mckravchyk

Is it? If founders were getting only 10% of ownership which would be further diluted in following funding rounds, how many of them would take the risk of starting a company? On the other hand, if early employees were not getting any equity, how many of them would apply anyway because they need the job / or want to gain experience and build their network with limited risk? (not saying that they should not be getting equity). If 1% seems unfair, they can start their own company, then they would quickly find out that the difficulty / risk / stress / responsibility is an order of magnitude larger and equity reflects that.

I tried to calculate a formula once, to convert increment of Earth's mass to increment of Earth's gravity for a planet of the same density, so not the same as escape velocity but sort of related. I'm not sure if it's actually correct but it was: x/x^(2/3) So i.e. for 5 Earth masses and the same density, it would be 1.71 of Earth's gravity on the surface, 10 masses -> 2.15 Earth's gravity.

Reasoning: Acceleration is GM/R^2 and planets R is like (x * Me / 4Pi / density)^1/3 . Directly proportional to M and inverse square root of radius, while the radius is directly proportional to (x)^(1/3)

Though the density for 2 planets made of the same stuff and different masses would probably be different due to differences in pressure in its internals? Just a guess.

Where's the Contact Sales option?

No. That would be a site that you visit from Google search results to read an article and then asks you for change to keep reading.

I think this question could be framed in another, more relevant way: "Is a failed startup responsible to ship security updates for the next 5 years (Article 13, point 8) and provide binaries for every single minor update for the next 10 years (Article 13, point 9) after it failed"?

Hopefully not, but it looks like now you will have to set up an LLC just to try the tiniest business idea. Hopefully closing the LLC (even if it's just one person) would count as cessation of operations described in Article 13, point 23.

Or imagine a startup wants to experiment with another, adjacent product. Doing that introduces enormous risk of having to maintain a sunsetted product for years.

AFAIK none of this applies to SaaS. This act is the nail to the coffin for on-premises software. Everything being a subscription is already bad as it is, they have just completely destroyed the incentive to ship anything the consumer can run on their own machine.

Slightly off topic but this is potentially a disaster for desktop apps and anything not SaaS. Correct me if I am wrong, the law requires to provide 5 years of security updates for apps. Some apps can leverage models such as "use it forever, but you only get updates for certain time without renewing". That allows companies *that ship apps where you can own your data* use a yearly subscription model and remain profitable. Now the desktop app vendor will be required to support users 5 years back, possibly shipping multiple builds (legacy versions with security updates and new version with features). Meanwhile the SaaS vendor charges a monthly fee and only has to care about security for the period of the subscription. I wonder how JetBrains is going to deal with that, I am pretty sure that their perpetual fallback is not updated for 5 years. But it's a big company, a small startup wanting to ship a desktop app will cry and despite the best intentions may as well change the direction to ship SaaS... The act provides the incentive to enshittify everything.

And the irony is that those people will only automatically get bonus points for being an "engineer" of a large, well-known company while a solo developer creating an impressive project can be viewed as an amateur and likewise people working in startup jobs that have more technical ownership will have less of a resume.

I have done it with the past self (no I don't have a tachyo-something anti-telephone, just a theoretical exercise). You can look at the obvious mistakes you have made. How much more could you accomplish or get out of life if you just applied those few paragraphs of instructions. Then look at it and wonder, in 10 years from now what kind of letter would I write to my present self, what obvious things am I missing now...

I did not know about type branding, but it would also be possible to just use casting if you don't want the prefix at runtime:

  type UserId = `usr_${string}`
  const user = { id: 'bgy5D4eL' as unknown as UserId }

Casting would just need to be applied wherever the object is generated, retrieving from the database requires casting either way. It could be a footgun though, if someone working on the codebase thought that the prefix is actually there and decided to use it for a runtime check.

I wanted to add this to the article, but decided not to, since I think having the prefix at runtime is just as useful - wherever the ID occurs, i.e. in error log the type of the object is always clear. But that or type branding is something that is much easier to apply in an existing system indeed.

