Yes, I hope so too. The Afghans have been taken advantage of by so many different groups in recent decades. It would be nice if this find ended up helping them build a new more prosperous life...but it's probably wishful thinking.
Consider this from her point of view. Here's a girl, that has never worked in "the real world", and has no idea what the costs of living and consequences of this debt will be. Technically she's not old enough to go to a bar, but she should be allowed to accrue a six-figure debt? Consider if this was any other industry. If you bought a product at a store that the retailer knew would break the second you took it home, or say a home from an owner that knows that the foundation is unstable, then there would be ways for the purchaser to invalidate the purchase. That's because in any transaction, the purchaser has the right to full disclosure of the product, so that they can make the decision to purchase with the full knowledge of the consequences. However, in the education field, there's a certain level of deceit that both the universities and lenders are complicit in: they know that they are charging excessively for a degree, based on the salary the student could expect to get with that degree.
Yes, it's a travesty that some private equity/LBO guy can have their debts removed, but not this poor girl. The law needs to be changed, especially when you consider how young she and others like her are when they make this decision. She's not considered old enough to drink, but it's okay to make her sign a document that says she is liable for a six-figure debt, for an asset that the lenders know is severely overvalued?
She was young when she made this choice. To suggest that she should be liable for the rest of her life for this decision is crazy. Student loans should be dischargeable under bankruptcy, or should be debt that one can negotiate with the lender. There's something wrong with allowing mortgage and credit card debt to be discharged by people who buy McMansions or go on vacations, but not to some poor girl wanting to get a college education.
If the law were changed to allow student loans to be discharged, then it would have the effect of lenders having to verify that the borrower would have a reasonable chance of paying the loan back. This would involve looking at the tuition costs and the expected salary that the degree in question would provide. If that were the case, there would be no way any lender would allow this girl (and the thousands of others like her) from pursuing such a degree at such a high cost. As a result, she (and others) would not have been able to attend college, thus decreasing enrollment nationwide, resulting in universities decreasing tuition in order attract sufficient students.
Supply and demand should be what determines the cost of any degree program. As long as the demand side is subsidized by the government through loans and debt that cannot be negotiated/discharged later on, then tuition costs will continue to rise and young lives will continue to be ruined.
"No skeptics believe there is a vast conspiracy of scientists working together ..."
uh, isn't that a suspect extrapolation? Just Google what Sen. Inhofe has to say on the subject.
Just like the article said, there is a significant overlap between those who deny AGW and those who deny evolution. And if over a century of empirical evidence is not enough to convince them that they're wrong, what good is a few decades worth of data?
The engineers in question are probably Chemical Engineers. If my college experience was any indication, Chem Engineers are some of the most right-wing people you'll ever meet. I guess it's because a lot of them go into the petroleum industry, and since they don't want to bite the hands that feed them, they end up swallowing the entire conservative ideology (including skepticism towards evolution).
Repetition is the best way to get the message into the heads of viewers. For example, if I asked you about a specific ad that ran on "60 Minutes" on CBS tonight (assuming you watched it), you might have trouble recollecting it since it was but one of many. But if it was on Hulu, which repeats the same ad over and over at each break, it would probably stick in your head longer.
It would work in the direct response/infomercial market. I can't imagine that products like the Snuggie or ShamWow took a lot to develop, and they've brought in millions. I guess the YC in this field would be Telebrands, run by AJ Khubani.
Biotech's problem is the length and cost associated with FDA regulation. Anytime there are political barriers in place to prevent you from selling directly to the consumer (whether it is justified or not), it's not something you can do without heavy financial support.
I think you may have misunderstood nailer's point. I think what he was trying to say is that if someone feels compelled to leave his country (and his family and everything he knows) to further his career elsewhere, then that must mean he must be really committed to that career path, and probably has the drive and motivation to succeed in that area, to a greater level than someone who wouldn't make that same sacrifice
Yeah I agree. If the margins are that high, then you'll have a ton of competitors come in, which will end up lowering it in the end. It may be possible in the beginning, before the competition forms.
yes, I agree! when you think about it, letting in highly educated people into the U.S. is a form of foreign aid, except it's directed towards to the U.S. The other countries use their resources and capital to educate the individuals, and America reaps the benefit from their knowledge!
