tryitnow

Are there plans to do in-person classes when that becomes permitted?

Yes, this is very confusing. Some people could read this and mistakenly assume that their reflections are always kept secret (because they didn't read the second sentence).

It might be better to change it to "Reflection are kept secret until Sunday."

This might seem like a little issue, but it's not. All it takes is one over eager person to join the app in haste, not really read how it works, post some embarrassing secret thinking it will be kept secret and then become mortified when it's revealed. Then they will raise a storm online and your app will be known as something that causes drama rather than alleviates it.

I don't know. I just don't see it.

Unlike in professional wrestling politicians, corporations, etc have real conflicts over zero sum games. Of course, there are situations where there's are incentives to cooperate.

As for his critique of neoclassical economics' reliance on perfect information - that's already been addressed by many economists, Stiglitz, etc. It's frankly banal to even bring it up any longer.

I just don't see this concept adding much value to a conceptual toolkit. Whenever I try to apply it, it feels forced and it seems simpler concepts do the job just fine.

For example, it's easier to just assume that sometimes competitors finds situations where it makes sense to cooperate.

And it's simpler to assume that even staunch enemies want to appear "gentlemanly" at times, either in public or behind the scenes.

Kayfabe seems worst that useless to me. It seems to violate Occam's razor. It offers an elaborate explanation where a simply explanation would be just as good.

You know this post is authentically Hungarian because of the pessimism.

When in doubt it's almost always cognitive biases at play.

I think a more reasonable assessment would indicate that people who are well resourced (either through financial, social, or skill capital) are more likely to feel invigorated and therefore will build on the resources they already have by taking advantage of the chaos.

I think it may depend on the company and on how these "averages" are calculated.

For a company where almost all the workforce is white collar then yes, $10K seems reasonable. In fact, I'm surprised it's not more.

For a company like Wal-Mart, I'd be shocked to see that much spend on software subscription.

In my experience with Anki all four of your points are spot on, especially number 3.

A big problem I see with pre-made decks is that they contain just too much information.

The same reasons perfectly intelligent people join and remain in actual cults.

Honestly, there are so many factors involved in it's hard to enumerate them all in an HN post.

For those who are intrigued by actual cults, I strongly recommend the podcast "Cults" on the ParCast network. It can come off as a little dry at first, but stay with it, they not only tell the story of the cults they cover they also reference real, mainstream psychological researching explaining the motivations of the cult leaders and members. It will change the way you think about all organizations, not just fanatical religions.

Not shocking at all.

It's a lack of leadership which shouldn't be surprising given that most corporate executives don't really know how to act in situations outside of their realm of experience.

This is worth the read. Regardless of how you feel about Bloomberg, the article reveals a lot about how elites work together to "protect" one another. My impression is that the elites who do this don't consider it "bad", any one of us would probably behave the same way and convince ourselves we had the best intention.

However, the net effect is to create a deeply skewed picture of reality.

I love this. In literally less than five minutes it's already given me some really valuable insights and inspiration.

Feedback: make the table sortable and filterable, everyone's going to want to sort by revenue and people might want to filter by source.

Wow. This is journalistic malpractice. I'm pretty sure "finance" workers include everyone working for financial institutions including tellers and other low wage positions.

My guess is that this average has more to do with the composition of the workforce than any meaningful pay differentials in the industry.

So my guess is that the story here is that tech companies just have a lot fewer low wage positions, which makes sense because a lot of lower wage tech work can be outsourced abroad (e.g. customer support).

Here's the catch:

"(b) California residents who are 18 years of age or older and receiving benefits under the Medi-Cal program, the County Medical Services Program, the CalFresh program, the CalWORKs program, or Unemployment Insurance shall not be eligible to receive a universal basic income under the CalUBI Program."

So I don't really see what the point is. If you're targeting technological unemployment why make it so that people who have unemployment insurance are ineligible?

Low is positioning this as a response to "job losses" associated with automation.

https://a28.asmdc.org/press-releases/20200221-expand-economi...

This makes no sense to me. $12K/yr is a nice supplement to low incomes. But let's say I'm a trucker making $60K/yr and I lose my job. Making 20% of my previous income is definitely nice, but it's not exactly moving the needle that dramatically.

If you're primarily concerned about job losses due to automation, why not radically increase unemployment benefits and make vocational education for adults tuition free (and maybe even offer a cost of living stipend for unemployed adults who retrain)? This approach is a LOT less expensive and far more targeted.

I fully support a UBI as a form of income security, but as a corrective for technological unemployment it just seems like a really blunt, and ultimately not terribly effective instrument.

Yes, the California economy could absorb an additional $32B in additional taxes if that money is then just re-routed back into consumers' pockets via a UBI.

So the overall tax impact isn't my concern.

My concern is why do this at all if just routes money through the state treasury then back into consumers' pockets?

Unless, the UBI is highly distributive,taking money from the well-to-do and giving it to the poor.

But...if it's highly re-distribute then that will incentivize the rich to leave the state and incentivize the poor to come, over time that's not sustainable.

Having said all this, I still 100% support the idea behind a UBI, I just don't think we're ready to implement on a national level much less a state level.

