yellowbanana

This is art

The store of value argument is now dead.

This has nothing to do with motivation,

If you start a company and that company becomes succesfull you will end up rich.

> Being a CEO/leader doesn't require some skill set that's given to you from some mythical watery being just because you're special.

Controlling a company requires shares, and shares are networth, it is good that companies are controlled by people who most understand them, and those are the people who started/built them.

There seems to be an illogical hate to people who have build companies that ended up being successfull.

If you are a small business ( non mega successfull company ), everyone is with you, "Small businesses are the backbone of our economy ", but then you win.

> The alternative to sending weapons being Ukraine being brutally beaten rather than given a chance to defend itself.

I really don't understand this point, Ukraine is very unlikely to win against russia. giving them more weapons is just going to make the war long and more brutal.

The sane thing is the diplomatic route and give putin enought to stop the war.

Otherwise sending weapons for ukraine to fight russia, is like supporting your friend with a knife to a gun fight.

Unless it's important enought that the west is willing to fight alongside ukraine, this will just lead to more loss of life and end up russia winning.

it's generalizing rather than looking at the individual characteristics.

If someone cant learn fast and that's an in important requirement to a position don't hire them.

But if the idea is statistically speaking old people don't learn fast so I am going to generalize and conclude I can't hire "old" people，that's bad and also is missing out.

This is the same idea behind racism, sexism, ... Assuming that because on average something is true so an individual coming to you will be judged first on an average of the group you see them in, above their Individual characteristics

> As usual, HN users are making lots of interesting assumptions (some comments to a conspiracy level) on the intention here...

> But in the reality, there are many smaller creators who is frequently being harassed by trolls (have you heard about those young Chinese patriots trolling over Korean and Japanese channels?) and one of their tool is the dislike button. And creators have been complaining about this for many years, so I would say in fact YT was super lazy on this particular issue, but at least better late than never...

That would be an escuse.

The solution to that problem is not changing that option for the whole platform

Make targeted changes but not just change everywhere.

Removing the ability to assess how other people think of all the videos is big

They can just disable comments ( the poster of the video )

Maybe now they can consider allowing them. since they can disable comments and no dislikes, and get 1 billion likes.

This is attacking a problem that happens 1% of the time to ruin experience for the 99% of the time.

=> I mean, if a multi-month, google-scale experiment says it helps, it... probably does?

Helps who?

Youtube user incentives are not necessary alligned the with company incentives. If it helps by making you a "peaceful" consumer who can't assess on average how other people think.

Maybe it is good for youtube but is it good for you.

They should take some months before commiting to a decision , if they still want it after then, they should do it.

Yes it makes sense for the poor friend to try to get some money.

The difference in wealth is so large that the poor friend's life can be easily changed.

It would be smart for the rich guy to change his friends' lives without being asked, if they were friends and still close enough.

It's also true that people will also overestimate their friendship with the rich guy because now the king can easily change your life.

There is no way someone who suddenly becomes very rich will keep most of the past relationships.

From close friendships to the bulies from highschool, almost everyone will try to reach out and try to get some of that cash.

It's also likely that the old friends can change, and start to see you as source of money.

And can definitely ruin the friendship, if every few weeks a request for 300k to fix some stuff comes up.

But it's more likely that the new friends are already rich, same 100M+ Club, whom you meet at the Fundraising events, Private Jet Review Meetup, and other events rich people do.

So i think it would be natural and they would not be interested in your money.

I would advise against that, because a decision to start a business basing on that short term inspiration/envy moment would not last.

It's better to let the emotions play out, and not make decisions basing on them.

The fact that they will be able to do it, is problem, we should not put ourselves in position to rely on their future morality.

Github at this point needs to be open source, atleast then they would be an easier way out.

New developers will get in using vscode web ide, and have no easy way to switch.

It's amazing how github is not open source, the biggest host of open source software is closed source?

News for programmers, would not really imply normal news is unsuitable for programmers.

Since content is often relevant to a particular culture, and streaming platforms collect content together, focusing on content from one culture can make sense.

Neflix is like the news, and Neflix for Black People/Culture would be like HN.

For me the most helpful general guideline has been. Make the code easy to change.

I can break rules like DRY, if the repeating myself makes it easy to change.

There is a default opposition on anything that twitter activists have been protesting for in the past few years

Netflix for Africans Netflix for Asians Netflix for Indians ... sounds normal.

But

Netflix for Black People Netflix for Women Netflix for LGBT

Will definitely cause an outrage

An other example on how we are tribal, even if the tribes are just activists vs non-activists.

They all fight for one goal, having a nation named palestine, calling them palestine/palestinians makes sense.

I like this but i don't like that it is not open source.

Yes and mighty will keep increasing prices as the developers can now ship any horribly optimized thing.

Mighty can succeed yes, but it's success would be bad for the ecosystem.

Centralized processing of all computing, would just make current issues like censorship, security issues worse.

I would guess that it is something mobile related. Android?

Are they going to limit the volum of the transactions, or it's trusting the investors.

It would be better if they gave more details on it.

What are the benefits for a company to list here?

What are the current examples of company that exists now that fit that ideal long-term vision?

In my opinion yes,

I wouldn't like it but it's their network, i would hope that that wouldn't be a good business decision and their competitors would not do that.

Google regardless of it's size is still private, and should be allowed to host who it wants or doesn't, same as you should be forced to host visitors you dont want.

Free speech is that they shouldn't be a law by a government to punish expression of ideas or opinions.

citizens or companies should be allowed to host and not host whoever they want.