I don't think that's fair. Although I do think America has been built up thanks to the "Protestant work ethic", there are other peoples with just as high a work ethic, who unfortunately haven't been able to exercise it because their countries have been in flux over the last few centuries. Think of the Chinese, and what they have managed to accomplish over just the last few decades in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Shenzhen, etc.
I agree. He's such a superb writer, that no matter how long or convoluted the article is, he can keep you enthralled right to the very end. His piece at the now-defunct Portfolio magazine was one of the best articles on the financial crisis that I have read:
http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfoli...
I always hoped that poor fellow ended up ok after that. My gut tells me that no one ever heard from him again. I don't think any other photograph defines courage as much as that one.
As for the business restrictions, what can you do? I do admire companies like Google that can take a moral stand against Beijing's censorship.
Chatroulette fits the YC model perfectly. Cheap to run, started by a young guy, builds an audience without marketing. Perhaps YC should build a Moscow office.
And the monetization will come. Twitter is valued 1B+, without making any revenues, I believe. Building the audience first is more important.
Its majority owned by an oligarch named Usmanov. Like most of his fellow post-Soviet oligarchs, they've been trying very hard to funnel their undeserved wealth out of Russia and into Western assets and banks.
I guess it's some consolation that this money is ending up in the hands of Silicon Valley (or Chicago, in the case of Groupon), instead of it just going to British soccer teams and yachts in the Riviera.
They already have a billion plus valuation, thanks to the investment by the Russian money laundering operation DST.
I really don't think location matters so much when it comes to dot coms. If you can get traction and revenue, does it really matter where you're located?
Your analogy is poor, not just because neither Buffet nor Gates are short. I agree that the author's list of companies was selective, and a larger list would have provided more insight. But revenue per employee is an important metric for understanding the scalability of a company.
Yes, Hastings himself. He's wealthy enough from Pure and Netflix. Also, he's always been very interested in education reform (charter schools and such).
In terms of lobbying, Google's approach is more benign, since they're not really looking for tax dollars to be directed at them, but rather to be able to conduct their business without government interference.
Can anyone tell me what the point is of having anti-trust regulations in the tech world? Having the FTC be able to block the AdMob acquisition, is that really something that is going to hurt the consumer?
It seems to me, that outside of the natural resource sector, you really don't need anti-trust laws since anything that is created with human labor (ie. software) can never really be monopolized. Even if Company A were to acquire all of their competitors and then try to raise prices exorbitantly to screw over the consumers, Company B would be able to enter the scene and collect market share from them. As long as we have startups, it seems impossible for any company to truly have and sustain a monopoly (unless you're dealing with things created by nature, instead of human labor).
Incredible. Their revenues were over 1.5B above analyst estimates.
And now they're within 30B of Microsoft, market cap wise. Unbelievable! Seeing the momentum their stock is on, and considering they'll have IPad revenue coming in over the next couple of quarters, it looks like sometime this year Apple will be worth more than MS...just think of how epic a comeback that is
Personally, I've lost access to more accounts due to forgetting the password rather than having those accounts be accessed by outsiders. So I agree with this study's conclusions.
Hmmm, very interesting. Are you doing it based on arbitrage, for mergers or when earnings come out? Which sectors do you dabble in?
I'm curious to how your strategy has worked out so far!
I would advise against anything like angel investing. You're not in a position where liquidity concerns wouldn't pop up, so having access to your money (should you need it) is important. Angel investing means tying down your cash for years...
I personally suggest you follow Nassim Taleb's advice (he of Black Swan fame), which you seem to be doing by keeping the majority in conservative,safe investments and looking to score big with the remaining. If you're looking for home-runs, I suggest options trading. There's a lot of volatility in the market, and if you time things right you should be able to generate a handsome return.
interesting interview. I never would have guessed Zoho was doing 40M in revenues, 12M+ in profits. They have a lot of great tools for small businesses. I have yet to find a better (and free!) CRM alternative than what they offer.Never again will Benioff or Ellison get a penny from me!