chitowneats

Classic deontology vs utilitarianism. I doubt we'll ever convince each other. I appreciate the discussion though.

I'm not sold on ice baths, but maybe I'm wrong. Training certainly inflates that number. My own anecdata indicates that building muscle has been far more time-efficient for me than running or cycling. At least with respect to burning fat.

Agreed, it's a thorny issue. My own subjective experience of lifting weights 3x per week vs. biking 5+ miles into work 5x a week is that the lifting was far more successful in helping me lose weight. Ideally, you do both. But I worry that many people, especially those in this industry, underestimate the weight loss gains from building muscle.

I love these metaphors that equate losing money with death. The whole point of capitalism is that people who make good decisions get to become rich and people who make bad ones don't. SV founders believe this at their core; at least they pretend to. No wonder people think it's a total scam the way it's currently implemented.

I'm pretty skeptical of their numbers as well. It costs calories to build the muscle in the first place. It's a snowballing effect.

Why do we keep speaking of SVB depositors with over 250k in deposits as if they are part of the hapless hoi polloi? These are founders who practice and preach capitalism with a capital C. They are part of a class of individuals with immense power and wealth in our society; or looking to soon enter that class. They deserve none of the type of sympathy you're extending towards them when it comes to matters of business and finance.

They were supposedly safe. Misconceptions exist everywhere in business and finance. Silicon Valley's entire modus operandi is about "disrupting" industries that feel their business models are safe.

They were in fact not safe. The bank no longer exists after failing to cough up depositors' cash.

I'm not saying we allow them to starve and die. They can apply for SNAP, EBT, and Medicaid, just like everybody else if they become truly penniless. Get a job delivering Jimmy Johns. Or just sell their vacation homes.

Your ideas on this topic are so bizarre. Are you arguing here that the bank owners and employees were not paid? That they didn't pursue a strategy they believed would give them higher returns, and failed?

The critical piece you're missing is that building and maintaining muscle mass increases your metabolism greatly. Michael Phelps eats 10,000 calories a day. This an extreme example, but the principle is true for all of us.

An early death means you won't have to suffer as long, I guess. I don't want that outcome for you but it's where you're headed.

LFG (let's fucking go). I've been repeatedly told that failure is good; that it's "corrective". SV needs to put its money where its big fat mouth is.

In reality, they are total grifters who will milk the general public for every dime they can get.

!remind me 6 months

It's deboosted. Comments with 50+ karma show up at the bottom of every thread.

Again, it's deserved. I get it.

They're neither good nor bad. They're just assets. Investors who bought them should bear the consequences of their decision. Depositors knew that their deposits were not insured in excess of 250K. Why do we allow certain groups of people to just rewrite the rules whenever they fail? It's ridiculous. Not to mention totally antithetical to their supposed philosophy.

This account is absolutely shadow-banned. It deserves to be. Just like VCs with balances in SVB larger than 250k deserve to lose their shirts.

Are you actually arguing that SVB and their depositors haven't seen immense profits in the past few decades? 250k is FDIC insured. Beyond that, a massive haircut is the only fair solution.

They made a bet on 10-year government bonds. It didn't work out due to rising interest rates. Whoops? Not my fucking problem. Unless they get their way and make us all pay for it.

Edit: This account is shadow-banned. I can't directly respond to the comment below. Luckily for me, I already thoroughly explained my point. This has nothing to do with "bankers" and everything to do with unbelievable hypocrisy from the SV founder & investor class. You all are so fucking full of shit. Flag this comment, please. After being totally swindled in 2008, I predict Americans are going to react to this rationally, which will be very bad for you. Good luck assholes.

"Very safe" was always a complete lie. It assumed a certain macro-economic environment that is now over.

Why do we allow these people to profit off the gains of their successful bets while socializing their losses?

The pitchforks are coming out at some point. "Gradually, then suddenly."

That Hemingway quote feels very relevant lately.

SV no longer has any moral authority about "disruption", "innovation", or any other buzzword. The entire industry should be allowed to burn to the ground so genuine growth can follow.

Silicon Valley lobbying to be Too Big To Fail. I predict they will get their way. What a complete joke. They'll be laughing all the way to the (solvent) bank.

The title is accurate.

Edit: the original title was correct and gave helpful context.

LMAO

If you vacate the space, you're responsible for the consequences.

Yes, corporations should pay a fair wage. This is about gender parity in government policy.

I will entertain arguments that no one should be allowed to work 12 hours, or that both men and women can. If you look at the other comment he made, you'll see he's arguing for neither of those.

I take back my other comment. I don't eagerly await any responses from you. Your comments are childish.

Get off HN and go enjoy your 20s. If by chance you are older than that, grow up.

No one is forcing anyone to work 12 hour days. It's about allowing it should a woman choose to accept the position.

I get your angle now. Trad nonsense.

They aren't exactly the same. They are very different. I am far from a copypasta liberal politics idiot. A quick look at my comment history would have indicated this quite clearly to you.

Please explain to me why women shouldn't be allowed to work 12 hour days? I eagerly await your response.

Thank you. This is the type of info I was expecting in TFA.

I read TFA and didn't notice an answer to my question below.

Do men already have this permission? If so, I don't see why women shouldn't.

I'm struggling to think of a "great nation" that doesn't or didn't allow this.

This is actually a pretty persuasive argument to me. My frustration comes from using it to satisfy a machine. Humans are much more flexible.

Did you mention Python experience on your resume? I already find whitespace sensitivity off-putting when I have support from my text editor or IDE. I'd be even more annoyed if forced to use it on a whiteboard.