CerealFounder

With all do respect the numbers do not back this up. There were less than 200 of these types of deaths in 2021 according NHTSA and thats with a massive increase in cards from the 80s. Almost all danger for children has reduced since that time across all economics groups.

The pressure from parents on other parents has made it so we dont trust children to handle risks that are pretty manageable.

No its not, the larger media is the original "for pay algorithm" that shows you what ever makes you engage with their platform more (subscription & ad supported). There is no conspiracy or man behind the curtain.

Simply put, complex stories resonate deeply with a small group and not at all with the majority. What you get from that is the current media landscape. Surveillance is a very complicated technical and moral story that only the smallest group cares about.

There is no chance Apple would be allowed to buy or run a mobile network. The monopoly dogs would be at the door before the email went out.

They used to be commiserate. For whatever reason media based rent seekers lobbied better than ones with technical products.

Dont worry. Unless they acquire it, they aint building it.

Sure, we arent always violent, but there always be people wanting what others have and imbalance otherwise there would be no relative value established.

Great example. I dont think its a bug that crypto is almost fully adopted by people who come from means. People are living in very different systems even in the US currently

Hah, its all protected by the proof of violence state. When someone is physically trying to take your assets, your going to convert that currency as fast as possible into physical force or protection.

The problem is a deep misunderstanding of currency. The structure of currency is a tool humans use to exert and identify power within groups. The idea that a decentralized currency will change human nature or goals to control miss the forrest for the trees.

We are animals the violence, control and waning and waxing dominance is the only predictable outcome.

Hijacking: Can someone ELI5 me why two pockets of differing air temperature create such violent weather patterns? It feels like dark magic.

The fact that Reddit let Discord grow to what it is today always amazes me.

Worse yet, this culture of shaming people for changing their minds/position is embarrassingly unintellectual and socially dangerous. Its one the most toxic attributes leftover from old timey gender role ideas.

Its tough. Parenthood also have a pretty varied time horizon for reward depending on what someone finds rewarding. imo, this whole study is kind of misframed and isnt much different than "25% of people find work to be bad."

My solution is 10 more Shohei Ohtanis

I think theres probably an interesting full book here examining exactly how and why "cause based" orgs become all end up looking the same once they cross a certain threshold. Power, influence and money seem to be a magnet for more of itself, so it fundamentally shifts the guiding principal of each org as it grows bigger.

Like why do no-profits and charities seem to corrupt their aim at a greater speed than for profit businesses?

Minneapolis is not getting rid of the police department as a quick Google would happily show you.

Its a fallacy to assume it is a failure of a public option when it just as easily can be that we've been marketed that we are vulnerable and unsafe. Almost all stats have TODAY being just about the safest moment for violent crime in the history of humanity.

Dont confuse a change in peoples purchasing habits as a logical response to something intrinsic. Its barely ever correlated.

edit: I actually reread and saw you said "perceived value," I agree with you, I just think its a tragedy people are so scared. Although SF seems to be really having a problem.

Your moralizing a non moral argument. Its simply harder to get access to someone else's capital than someone else's time. So people can charge a premium for the capital.

I do believe that premium is probably a bit higher than it should be because it used to be EVEN HARDER to get that capital so people are pointing out the slightly outdated examples of cost in order to gain negotiating leverage.

In the end our time and money have no intrinsic value, but try asking a friend to help you move and then try asking your friend to loan you money to hire movers and see which they are more likely to do.

I have a slightly different take as to what all this is and I havent seen it expressed almost anywhere. Since the proliferation of the internet the world has gotten exponentially more competitive. Information and access have been reduced to almost uniformity if you understand the tools. No while prizes have gotten larger, there are simply way more people competing for the top spot than before. These culture wars are simply just a new weapon for those without power to seize it. Its not much different that coming from wealth, being charismatic or the host of other weapons being wielded in a competitive game. Human kind has always been collective, but the largest motivation is survival of the self. You should look at this change a clever weaponization for a class that wants more power and not some intrinsic right or wrong.

What is likely to happen is we will always see it moving forward, but eventually (outside of extreme circumstances like violence), these things become less powerful as the novelty of the charge wears off.

I think the better question is closer to why did I choose to endure building two companies. The answer is closer to having unreasonable principals about random stuff )and being abnormally competitive), which directly answers your question.

What part? Its a law on the books and it all went down at the Stanley Mosk courthouse on the third floor. I was also late to roll call and I had to take a Bird scooter a quarter-mile from Chinatown because parking at the court is like $40/day.

Gather around, this is good.

How I sued Spectrum California for $1800...

