zarro

If we could make bets according to the markets perception of the Nature-Nurture debate, my feeling is that natures role is undervalued.

Its incredible that the author would think that they are in a position to discipline the engineer, and not rethink their organizational incentive structure.

The whole point of a company is to maximize the value that it creates and to that end set up an incentive structure to develop and maintain people that are able to create that value which means rewarding them to keep everyones interests aligned.

Using the "company doesn't promote people unless they've worked in a role for a least 3 years" is the biggest pile of shit excuse I see all the time. If zuckerberg can prove that he can provide enough value to be a billionaire by 30, certainly there should be a path to director or CEO regardless of age, within any organization worth its salt, for someone that can provide that same value, without checkboxes for attendance.

Just because you attended the lecture doesn't mean you should be able to prevent someone from getting an A who ditched every lecture but can easily ace the exams.

Regardless of the long term trends toward populations moving toward the city, I don't see why most newly built suburban homes after 2025 wouldn't come with a Tesla (or competitor) solar roof.

The 20-50k that it would cost would just get absorbed into the mortgage and become an asset that would increase the value of the home - besides that, over the over a 30 year period, if you are able to capture even half that value in electricity savings, it becomes a no brainer as it would cost what a normal roof costs anyway.

There are also the benefits of more efficient energy transmission and resiliency of micro-grids as just bonuses.

I am more concerned that they are using the idea that this "would give the internet giant an unfair advantage by denying access to users' data" as a pretext for "We will no longer be able to spy and spoof efficiently on our customers".

In my opinion, the telecoms and government give us a lot more reasons for concern than google. Its not in googles best interest to become known for censorship, customers will just use another browser and search engine (some already have), but you don't have the same degree of recourse with government and telecom control.

I am more concerned that they are using the idea that this "would give the internet giant an unfair advantage by denying access to users' data" as a pretext for "We will no longer be able to spy and spoof efficiently on our customers".

In my opinion, the telecoms and government give us a lot more reasons for concern than google. Its not in googles best interest to become known for censorship, customers will just use another browser and search engine (some already have), but you don't have the same degree of recourse with government and telecom control.

Thats fine, the way it will come to pass is some people wont trust crypto and stick with traditional currency.

The crypto that will win, will be the one that people adopt to a higher frequency over traditional currency because it will bring them more value over time. Then the ones who will be upset at this will be the ones who benefited from the inefficiencies of the prior monetary system, which by its very nature was prejudiced.

The whole point of blockchain is for it to be not regulated or controlled by anyone - especially the government. Its control should be decentralized, its transaction history and owners private,and its ledger impossible to manipulate without destroying.

He who achieves this will be the currency of the future.

"On a political sickbed a people is usually rejuvenated and rediscovers its spirit, after having gradually lost it in seeking and preserving power. Culture owes its peaks to politically weak ages.”

Anyone guess who?

Its real issue is not about the technology, its about its misuse and the fact that we don't have enforcement of the privacy we expect.

Tracking a citizens location, and face or collecting his personal data or profile information without express consent with option to OPT OUT should be unconstitutional unless there is a 1. a warrant 2. a right to jury trial and appeal.

Mass surveillance, unlawful indiscriminate data collection, and no way to appeal/defend ones-self is the problem, NOT the tech, which as stated could have many beneficial uses as tools, if used appropriately.

I don't think that they understood your next level satire.

How about keeping a plan secret makes you more motivated to accomplish it.

In the opposite case, you were already rewarded before the successful action, in this case, you will only get the reward once it succeeds. It forces you to focus on accomplishing instead of on giving off the appearance that you will be successful.

Although often the former may depend on the latter.

crypto will save us

+1 rep

No surprise here. I took a year off to travel through central and south america and noticed:

America cost of living is really high, healthcare really expensive. You get a much better value on $ in Central or South America, and can collect SS or fly home to get medical - or get it locally for cheap. There are cities like san miguell de allende or san cristobal that are primarily expats in awesome climates.

If you don't have much savings, you can have a much higher quality of life in retirement in mexico or Colombia than europe/us.

Halfway through, I also thought this was some next level satire.

Don't listen to these bums, there are much more people that agree with you. Its just that butt-hurt is a greater comment motivator than agreement.

Thought experiment Laura, lets imagine that in the future there is a quadrillion dollar company that started in 2020. Do you honestly believe the founder of that company would take your yc deal?