dawhizkid

See link to a chart on returns by year/fund from the article: https://twitter.com/vcstarterkit/status/1173611439833006080

For whatever reason, the cost issue is completely missing from the dem primary debates on healthcare. Everything so far has been focused on health insurance coverage, and the candidates are really just debating what is the best way to cover more people.

A world where 100% of Americans are covered under the existing healthcare system is still a disaster because everything still costs so much between premiums, deductibles, copays and coinsurance. And on top of that, patient responsibility is still largely unknown until post treatment.

If you look at the cheapest Bronze plans on the Obamacare market, you're probably looking at $400/month for the premium with a $7500+ deducible for a single person. If someone is coerced into buying insurance and they can barely afford the premium, how is that something worth celebrating?

The most interesting thing about this whole thing is how irrational the public market can be, especially at a time when there’s so much scrutiny on private valuations. I don’t remember the highest marketcap the company reached but it was skyrocketing at some point despite never really having pivoted on its business model.

The Harvard connection was more widely known than the MIT one until recently.

I wouldn’t look too deep into it. Private valuations are mostly meaningless. This goes for everyone.

I was surprised to find that Miami Beach has free trolleys and Hollywood (CA) has a free nighttime (weekend?) shuttle as well here in the US.

I mean these companies have been getting crushed in the last week or so when the rest of the market has been rising. Medallia and Slack near all time lows since IPO.

There seems to have been a few big moves down among recent SaaS IPOs (Slack, Medallia, CrowdStrike).

Not sure why the market is suddenly fearful, though objectively these are mostly still overpriced.

I wonder why mopeds have never taken off in the US. Seems more practical than a scooter for medium to long distances within a city. I have relatives in Taiwan and mopeds are everywhere there (and other parts of Asia).

The landlords that jack up rent more than 8% a year, at least in SF, are the commercial landlords of large apartment complexes like Avalon. At the very least this will stop the ones managing older complexes built 2004 and earlier from doing that anymore.

Rent wasn’t that much cheaper 5 years ago, if at all, save renting one of the luxury high rises.

For those living in SF, this significantly expands the number of eligible apartments for rent control. Right now only multi-unit homes/apartment complexes built before June 1979 have rent control. Now everything (except single family homes/owner occupied duplexes) built within last 15 years on rolling basis is eligible.

Given how slowly SF builds housing, the fact that anything built 2004 and earlier is eligible basically means almost everything except new high rises.

I wonder what'd the courts would say if Uber decided to charge a nominal fee (say $1/year) for the driver app in the App Store? That would make it more obvious that it's a piece of software that is being licensed by drivers for lead generation.

Uber's defense is that it is licensing lead generation software to drivers, and that it just takes a commission from each trip as payment for use of its software.

In many ways, I can see it. I think the issue lies in a lot of Uber's current policies around drivers e.g. very strict rules around cancellations. If Uber was just a lead generation provider then it shouldn't care or intervene if a driver decides they don't want a job, but depending on the scenario you can be punished if you don't want to take a job.

Part of me thinks Uber could get away with this if they just relaxed some of their current driver policies (e.g. more limited penalties for cancellations). The issue is whether doing so would drastically deteriorate the quality of the service for riders.

I didn't realize 690 was the cut off for "subprime." I thought that was generally considered "ok/good" but not really that bad.

It isn't right now, but if you buy at this valuation you're betting that they can diversify away from memberships as their main source of revenue to something more "techy."

Personally I am bearish because I don't think they can hire the engineering talent to pull that off. They should've gone on a tech hiring spree long ago if that was their intention but I know of no prominent tech leaders who work there.

for some reason I assumed that he would write about how this trauma would give him a new perspective on what was really important in life, but at the end it sounded like the experience didn’t really change his perspective on desiring to work all the time on his startup and that he was only stepping down because he couldn’t perform 100% and not because this experience changed anything about how he prioritized work/career?

Really curious what happens to the stock price of these companies if a progressive dem like Warren or Sanders wins. I mean, on election day will the price of these stocks drop double digits? Doesn't seem like these risks have been priced in at all.

Ultimately I don’t think it matters much. I’ve only very rarely seen promoted news stories in my feed from media companies - I don’t think spending money to promote links to articles is very widely used at all.

Guessing that breaks down to something like $30-$40 per hour per home? Wow.

I was taken aback by a recent conversation with an very Americanized Chinese Harvard grad (grew up in Northern Cal) who genuinely asked me after having said my parents are from Taiwan whether it's true if the people of Taiwan think China is "a part of Taiwan."

I couldn't believe that any person in the West could believe such a thing, and the only explanation is that Chinese disformation spreads far and wide beyond China's own borders.

Carrie Lam's resignation, plus:

The complete withdrawal of the proposed extradition bill

The government to withdraw the use of the word “riot” in relation to protests

The unconditional release of arrested protesters and charges against them dropped

An independent inquiry into police behaviour

Implementation of genuine universal suffrage

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/13/what-do-the-ho...

I’m trying to think of a single use case where I’d want to flatten exactly one level of an array and can’t.

I'm an Apple shareholder...biggest concern with driving "services" is that the 30% commission on in-app purchases is borderline obscene and I don't think longterm sustainable e.g. if the tech regulation hammer is pointed at Apple, regulation around the App Store, including limits on Apple's commission, would make the most sense.

From the snippets of text I've seen in various articles, it just sounds like she was bored? I imagine she had worked for a number of years and saved up a decent amount of money and decided to leave her job, had nothing to do all day and just posted at a Starbucks working on personal projects, which ended up including hacking into large corporations...?

Reminds me of my first manager, who was mid/late 30s and could've retired very comfortably long ago, and his primary motivation for working was because boredom, for him, would've been (in his words) a dangerous thing.

arr.flat(Infinity) seems like a strange decision for flattening the entire array - wouldn't the most common number of levels to flatten an array be all levels, in which case I'd expect arr.flat() to flatten the whole array but in this case it's just 1 level.

The "marketing manager" role at Uber is an operations role and part of a local operations teams. Your main job is not "brand marketing" but attracting new drivers and managing local incentive spend.

They've most likely (wisely) decided to centralize those decisions, so not a huge surprise.

FWIW, the operations teams (small, local, non-technical teams stationed random cities around the world) built Uber into what it is today. Scaling/automating those jobs was always an inevitable.

Yes, institutional money is driving push into bonds, not retail investors/individuals.

Bank accounts are only FDIC insured (or equivalent) up to some limit. If you have hundreds of millions and would otherwise stuff that in a bank account buying bonds are a safe alternative to get around that limit.

I don’t think buying some stock from Euro-based companies constitutes as “supporting your own economy.”

If that’s your goal, then I’d argue buying Euro bonds would be closer to that, though many have negative interest rates at the moment.