I thought the same (“corporate junk”) early in my career... then I had to start getting dozens/hundreds of people to execute in a coordinated fashion against a defensible plan...
4,506 karma · joined March 3, 2007
https://www.linkedin.com/in/samodio https://tkmx.odio.dev/user/so
Paul - great work. Was thinking of doing the same. I'd love to collaborate on some sort of shared resource/repo of docs like these (github?) and contribute a few of my own.
Why Britain doesn’t build (worksinprogress.co) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36477481
Not true.
Source: worked for Zuck.
I work with Drew (the DBX CEO) on 0-1 bets at Dropbox. I'd love to chat with former founders/early employees passionate about project management, task management, calendaring, or the intersection of the above products with ML/AI. Send your LinkedIn to odio+vip@dropbox.com.
A close friend struggled with bipolar. She was uninsured and making close to minimum wage…calls to suicide prevention hotlines resulted in thousands of dollars in new bills from ER visits and even involuntary psychiatric care.
She was struggling to pay rent. Being discharged in effectively the same condition as before but with new debt she wouldn’t be able to pay off for years…the medical bills for involuntary psychiatric care were their own special sort of crazy.
See https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.2...
Presumably, if Legiblenews takes off and doesn't add value, Wikimedia is free to compete with it. Wikimedia could form a for-profit company that donates more of user revenue to the foundation and feature that company on Wikipedia. Therefore, for the foreseeable future, Wikimedia effectively retains the option to copy & crush Brad's side-project. And if Legiblenews takes off Wikimedia does nothing at all...they will still almost certainly receive more $$$ than the current state of the world.
In that way, Wikimedia is outsourcing innovation to Brad, who Wikimedia is well-positioned to copy/compete with in the future, and being paid to do so. While Brad loses money.
I'm not 100% sure who is on which side of "fair," but ultimately if it complies with Wikimedia's license I'm good with it. And if you don't like it, why not start something better?
In this example you continue to incur new debt, but at a rate not more than the growth rate of your assets.
The "Fixed pie fallacy" [1] is probably both one of the most important tenants of modern policy-making, yet it's rarely explicitly discussed or debated.
Cyclone_, your thinking relies on this fallacy, namely that if one person is working a job, that's one less job available. [2]
In reality, there is quite a bit of empirical research that indicates when people work (especially highly skilled jobs like in tech), it does not reduce (and may even increase) the jobs available to others [3].
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/07/opinion/lumps-of-labor.ht... 3. https://siepr.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/...
It saddens me that many engineers don't start projects for fear of embarrassment from forums like these.
My first startup failed for all sorts of legitimate reasons. My second startup sold to Facebook for millions. And all of them sounded like a bad idea at the start.
Let's not be a modern slashdot and miss the forest for the trees. What if Niko or someone here is successful? How will history judge the incessant critiques?
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
> The prediction that participants in the sleep condition would have greater discriminability compared to participants in the wake condition was not supported. There were also no differences in reliability.
Faking your own dna has little effect on this process of triangulation and can easily be identified as you won’t share expected traits with relatives.
Good luck...
We don't need to argue that consolidating buyers (e.g. single payer) has more market power and can negotiate prices down. This is an accepted principle among economists.
I am very curious about what affects single-payer in the US would have on global healthcare innovation. E.g. concepts like:
> the high spending of health care consumers in the United States is arguably funding not only global pharmaceutical innovation but is also facilitating the availability of new medicines to other countries at much lower prices than domestic consumers pay.
https://arcdigital.media/u-s-health-care-reality-check-1-pha...
I'm surprised the author is making the arugment that more competitiion doesn't drive down prices - despite the large body of evidence to the contrary.
It's accepted belief that when competition fails to drive down pricing among pharmaceuticals, it's usually due to regulatory decisions. There are several studies that have been done on this exact topic, one even finds that price regulation actually leads to higher prices by discouraging market forces [1].
1. https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/kilde/hod/hdk...
While off-roading it's not uncommon to completely loose traction on two wheels (search for cross-axle articulation for a way to mitigate this). I've also lost traction on three wheels during steep hill climbs, rutted, muddy traverses, and on sand.
In situations like that locked differentials are vastly preferred as you can transfer the majority of the car's torque to 1-2 wheels. A motor for each wheel (or each set of wheels) would not be preferred as 1/4 or 1/2 of the vehicle's torque is often not enough to maintain forward momentum.
The challenge is that the axles of many stock vehicles are not designed to withstand all that torque, so breaking your vehicle's axle when all the torque is transferred to one wheel is a real risk.
In addition the content at times even contradicts the title...
"RBC analyst Joseph Spak, who has a $180 price target, said strong initial orders for the Model 3 could help Tesla achieve positive free cash flow"
...
"In February, the company said it expected to be cash-flow positive in March."
A more accurate title might be: "High Model 3 demand poses growth challenges and an increased need for capital."
That graphic is a image of the Model X. http://www.teslamotors.com/modelx
Misleading title; it presents false choice.
It's common to take photos of receipts for business purposes. Is there a situation where that type of behavior indicates insecurity?
Actually, I think you a) misunderstood the claim in point 2, and b) take issue with the assumptions - not the math/statistics - in point 3.
your math in point 2 assumes you will certainly find yourself in a life threatening situation while carrying the device.
In point 2 the likelihood of a life threatening situation was not assumed or calculated (that's point 3). The conclusion, restated: If there's a 1/3500 chance you'll be able to effectively use the device to save your life, you're breaking even while mitigating risk.
And your point 3 probably vastly overestimates the fraction of life-or-death calls.
You've stated that I've made assumptions and you're right - which is why they're labeled as such. Feel free to suggest yours.
1. http://www.amazon.com/ACR-Electronics-ResQLink-Personal-Loca...
2. $280 / $1MM ~ 1/3500.
3. A useful metric might be 911 calls, of which there are 240 million in 2008[4], for the US population of 305 million. If you assume 5% of the calls are life-or-death, that your daily odds of needing to call in remote areas are the same as the country mean, that you spend 5 days a year in remote areas, and a 5-year useful life for the device, then there is a 0.2% chance the device will save your life.
240/310 * .05 * 5/365 * 5 ~ 0.002
Ironically, on top of it all you're actually increasing your dependence on fossil fuels since since e15 requires more fossil fuel to get you the same distance as e0.
Can someone explain the argument for ethanol-based fuels?
1. http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2011/01/the-great-ethanol...
Startups are rarely profitable since a company designed for growth reinvests its revenue back into the company to create future growth (think a "ramen profitable" startup vs a "lifestyle business").
Large profits mean the company has run out of investment opportunities.