__derek__

I think "exercise" and "working out" are probably the wrong target because they're kind of pointless all alone. The key is to find something physical that you can get (mildly) obsessed with doing, then create a mechanism to get you to do it regularly (e.g., a Couch to 5k plan, a pickleball league, a climbing course). At some point, doing that thing will become your default behavior, just as doing whatever you do now is your default behavior and doesn't require motivation/willpower. It might even lead to other training to get better at that thing.

> However, new founders may find it harder to tap than those who went before them. A spate of founder scandals at unicorns like WeWork and Theranos have caused investors to dig deeper into a company before throwing money at the latest shiny promise. Market uncertainty only adds to that scrutiny.

These examples made me laugh because they notably didn't increase scrutiny during the last few years. Otherwise, we wouldn't have more recent examples (FTX, among others).

Have you considered a startup studio? Assuming your handle indicates location, Pioneer Square Labs[1] and the Allen Institute[2] both have incubators to connect skilled people with promising ideas for startups.

[1]: https://www.psl.com/jobs/job?gh_jid=4418268002

[2]: https://jobs.ai2incubator.com/jobs

> My understanding was that if any court had litigated the issue at all, then the QI drops away.

I'm not sure why this would be so given the way precedent works in US courts: since SCOTUS denied cert in this case, none of this applies outside the Sixth Circuit. Even within the Sixth Circuit, it's not clear that the same set of facts should pierce QI as long as the PC can be reasonably justified, an area where courts give police extremely broad latitude.

> There's a 100% chance that some (many, actually) members of the community would have believed this account to be 'real' ergo, he's impersonating an entire police force.

The appeals court touched on this issue specifically to say that (a) police reasonably inferred probable cause from this, but (b) the standard is "reasonable reader" rather than "most gullible person on Facebook", so (c) it's definitely protected speech.

Besides, he was acquitted. Prosecutors actually took this nonsense to trial and failed to convince a jury of your conclusion.

I would be surprised if 1% of these cases involved defense attorneys billing by the hour.

Right. SCOTUS has created a Catch-22 with a twist of Kafka: one's right to redress only exists as long as someone else has successfully gotten the courts to decide that some other police violated the specific expression of the right one wants to exercise.

It's not even that strong because of the "reasonably believed" bit: they just have to plausibly deny knowledge of precedent explicitly barring their (hyper-specific) action.

It seems that VCs are primarily selling to LPs. They hire bankers to sell to public markets.

Maybe. A public corruption trial would likely take a few years and cost seven figures, then the Federal Government's cost to imprison someone is ~$36k per year.[1]

[1]: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/09/01/2021-18...

Many Republicans have signed Grover Norquist's pledge, and he explicitly opposes making it easier to file taxes on the belief that doing so would make it easier to raise taxes in the future.

Knowing Amazon, the S-team absolutely used real data about productivity/cohesion/resilience for teams that spend more time in the office to make this decision, but they are absolutely not going to share it with anybody else.

That's right. When I worked there, I had a colleague planning to move away from Seattle. Our director wouldn't allow remote work, so this person switched teams into an official Virtual location under a director that would.

Active discussion of the post itself from yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34799308

Why is that? This seems like the heart of the labor-hoarding criticism of Google: hire a bunch of smart people, then tell them to churn out low-value code for the ads machine while their RSUs vest and refresh.

Consider my comment in the context of the one that I replied to: I named big-wall climbers because their sport is similarly extreme and unusual in the broader population, unlike soccer/football which is neither.

As for the climbers, Honnold achieved some normie fame as the subject of an Oscar-winning documentary[1]. Steck was also among the best climbers ever, but his speed records centered on the Alps (hence my joking aside about the Euro audience).

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Solo

The Messi comparison threw me, too. Maybe Alex Honnold would be a better comparison, or Ueli Steck for the European audience.

More active discussion on this later submission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34818311

I never associated Hilary Putnam with postmodernism, but I suppose he could have been affected by something in the air while writing The Meaning of 'Meaning'.[1]

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilary_Putnam#Semantic_externa...

> I remembered that law students pay tuition

Maybe. There's a lot of scholarship money available at elite law schools. For those paying something close to sticker price, Big Law summer associates make good money.

Caveat that I don't know what I'm talking about, but maybe 20% time violates the inclusiveness value because it doesn't require/include others' opinions:

> “Respect each other” is translated into “find a way to include and agree with every person’s opinion”. In an inclusive culture (good —it doesn’t withhold information and opportunity) with very distributed ownership (bad), you rapidly get to needing approval from many people before any decision can be made.

FWIW, it's also possible that the folks you describe have indicated a preference for more in-person/hybrid work.

Maybe you're thinking of Amazon's former Blueshift office in the old Macy's building in downtown Seattle.[1] This building is located across the street from a McDonald's that has long been a nexus for anti-social activity in the area.

[1]: https://www.geekwire.com/2022/amazon-moves-employees-out-of-...

The IRS can reasonably assume my primary residence address from my prior year's tax return, then match that to the 1098 with the same address. The other, less common situations are covered by my comment on the home office and rental-property plumber: some things will require corrections with additional details to substantiate them.

It's the opposite of what you wrote:

> That makes sense--alcohol decreases inhibition. It makes you do things that maybe you were inclined to do, but wouldn't do sober. (That is part of why people drink alcohol in the first place.)

> the details of your mortgage debt

This is already reported to the IRS by servicers via Form 1098.[1]

[1]: https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-1098

> Got married, had a baby, used a home office, paid a plumber to fix your rental property?

The first two would be minor corrections. The latter two would naturally require more attention and detail, but they don't apply to most people.

> Deducting mortgage interest?

The IRS has my 1098s. They know the mortgage interest, principal, and origination date.

This is basically what got Nothing Forever pulled from Twitch.[1]

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/feb/06/nothing-fore...

> dependent on alcohol or drugs are six or seven times more likely

NB: this does not mean actively using. Dependency creates significant stress when sober, which almost certainly amplifies violent dispositions. Hence my GP's comment.

Definitely an interesting turn of phrase. Ironically, I think you've helped me understand why I might be wrong about some of the metaverse hype: while I steadfastly believe that people prefer the real world, moving consumption to a fake world (e.g., buying an NFT handbag for your digital avatar) would fall into this category of behavior. In effect, paying as much to own a fake good as the real thing is loudly saying, "Look at what I could have purchased if I were less virtuous."