Btw. I submitted this on Monday 6 AM EST and now it is visible as submitted 19h ago? I totally did not expect to make it far, let alone /front when it initially did not get any upovtes. I'm curious how it works :)

I think that the proper equivalent would be 35h/week for full time remote position. Like you said you can't possibly expect an employee in an office to do actual, raw 8h of work between 9 to 5. And when you do your remote work schedule, you can't expect yourself to work 8h without a break and be productive so requiring 40h is like 45h when translated to an on site job. I know there's no transit cost but it should not be an excuse to require more hours from remote workers.

I never did any game development but I feel the same way. I never pursued this path but I kinda wish I did in some way and the idea that maybe it's not too late to switch comes back every so often but the scope feels impossible. I wonder if AI tools making the art would be a big enabler for small indie studios. Still, it does seem like 10 - 100x effort required to make a good 3D video game that sells vs. making an even somewhat complex app.

I have recently heard about a case in Poland where a police officer was punished for not being professional. Something like a Ukrainian made a negative comment about "Polish police" when stopped for speeding or leaving his car or something and the officer responded with something like, "if you don't like it here, then get the fuck out to your country" and that got him some kind of punishment. I guess this would be unthinkable in the US.

I'm a front-end developer and I sometimes wish I was a game developer instead. App development seems just not technical enough compared to video games, 3D graphics - I'm not much of a gamer but this is the most impressive use of the technology to me. I know this is a passion driven industry and because of it the salaries are worse and so are the working conditions, but I'm talking more about the perspective of working on my own product (game). I have been working on a smaller product that I did not release yet, I love the craft, but I just see how much more I would enjoy building games. But it feels like it's kinda too late to switch and making a great game requires far more resources than making a great app. I stumbled upon this path sort of by accident, by random ideas and I just kinda wish that way back then I had a random idea to make a simple game instead.

> “(10) This Regulation applies to economic operators only in relation to products with digital elements made available on the market, hence supplied for distribution or use on the Union market in the course of a commercial activity.”

So if you wanted to release an open source product, but try to monetize it in some way by providing extra services on top of it (i.e. backup / sync across devices service), this totally applies?

What if the open source product is used as a marketing asset of a commercial product but otherwise is not commercial by itself?

I wonder if you could put small displays in an array and somehow synchronize them to act as one big display.

Those are some good points, thanks.

Is there a reason why npm packages should not target the highest possible target that an LTS Node.js supports? On the front-end those that need lower targets will run their own transpiling anyway to whatever target they want. I'm about to release a few simple npm packages and I'm considering ES2017 as the target (since it has the last major feature - async / await). I'm guessing it's just that the end-user of the library would need to be aware of the polyfills that need to be supplied. I have asked a question [0] about it a while back but it did not get any responses.

To clarify - the goal is if you have a project that uses ES7, why would you want to use a package written in ES2020 that is transpiled to, i.e. ES2016 using non-native async / await.

[0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/76558023/whts-the-ideal-...

I'm not an expert in this but I think that generally price is determined by what the upper limit of what the users are willing to pay and the lower limit of what the vendors are willing to charge. As a new software vendor it only makes sense to look at the price of similar software in your space. And is it really bad - how many would want to be a software vendor otherwise? I'm not saying that some physical products do not come with risk, but the article is mentioning water - what are the chances that a company selling water will have a product market fit problem? What are the chances that the app you have worked on for so long without getting paid for it will not net more than a day job would 2 years after launch?

And Google, Facebook - they are something entirely different, they have a monopoly on their ad machine so they can charge whatever they want - and give something back in R&D in exchange - a company that struggles to keep its lights on can't innovate much (Zero to One is a nice take on this). For the latter, I'm not saying it is good or bad, it has benefits and drawbacks and it's the way it is and it's certainly not limited to virtual products. The Train Monopoly Co in my country has made the tickets practically 2x as expensive in just 1 year and what can I do? They could increase the price even further and I would still be riding with them because there are no other options.

At the most basic level, distraction is the opposite of focus. If you want to do deep work, you must eliminate all distraction and just focus on that one thing you are working on. So no HN while working for instance and even something as seemingly innoncent as grabbing a snack randomly can mess with it big time and start a distraction loop. Other than that you can practice focus deliberately, like for example zen meditation of counting exhales 1 to 10 - you will notice how easily distracted you get, but it's normal - you just get yourself back to focus on the most boring thing. And make sure you get good sleep, it's easy to become chronically sleep depleted and live in denial that no more sleep is needed, but it actually is needed badly - and it's very difficult to focus, if I get worse sleep I especially pay attention I do not have anything distracting around and usually choose to work on one big thing as multiple smaller tasks can prove to be too distracting to handle well.

