southerndrift

I don’t understand why it’s encouraged (in some companies) to discuss politics at work in a way that leads to internal issues. Purely from a commercial stance, team cohesion has a positive impact on people and product. Why do anything to disturb that?

Fail early. You can achieve cohesion by letting go of everybody who cannot discuss politics in a civilized manner. Then you can be sure that the remaining team can discuss anything without any problems.

On the other hand, is it cohesion when the team is held together by outer influences?

This assumes that parents know what's best for their children. Is it just to the children that parents can spend a fortune on miseducating their children? (The Dutch family wasn't rich, but there can be seen that parents can totally go astray. [1])

Being a rich son (70% work for their father according to a linked study in the article) is essentially like being Tim Cook. It's a nice job that pays handsomely but who has the character to walk away and do what they really want to do? This links back to the beginning of my comment: do rich parents prepare their children for that move or do they try everything to lock their children into their heritage?

This is not an argument for standardized schooling. I am just wondering if being a rich kid actually comes with a huge price.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21260112

Hasn't Maxwell not mentioned Maxwell's equations when giving a speech about the state of the art of science? If a great scientist can be unsure about a theory, it's not surprising that an average reviewer can be, too.

How else can facebook prevent people from moving on to wechat with its internal payment system? Why should people stick to facebook if wechat can offer a whole bunch of services that need (micro) transactions?

That's the opposite. The soldiers make it work for the general whereas the German word would be used if it works 'in general' but doesn't when it's demonstrated to the general during an inspection.

Why not both: do the live demo but have some slides prepared just in case.

Where do you get a $1/month VPS?

Why would a diesel generator put them on equal levels? Even if you assume that an electric engine has 100% efficiency, you lose energy because

* per amount of energy, batteries are heavier than gasoline tanks so accelerating needs more energy

* charging batteries is not 100% efficient

Is that all balanced by the generator operating at optimal conditions?

I would assume that there will be a neighbor who offers a money service to the village. He will have a Libra account. No need to drive to the next big city. Your family can go to that person who they trust and he will hand out the money.

And if it is not Facebook, it will be WeChat. Then you first have to send your Libra coins to a suitable exchange that will wire it to that neighbor.

Actually, many African countries have mobile money, so you won't wire it to a WeChat exchange but to a mobile money exchange [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_MobileMoney

I am not asking what happens if I short shares but if I lend to others my shares. If the broker cannot buy those shares back, I face the risk of losing them, don't I?

So I am wondering: does using those brokers come with the risk that I end up owning nothing if I pick a very successful stock?

But the broker doesn't necessarily lend out the shares to his own clients. And even if he does, how does he get back the shares from the person who went long? The broker will have to buy other shares. But if the price of those shares is exploding, who is willing to sell them?

Does this mean that using those brokers means that I 'nakedly' own those shares? I.e. if I actually pick a successful share and the price explodes, the shorter or the broker cannot buy it back and I end up owning nothing?

With all the people shorting Tesla, who will own Tesla if Tesla succeeds and the price explodes?

The limit of the airline metaphor is that uber doesn't have to own the fleet. The fight is in subsidizing rides, like with lift. Then comes softbank and they pick the winner because they have the deepest pockets. Who would go up against those pockets but a bigger player? And then, uber can offer them shares and the fight is over and uber keeps on winning.

Regarding the price checkking: it's one thing to compare ride prices if you fly once a month but it is something else if you buy a ride 5 times a day. Like businesses buying flights from one supplier, consumers will buy rides from one app.

Uber will be profitable once nobody is willing to burn more money. That day will come sooner than later.

Uber has thought this through because their name is not lift, but uber.

The airline argument is quite convincing.

How about the frequency and the fair price? It's worthwhile to compare airline rates. It's more difficult for in-app uber purchases that are more frequent for less money. Will people compare rates? Especially if rates are not cheaper elsewhere? The biggest network will have the best cost structure.

Uber can keep other companies alive by slightly rising their prices. So no monopoly problem but nobody who has the money to innovate. Then they have the money for the most advanced technology and by adjusting their prices they decide how big their market share is.

Nothing is stopping you. But will you retain your market if you are not the biggest network? You need deep enough pockets to get 50% of the market or Uber will get its share back once you try to be profitable since they can leverage their scale.

Uber is preparing for a future with self-driving cars. If they are the network to rent those cares, they will make back everything and more. The manufacturers and even the self-driving software won't matter. All that matters is being the app that summons the rides.

The network is not as defensible as facebook, but all the other players would have to stick together to dethrone them.

Have you checked that those were denim jeans at Primark? Last time I checked all of their trousers were made in huge parts out of synthetic yarn.

In which way is it portrayed and what is the reality?

Where do you get the people to entrust millions or billions? The organization will be flooded with networks of people who will scam away all money.

Such an organization has to be grown slowly. But that takes too much time if you have the opportunity to manage huge amounts of money right away.

and fasting does not do your body any good.

Wasn't there a study that showed that at least mice live longer if they fast?

How does 100TB.com beat Hetzner? Their $5 virtual server comes with 2TB whereas Hetzner offers 20TB.

The only thing we can say with confidence about these "goods" is that they were heavy, and not necessarily something you want... especially if they are to be repaid "with usury" at some future undisclosed time of reckoning, as in the story!

But having talents, isn't that essence of being human? Having talents and using them? Who are we if we fear having talents?

Maybe I am missing some subtleties, but why is talent not money?

The Homeric talent "as money" was probably the gold equivalent of the value of an ox or a cow.[2] Based on a statement from a later Greek source that "the talent of Homer was equal in amount to the later Daric [... i.e.] two Attic drachmas" and analysis of finds from a Mycenaean grave-shaft, a weight of about 8.4 gm can be established for this money talent.[2] The talent of gold was known to Homer, who described how Achilles gave a half-talent of gold to Antilochus as a prize.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talent_(measurement)

Why do you think so?

Wiley was obsessed with starting a business. One day it was a smoothie stand, the next it would be a gallery, then a VR headset company, then a ‘coder’, then a spaceship building company.

To me, this sounds like the father shouldn't be worried too much. Wiley loved the way his father was to the point of wanting to emulate him.

Damn, could that kid dance.

The kid gave it all, like his father. Without such a role model, would he have been the same kid? Would he have had such a precious life?

I know. Unfortunately, that metaphor is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

But humans are not snakes.

But behavior is not a skin, but the core, unless it is an act.

Hasn't much of the work been incorporated into the Alien movies?

While still online, let people download a bunch of signed tokens from a server in exchange for their public key, which is linked to their phone number and thus identity and credit card.

Now when offline, they can create their tickets by linking a token to a fare and sign that with their private key.

At check-in, collect those tickets and when online again, charge the credit card.

It is not futile. You can drive to a race track and have fun without having to rely on a trailer and another car.