, of course.</p>
<p>Of course, with all the time I said Boost and Loopt in that post I may have reversed them from time to time.  I will go back and see if anything needs clarification ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: More Diapers</title>
		<link>http://fstutzman.com/2007/01/19/wsj-on-loopt-the-mobile-social-network/comment-page-1/#comment-564</link>
		<dc:creator>More Diapers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2007 16:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://127.0.0.1/~fred/projects/blog/?p=375#comment-564</guid>
		<description>Interesting and insightful.  However, you need to keep in mind that there&#039;s one thing that Loopt cannot control: the price of the application.  When it comes down to it, that decision is entirely in the hands of the carriers.  So, whether or not Loopt wants the application to be free is only important if the carrier chooses to listen.  From experience, I would peg the situation at Loopt wanting to keep the application free and the carriers wanting to make monthly recurring fees from the app.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting and insightful.  However, you need to keep in mind that there&#8217;s one thing that Loopt cannot control: the price of the application.  When it comes down to it, that decision is entirely in the hands of the carriers.  So, whether or not Loopt wants the application to be free is only important if the carrier chooses to listen.  From experience, I would peg the situation at Loopt wanting to keep the application free and the carriers wanting to make monthly recurring fees from the app.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