Not really. So far the biggest fundraiser in the Democratic primary has been Bernie Sanders and he has raised most of his money from small money donors.

So it's absolutely possible to raise money without using one's own money or taking bribes.

And even if a candidate raises money from a 100 billionaires, that's better than one billionaire. The more people you raise money from the more likely it is that those people have conflicts with one another that can then balance one another out.

A single billionaire financing their own campaign is just too much centralized power for my tastes, even if I trust that billionaire and generally like his policies.

Power corrupts.

I used to be YIMBY, but I doubt more construction would lead to lower costs of living.

When I researched this I couldn't find any strong evidence suggesting that more building would lead to more affordable housing.

You would think that more construction would lead to more affordable housing, but it seems like more construction doesn't just increase supply, it also increases demand, which can offset any price effects from the increase in supply.

This makes sense when you think that similar people want to live in proximity to people like themselves. So if there are more luxury condos in an area that's going to create demand for more high-end retail, which will enhance that neighborhood's appeals to wealthier customers which will then increase demand for more luxury residences.

Vienna and Singapore seems to be cities that have overcome this trend.

So I used to be an enthusiastic YIMBY, but there just doesn't appear to be any concrete evidence that more construction is going to lead to more affordable housing.

Having said that, I do believe we should promote more construction, I just don't think it's going to reduce the cost of living to a sustainable level.

If I'm understanding this correctly, that's a pretty big savings: $500/yr versus $198/yr.

Can anyone confirm this?

What's wrong with using these products? This "study" doesn't appear to make a distinction between using the products exclusively and using them in conjunction with other products.

I'm betting every one of these large companies ALSO use specific contract management software tools in addition to Excel Sharepoint and email.

I'm actually surprise MORE companies don't use this combination since almost every large company makes use of MSFT office suite products.

I'm skeptical of any company trying to position itself as some sort of replacement for products that have been used for decades.

I've drunk that Kool-Aid before and it never works out the way it's intended, companies always fall back on some class Office suite products.

The sad truth is that you'll probably end up using Excel, Sharepoint, and email in addition to whatever contract management solution you go with.

It's not that it's unmaintainable it's that it's a lot more difficult to maintain.

You can get around this be having someone engineer a spreadsheet using all of the advanced functionality and VBA that Excel offers, but by that point it becomes a lot easier to just use an application that's built for whatever purpose you're trying to achieve.

Spreadsheets are accessible for a lot of people, but that doesn't mean they're easy to use and maintain. "ease of use" implies "use" for some purpose.

A lot of time ease of accessibility (anyone can click an icon and start entering numbers and doing calcs) conflicts with actually achieving whatever your purpose is. And if often conflicts with maintainability.

Spreadsheets ease of accessibility is both their biggest benefit and their biggest drawback.

I think properly implementing a solution appropriate to the problem space is the literal definition of engineering. So "we" aren't bad at software engineering but someone definitely is.

Is this the course?

https://davidrambo.github.io/assets/teaching/Galactic-Capita...

Exactly.

This is why I think hard work and intelligence should be rewarded up to a point, but then after that point all we're rewarding is bad behavior.

Personally, I think a lot of this can be fixed through the tax code - making it steeply progressive so that there's less incentive to engage in shady behavior, but not so progressive that it discourages effort. Finding the balance is key. Today the US (and most of the world) is too balanced in favor or rewarding those who have acquired the most economic power.

Hmmmm. I wish your implication was correct, but I fear it's not.

According to this article, it's worse than that, we're lending money not to banks, but to hedge funds, PE firms, and REITs: https://wolfstreet.com/2019/11/06/whats-behind-the-feds-bail...

These firms than use the cheap money (interest rate < 3%) to make leveraged bets on risky assets (mortgage backed securities, CMOs, etc).

Wow. This is an interesting take.

I didn't know higher risk firms like hedge funds, PE firms, and REITs are borrowing so heavily in the repo market.

So basically, this is the Fed just handing out cheap money to these firms. It's socialism for the super-rich.

I think that's a very specific brand of Christianity. Mainline Protestant groups and most Catholics don't really emphasize conversions.

I see relatively little harm in mainstream Protestant churches and the more liberal Catholic parishes. Evangelical and conservative Catholic churches start to creep me out, even if people do get some value from them.

In my view, if you get value from having a Christian faith practice, it would be best to quit more evangelical and dogmatic churches and start attending more open-minded, less conversion-oriented churches, e.g. Episcopalian, Methodist, Metropolitan, etc.

I think you're right about the colonialism part but I think it was the Ottomans not the British, the British were involved for a fairly limited time, the Ottomans dominated for centuries.

They are private, but I believe SpaceX depends heavily on government contracts, so the fact that they're private isn't terribly relevant.

This headline can give newbies the wrong impression. Mindset and environment are just as important as the substance.

A a more accurate headline would be "Months of intensive therapy set the stage for Magic Mushrooms to help smokers kick the habit"

I know people will see headlines like this, try to "cure" something with psychedelics, end up getting themselves into some sort of trouble and then blame the substances for their problems.