bearmcbearsly

At my company in the Bay Area, we get 30 days vacation plus 10 holidays. For the first few years, it was a bit less vacation.

And how's that working out for them? The median SAG/AFTRA member makes less than $1,000 per year from acting. And the pro sports players associations are tiny -- they exclude the much larger group of athletes who try to make a living playing sports but don't make the big leagues.

I dunno... I was a victim of this wage-fixing scheme, as were all of my coworkers at the time. And I don't know of a single one who would have preferred to have a union collectively negotiating wages.

The whole scheme was that the companies stopped their recruiters from cold-calling each others' employees. That kept wages down by reducing the opportunities for people to get a better salary by moving between companies (or threatening to). If wages were collectively negotiated, those opportunities would not exist in the first place.

> current crop of ads which are usually one of fraudulent, malware, or borderline pornographic.

That doesn't match my experience at all, but maybe you can chalk it up to targeting?

188 upvotes in 3 hours and already off the front page. Clearly people are flagging this post. The question is why...

On the other hand, I don't think it's that uncommon for startup funding to come through at the last minute.

I later found out that a company I worked for had come within 2 months of running out of cash before their next round of funding came through. I'm glad they didn't shut down at that point to pay a "proper" severance.

Well, yes. But I think lucidrains was referring to:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762

Yeah, I always assume that anyone who disagrees with me is a paid shill too. It makes things so much simpler!

Do you work for Apple?

You mention proof of work vs proof of stake, and then two sentences later you claim that nobody is paying to the environmental impact of cryptocurrency mining.

The whole point of proof of stake is to avoid the energy waste that proof of work requires to secure a blockchain. It's not just a technical challenge -- it's one potential solution to very problem you're describing.

Is proof of stake actually going to work at scale? I don't know for sure, and I don't think anybody else really does -- but the point is that not only are people talking about the environment, they're actively working on solutions.

Now that you can trivially use async functions as express handlers, what are the major benefits of transitioning to Koa?

> if you work a solid hour and only earn $1 gross income, that seems extremely exploitative

If that $1 per hour provides you with a better income than your peers with less physical labor, then this doesn't sound exploitive at all.

That's what the entire article was about.

If you're the sole owner of a corporation and also an employee, you can move money from the corporation to your own pocket by either paying yourself a salary or paying a dividend out of corporate profits.

At least prior to the recent corporate tax rate cut, the tax you'd pay on the salary would typically be less than the sum of corporate income tax and tax on the dividend, so people would pay themselves unreasonably large salaries to save on taxes, and the IRS would object to this.

Here's an article that goes into more detail:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2016/05/13/reasona...

That's completely untrue. In fact, it's the opposite -- the IRS objects if you pay yourself more than a reasonable salary.

I'd argue that the average person probably understands the actual implications better than the typical HN user.

> Steganographic communication as a substitute for encrypted text is a baffling misinterpretation of the reason for encryption in a chat program.

I agree with you, but couldn't you say the same thing about using end-to-end encryption in a chat program as a substitute for messaging that's just encrypted in transit?

Would you say the same thing about A-list actors or pro athletes? After a couple of successful movies or seasons, they could afford to retire too, but most choose to continue working as long as they possibly can.

At Google and other recent tech giants, you'll find thousands of people who could live comfortably without working a day for the rest of their lives. They're clearly not doing it for the salary.

Serious question: is it illegal to exploit a cryptocurrency flaw for profit (strictly at the protocol level -- not hacking someone's machine or wallet, etc.)?

> No you cannot, unless you're running a single threaded server process on a single machine. What you can do is _gamble_ that you probably won't have a collision

This seems like a pointless distinction.

If I did the math right, you can generate 1,000,000 ULIDs per second (1000 per millisecond) for around 50 million years before you can expect to hit your first collision.

I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure any system I build won't be running 50 million years from now. Not to mention that the timestamp portion of the ULID will overflow in a mere 9000 years.

> Why do people buy common shares which give them no voting rights as a shareholder?

Because they trust the founders to protect the long-term interests of the company more than activist investors trying to maximize short-term profit?