Uh I mean, not that I'm a cryptocurrency enthusiast by any means, but wouldn't prudent estate planning include a prepared will or some sort of next-of-kin document that includes a mechanism for access to your accounts/passwords/passphrases?
2,298 karma · joined March 16, 2015
1) That would make the previous 3rd generation before this current iteration (one cycle ago) the generation that experienced WW1 - they'd hardly be ignorant of the horrors of world war.
2) Boomers (your 2nd generation) went through Vietnam and the cold war, so I'm not sure they often felt like the UN was safeguarding them from, well, anything.
3) Boomers also seem to be indifferent and apathetic about climate change, so I'm not sure how that really fits into the narrative.
The most likely answer is that most people just feel indifferent about things that feel out of their control. Boomers likely didn't spend every waking minute about how close they were at several points to being ended by thermonuclear war.
Hell, even for the greatest generation (well, except for Murrow obviously) let McCarthy run rampant right after WW2 until he tried to go after the army.
First-sale just means that the sellers don't need permission from nintendo to sell the items everywhere.
Seems like probably both, no?
> Users on the used-Nintendo forum thread have postulated that counterfeit retro Nintendo cartridges have been an open secret among Amazon sellers for some time.
I'm guessing Nintendo isn't too happy about this (in general they seem very concerned about their brand) and Amazon is likely happy to stem some of the negative backlash about counterfeit goods on their platform.
I'm not surprised to see that Apple products are likely to fall under this umbrella - another company very concerned about their brand.
Quite interesting if you think about it! A bit of an antithesis to the idea that what's on the web is preserved forever.
Interesting take! I've always thought it's because of the change in viewpoints towards marijuana (and to a lesser extent, psychedelics).
Attitudes towards recreational marijuana use are far more liberal than they used to be. As it became more socially acceptable it caused much of America to re-examine attitudes towards penalizing drug usage in general, if only because it felt draconian to imprison someone from their milieu for smoking their illegal drug of choice (marijuana).
To be totally blunt, I also suspect a large part of it is that the founders would like to be in the bay area.
I don't mean that as a slight either - I think if you're spending a good portion of your life on something, you might as well do it in a place you enjoy spending time in!
Yes, and they're quite adept at it even if you don't think you're leaving a trace. For example: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2014-55
Yes!
The way I've started explaining this to people is it's like going to the gym: I like going to the gym. I make sure to go to the gym regularly. But I can't spend all day at the gym, and if I spend many hours at the gym I'm going to be very sore and tired and need a day or two off.
To be fair, that would be the 5% :).
This is just one example, but I suppose what I'm trying to say is that this will likely become the norm not the exception.
The way for you to win would be to counter my argument: Show the amount of money/time/etc. that went into resolving the AIDS crisis was minimal (and of course, you'll have to argue what minimal means). I can easily find resources to the contrary [0] [1].
> However, maybe you'll pay attention to all the dire predictions in the next ten years, and maybe ten years after that you'll notice that the world just keeps getting better despite all the people claiming it's worse and will end soon.
It keeps getting better because people keep devoting time, energy, and money into resolving these problems. "The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance" and all that. We've seen what happens when people stop being vigilant: Things like the return of measles in the US.
I'm mostly shocked to hear this sentiment on HN of all places; IT is notorious for encountering "the servers run fine and never go down, what do we pay you for?" attitudes. Surprised you don't understand how it applies to other areas of life.
0: http://www.healthdata.org/news-release/first-long-term-study... 1: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-11/18/077r-...
This is literally what the OP was about.
If you don't understand the other side, or worse mischaracterize them, how can you possibly hope to bridge the divide?
See also: Ozone holes, Y2K, etc.
I mean, just make the earth uninhabitable for humans. There are a few ways to accomplish this; even excluding climate change, nuclear weapons were and continue to be one such specter as the article alludes to.
Sure, some people will continue to eke out an existence even then, but it's quite easy to imagine humanity perishing over the course of a few generations after an event like that.