Does it include D-3 and K-2?

Cool! I thght t wld b bt at-xpndg vwls. I gs smth lk tht shld b psbl nw wth LLMs. smth wh y wldd jst rndml drp chrs t incrs spd nd it wld jst gs th rght wrd 99% f ttime bsd on ctx. Nt sr hw prctl t wld b thgh bt I thnk I cld qckl gt sdd t t.

I have tried to sell myself on using functions (not pure functions though but ones that accept an object and modify it) but ultimately sticked to OO. I try to find the balance in-between, if something is processing heavy it's going to be a function, but if it does not do much by itself and relies on a lot of state, it's going to be a method in a class - which may call a function or a few.

The biggest benefit is the structure, you get an API that can control any aspect of the app out of the box without the need to redeclare stuff.

On the other hand, what would it take to have a technology that could take a 3d map snapshot of the entire brain structure?

> Aside from that, it would be interesting to see how people would act if they had lifespans of a thousand years - knowing that what you'll do to the environment, you'll have to bear the burden of yourself.

How people would act? The masses would never change their way of thinking, meaning there would be no progress / change of culture as well as the danger of a bad culture persisting for millenias. At the same time you would see those in power conentrate even more power and it would be certainy power like you see in non-democratic countries, where one individual rules everyone, except that individual would never ever die. Imagine if Stalin has lived to this day. Now considering that, you would think that a 1984-like goverment with a supreme leader that lives for centuries would let the average person live forever in the first place?

> versus guaranteed doom

I would not call the death, complete absence of everything, following a life well lived, doom. Everything has an end. Of course if that happens too soon, that's a tragedy.

> No more passage of time, no more conscious thoughts or experiences, ever.

It's interesting to look at the opposite. If following death, there's no experience, no awareness, nothing. Then what is the now? what it means to be alive right now, to perceive and how is it different from the memories of the past and ideas of the future? It may sound far off, but in a way, we die every moment. And on a larger scale, the 8 y/o me, the 16 y/o me is no more, not in just terms of being made of different atoms, but in terms of identity. So you can also imagine that if a person lives thousands of years, they either experience many "deaths" over time or they live the same dull life for thousands of years - in which there was no point to live that long in the first place. I can share that fear though, but it would be more in the context of "you have x months / years" to live heard at a relatively young age with life feeling far from finished, but the longer I live and the more things I do and experience that I wanted to do and experience, I imagine the easier it is to come to terms and be grateful for what has happened already.

Don't have anything against what they are doing and heck, if I could easily afford it, maybe I would even sign up - one way ticket to see what the future would be like (vs. nothing like you said). But I don't think it's that important and if humanity reverse engineers the brain so that a person can live for thousands of year, or potentially infenitely (I think that would be the biggest challenge that goes far beyond just stopping death, I would not expect a brain to work for hundreds of years without serious modifications), if everyone has an access to it, it's like one of those things like an omni-intelligent AI, something you would think everyone would be better off if it was never developed.

I think it would be cool if aging was stopped (the prime years of adulthood are so short) but I'd wish there was some natural cap of say, 200 years max were the brain would just break down at the end and it would be very hard to make it work longer).

Some replies were coherent, but it took just a few tries to get something completely random - that's all one reply:

---------------------------------------------------------------

    High level of confidence in troubleshooting software and devices

    Proficiency in German or any other language

Location: Santa Clara, CA

United States - Wisconsin

Iron River 24° Partly Cloudy Mostly cloudy skies early, then partly cloudy this afternoon. A stray shower or thunderstorm is possible. High 83F. Winds SSW at 10 to 15 mph. 0% (0) Forecast

    High: 85 °F
    Low: 58 °F
    Mostly Cloudy

Mostly Cloudy

Forecast

    Forecast
    Minneola Highs

Forecast

    Forecast
    Minneola Highs

Fluffya Bunniezuwuzii

Location: Merced, CA Member since: 18 June 2013

Description

Here I am:

an (old) hippie musician who still can jump around, I have lot's of toys and like to play with them to make beautiful things. Hoping to learn enough here to really make the most of it and have some fun doing it!