So my internet had rolling outages for weeks and Spectrum wouldnt do anything. So they sent a technician to my house. Three consecutive days, scheduled appointment, no one showed, or called (other than the automated attendant. This is important later). I was furious. I was talking to my father who did a bit of law school and he shared that California has a $600 a day no show penalty for companies with 25 or more employees.

https://legalbeagle.com/7272842-service-noshow-penalty-calif...

So I file small claims for the full 1800. I show up and theyve sent a person who professionally goes to court to fight these things. It also became clear the they use the auto dialer follow up to negate the "no call" portion of the "No show/now call" law. They've got it down to a science.

So dejected by their treachery, I try a last second hail mary by asking the judge if I can speak to the court. I tell him "I am you, you, you (pointing at him and the people sitting in court), this company dosent care about providing the service they promised, theyd rather spend that money hiring henchmen to beat the consumer laws on a technicality. Their largest investment is in extraction, not service. Im just a guy who wanted his internet and to go back to work. If my experience hits home at all please, hold them accountable."

Lonnnnng silence and the little Spectrum rat is visibly smiling. The judge starts to speak "Mr Cereal, I personally empathize with companies not respecting my time. Its so frusteratinfg" The whole court audibly gasps, this judge is gonna stick them. Judge flustered "Wellll, I dont mean Specturm specifically. That said, I find fully in favor of Mr Cereal and order a full judgement."

Ive sold two companies for 9 figures in my life. I have never ever ever seen my jewish father as proud of me as when I called him and told him what happened. I got a check two weeks later.

tldr: ISPs are evil, but you can get them if they dont show. Also, your dad will be proud.

This guy infers. This seems like a tough study given the correlation factors.

Its rarely the syngeries that make it work, instead its often they bought a business they leave alone that has much more room to grow.

You guys are all dissecting his points like academics. I think the real thing is that the environmental piece is a strong enough weakness to make an emotional argument to build support within the non-hardcore communities with the cloaked motivation (as always) being one of control or financial power. The no-cryptos are betting on a growing swell of anti-anti-environmental ideas in general with this one.

Currency/whatever crypto is, is just a system of trust. Logic is likely to have little to do with the downfall if it comes. Scrolling through the comments the Crypto-religious right is out in full effect and tbh, I understand it. For many people they have moved up many brackets of the wealth ladder and they probably should reject anyone coming for their system with vigor.

I think the downside of the crypto religious complex is going to be, that if any of these emotional arguments (coming to kill crypto) become mainstream and compelling, the tenor of arguments is going to push the crypto and no-crypto sides apart cartoonishly (think modern dems and republicans) and the choices of resolution will have to be loud and final.

Make no mistake, crypto is much closer to a political religious sect than it is a science.

Say it with me. You cant be a mature service economy AND an ultra cheap manufacturing economy. It's not said, its far more lucrative to to be the former than the latter. This is just an odd consequence that their investments are so concentrated in a single place. and that place is peak antithetical to fair economic fights.

The real story is Ben and Moisey were running one of the largest hosting co's in porn and then there was a security problem via one of their upstream providers and it created a DISASTER. Thats how DO was born from what I understand.

God this point doesnt make sense. Bitcoin exists in lands that are governed by men. The governments could make it valueless at the first sign of threat to political currency. BTC is not a hedge, it's just an asset class that is growing fast and gaining attention faster than adoption.

Your comment is confusing. Flynt fought the government, people who are complaining about cancel culture are complaining about people not liking their spicy takes.

Don't underestimate the power of incumbency. Gold has been something used as an exchange commodity far before currency. Its also impractical at scale so much less a threat to the general system.

This was always the major existential risk of all of these currencies. It always felt like the cryptoheads viewed currency economics through an academic perspective instead of a practical one. While fiat currency is about money, at the macro level its much more about cultural and political control. Yes, it would be ideal if we decentralized and things were more transparent, but to get there you are literally going to war with every major military in the world by asking them "hey guys, hand over that control/influence." It seems like an uphill battle and one that doesn't truly start until they begin to be seen as a threat.

Good luck fighters...

Im a pretty well known founder and I cant stress enough, the higher up you get the less people know whats happening holistically. Observationally I think it's a product of the fact that managers who get to the top are so dialed to the politics and daily reality of the role (its how they reached the top of the mountain), that theyre very brittle to all the other details of their world. I think this happens all the time and her cardinal sin was courting national press in a space that kills people while committing fraud.

Probably not. The morale of the story was she was good at collecting people with clout who simultaneously knew nothing about her business. Even in their earliest days, the outside was screaming "literally impossible" from all sides.

iirc, there is even a historic thread on HN where if you go back to the comments, its mostly people proving that there is almost certain fraud behind the scenes.