Also, when people say things like "humanity being wiped out" they usually don't literally mean "extinction of homo sapiens". They usually mean "quality of life significantly degraded" such that life resembles a Mad Max movie more than what we know today.
Most (but not all, obviously) unicorns could easily be profitable if they chose to be. It would come at the expense of growth and R&D, but they would be profitable nonetheless. Growth is just valued much more heavily in the current market.
If you look at S-1s or even recent public unicorn earning statements, most of their losses stem from outsized increases in R&D/etc. expenditures despite healthily increasing revenues. The most recent example I can think of off the top of my head is Dropbox.
Er, we're talking about them right now. College sports are extremely regional but still have significant national appeal. Many, many people tune into SEC conference games who have no connection to the SEC.
If you think people wouldn't watch an SEC-only league (I'm using the SEC here because it's the most obvious example), then I think that betrays your knowledge of college sports.
Uh, this would be true of many states but not of states like CA/TX/FL.
There would absolutely be demand for a CA-only athletic organization.
There's a reason California did this and not, say, Alaska (no offense to Alaska of course).
I'm more interested in the ramifications, and I don't just mean the obvious ones like "potential tech recession" (maybe, who knows) or "more due diligence" (unlikely, or if so likely to swing completely the other direction).
Given that "private markets are the new public markets" I wonder if this will just encourage more companies to stay private either indefinitely (e.g. MailChimp though obviously I realize they are an exception) or for a period far beyond the norm (AirBnB) to wait for a more favorable time to IPO. Maybe we'll see companies switch to RSUs instead of ISOs as this becomes more common.
Despite being a strong believer in it, I've worked at places that did blameless post-mortems and it was sometimes frustrating because remediation often felt like a second-class citizen. Remediation is often much more difficult in these environments because systematic changes can obviously much more complex than "fixing" an individual's behavior.
If someone pushes the big red button accidentally I'm fully on-board with the "well what led them to push it and why were there no safeguards?" but it also kinda sucks if you spend so much time on that conversation that there's no time left for "ok, who's going install the confirmation screen for the big red button?"
Sometimes the "remediation" was even just "well, that's just the way it is and we can't do anything about it easily, but hopefully the post-mortem itself will serve as a way to inform people not to push the big red button" which is obviously frustrating because memories are short and people come and go quite frequently in the tech industry.
Anyway, and this might be obvious to some, but remediation is important and sometimes incredibly difficult in these environments. Adopting such an environment requires a commitment to actually fixing the systemic issues. It can sometimes feel more frustrating than "blameworthy" post-mortems especially if it's the same individual(s) over and over again.
By that I mean: I don't think the e-cigarettes themselves are wildly more complicated to produce than the cartridges--though I might be wrong on that.
Wait, isn't that exactly the problem that's lead to what's happened here? Unregulated THC cartridges causing health issues in states where marijuana is still illegal?
> Are they profitable?
Profitability isn't the end-all metric for a company. Amazon famously circles around the profitable/not-profitable line frequently and few people have doubts about Amazon's viability as a company.
Dropbox reported ~20% growth in revenue YoY and seems to have dumped most of that into R&D (you can see their R&D costs have grown by nearly as much as their revenue has). Other operating expenses remain mostly the same.
> There is no better evidence that Dropbox is just a feature than for the same price that Dropbox charges for 1Tb of storage, you can get the full Microsoft Office Suite for up to six users and a total of 6TB of storage.
Ok, but a growing subset of people clearly choose Dropbox. There are huge advantages to being a first mover that are sometimes insurmountable, even for gigantic companies. The zune was in many ways "superior" to the iPod, but we all know how that story ended.
Being pressured into a sexual relationship by her superior, who was by many standards the most powerful person on the planet at the time?
Like, regardless of whether you believe that's true or not it's pretty obvious how people might arrive at the conclusion that she was a victim and why there's debate about it.
Just pointing out that people under the age of majority are, in fact, restricted from trading securities (for obvious reasons).