vbnet

      .-"""-.
    .'       '.
   /           \
   |    ___      |
   |   'o.o'     |      I am a Hobbit!
   |      l       |       -
  ,|    ___     |      / \
 (_|   "'     "'-|     |_.-/
  _j            | _.-'

.-' '-.._ / (__,....' `"-;;""```

I don't want it, it's been a necessity. Now I'm cutting it down a bit actually and putting my entrepreneurial pursuits on hold for some 4 - 5 years because there was just too much conflict with missing out on some other things in life that I find valuable.

I think there are 3 factions in a world where AI took out most jobs (with UBI of course):

#1 There will always be jobs requiring humans - jobs that require human interaction. The supply will be much smaller, but so will be the demand.

#2 By the time AI replaces all jobs, we will most likely have a very realistic VR with multiplayer capabilities. I think that many people will live adventures in such world and spend most of their waking hours in it. Metaverse sucks but it's only because it's so artificial. If you could have tech that could integrate with your senses directly, giving experiences on par with the sharpest lucid dream... that's going to be much different and for better or worse, a lot of people will get sucked into it. Of course, it's going suck - life is about yin-yang, endless pleasure is not good. People who will end up spending the majority of their time in such VR will not be unlike drug addicts, unless they will also be doing activities that require mental & "physical" engagement (I think one of the coolest thing that could arise out of it are new sports that would not be possible in the real world), however, that yin-yang balance would be hard to achieve when there's no evolutionary pressure combined with overabundance of simple pleasure that's just available all the time.

#3 Walking the path to mastery in some pursuit - i.e. artistic, athletic, a craft. There's pure joy in just getting better at something and enjoying every day of practice and most importantly - feeling challenged which is a primal need. It may be competitive as heck to get some recognition or play in the big leagues (which would be more like #1), but that would be just a bonus from that perspective.

If AI leaves us nothing to do, then #3 will always be available. AI will not take away our own engagement but engagement requires effort and so, I would bet that a significant majority will overindulge in #2 to their unconscious doom - I guess it will still be a pretty cool experience though and it's not like those people will not have a choice to get out.

It was a bit hard to watch given that it mentions digital all the time. Why is it called digital? There's nothing digital about electricity flowing through a wire. Digital means that a binary signal is carried rather than say, a signal carried from the audio jack.

It comes at some personal life sacrifice though and I will be looking to reduce it slightly in the coming years. It's basically a lifestyle of work and not much else, I set aside some time for a hobby which also involves socializing and that's why it's 60h/week (63h/week being theoretical max if nothing comes up) and not 70h/week.

Hitting the time on a regular day (not every day is like that) requires ongoing effort to sustain it. I spend 20 min / day doing time tracking and performance analysis (I think it makes more time than it costs). So for example if I want to hit 10h on a day which is purely dedicated to work, I wake up at 6, I end work at 8 and go to sleep at 9:30. That gives me 14h between 6 and 8, so it means that the combined time for the morning and midday routines must be under 4h. I don't stress about doing too little work on any given day, but I will always look at it the next day and consider what I could do better with the execution of the previous day . Then it mostly becomes a habit, I would just do it like a robot. Not every day is like that, but most are.

I'm sorry to hear about your disability. I don't know much about ADHD but perhaps you would find the following tips useful. You could look into Zen meditation - a good book with the how is 3 Pillars of Zen, feel free to discard the supernatural stuff and just focus on regular practice. One of the main benefits of Zen practice is increasing your attention span. It's extremely challenging to sustain focus on nothing and I still struggle with this despite doing it regularly for 5 years. It could be as simple as counting exhales and resetting the count every 10 breaths, expect to lose track fast but you get better at it with regular practice and this directly translates to your attention span when doing other things. Maybe you could also benefit from journaling - try to successively increase work blocks by a small amount every week or so and keep track of it. Other tips: avoid scrolling social media, get good sleep - you may need up to 8.5h of bed time / 8h of sleep, it's easy to be chronically sleep depleted without being aware about it and everything is much harder without good sleep, do quick breaks while working, i.e. 1 minute pause every 15 min just looking at the timer (not email!).