100% this - Cursor's new inline multi-file editing with claude is staggeringly good. And it's _so_ new still.
2,060 karma · joined June 17, 2017
We've got to live somewhere, and the new house has a mortgage at 7.65%. The principle decrease + cashflow from holding the existing property barely offsets the interest cost on new property.
So I guess the way to look at it is a zero-cost, but potentially highly stressful, bet on the property market appreciating?
Primary home with ~400k in equity, 400k loan @ 2.7%. Moving and bought a new house, and deciding what to do.
Market is hot, equity up 300k in 3 years.
I always believed in this "don't sell property, you can always generate income" but now that i'm facing this decision, I don't see how to justify keeping it.
Cashflow (factoring in expenses/maintenance/vacancy) from renting would be ~$400/mo. If you include principal paydown, then it'd be ~$2000/mo.
Selling the property, and taking the equity seems like the best option. Either a) rolling it into the new house or b) investing it in nearly risk free muni's. Both of those would net me more than keeping the property with a significantly better risk adjusted return.
If you live in a place with wild property appreciation over the last 4 years (most of the country), then I don't really see how it makes sense to keep a property. What am I missing?
And we do our best to comply with the letter of all the different open licenses, but it's hard as a small pub with a writing staff.
Which is why this scam is so profitable.
It's like arguing that punitive fines for minor infractions, like jaywalking or speeding, would be justified because "you broke the law".
The outrageous maximum penalties ($100k/infringement), the nuance of fair use and copyright law, and the resulting cost of defending yourself means that the only solution if you don't have excellent in-house counsel is you have to settle for what they ask. It's legal extortion.
As an owner of a website with a lot of content published over the years, a copyright claim pops up with "settlement" offers between $200-$1k to make it go away.
50% of the time it's an outright scam like this.
45% it's legit, we pay the settlement, and a writer gets a reminder about citing images and copyright.
5% is the worst, where a photographer will have a open license like CC BY-NC, then a law firm will contact photographers with images licensed like that, and partner with them to send demand letters to businesses improperly using the open license and do the settlement shakedown. While technically in violation because we're a business with ad revenue, it's nefarious because it's exploiting nuances of open licenses and writers on schedule missing the NC part of the license review. We get it right most of the time, but mistakes happen. Feels dirty to leverage CC to make money doing copyright shakedowns.
Standardized packs for low-end ebikes would be wonderful.
Man this was one of the biggest silver linings on the pandemic. Chase allowed groceries and home improvement purchases to be paid for with points. 1.5x redemption. Paid for all the materials for my home renovation with them.
Our business has a significant amount of cc spend because of ad networks that don't charge processing fees, and high CC limits acting as nearly free lines-of-credit. This generates something like ~$100k annually in points value for us.
We got some opinions from a few tax attorneys and CPAs a while back on how to handle this, and the consensus was clear that as long as points stay in the programs and are redeemed for flights/hotels/etc, they won't need to be recorded as rebate to expenses or as income.
Applying the rewards against your balance should be recorded as rebate against expenses rather than income. Also, worth noting that some cash back programs have started issuing 1099s, depending if it's a "Bonus" or percent of spend.
1 - https://www.capitalallocators.com/podcast/blue-triton-brands...
What about ads inside airports? Bus stops? Transit stations?
Where will the money come from to fill in the budget gaps left by removing these ads?
If I'm at a local minor league baseball game, and see an ad for "Bill the plumber", how is that a problem? It's local community supporting local community spaces. If Bud Lite buys a spot next to them, great! More dollars for my local ballpark so they can stay open.
The nature of local, physical advertising is that the ad dollars stay (mostly)* local.
* Mostly because clearchannel manages most billboards on roadways around the country. They pay rent to landowners, who may or may not be local, but they also pay local taxes. So not perfect dollar retention.
The adjectives you used are the opposite of mass market. Thus mass-market advertising doesn't work, so those businesses don't spend money in those channels.
The ads that work on billboards are very high dollar services businesses, or multi-nationals who need to spend through budgets everywhere for neilsen scores.
For example: insurance, lawyers and RE agents - they need to build "trust" through name recognition so when you do decide to make that purchase/call, you call them first.
A retro game store billboard would be awesome - but how many people driving the interstate are interested in vintage games vs how many people will be buying a home in their lifetime?
There's nothing stopping any business from buying billboards, but the economics just don't make sense apart from the whole "getting your face on a billboard" schtick that's fun.
On the flip side, if you've ever been to a local sporting event like farm league baseball or local race track, you'll see all sorts of billboards for funky little local shops and services. That's cause the ads cost a couple hundred bucks and come with perks like tickets for your employees, and you're supporting your local community, so the ROI doesn't really matter.
Roadside billboards cost thousands per month and typically come with pretty high minimums.
> money is fungible
What?
It does exist, but then the cost of the bike sharing would have be borne by
a) users of the bike system - this would impact ridership and equity of access. b) local govt - budget would have to come from somewhere.
considering b) would likely mean that the project wouldn't get past planning, really a) is the only alternative.
Everything is a tradeoff.
From my perspective, I'll take shitty ads if the money earned from those ads is spent on significant quality of life improvements. Same reason I support legalization and taxation of gambling, drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, etc where the revenues pay for schools, social services, etc.
> Most billboards are from [inter]national corporations. Local businesses usually rely on the most effective form of advertising, word-of-mouth. Some of the most successful local businesses in my city have literally never paid for advertising.
Are they? From my experience, at least on roads here in the US, the majority seems to be realtors, ambulance chasing attorneys, restaurants/casinos/road-side attractions coming up, and various political/religious/group-affiliation advertising. Corporations make up some of course, but it's a lot more mixed than, say, TV ads.
We had to hire someone to review ads in Google's ad transparency center. Every day they find dozens of new domains, with the same creatives - all those fake button "Continue"/"Download" click-trick ads.
The same process every ad. Report to google, block on google, and send to a third party ad security company. The volume didn't start going down until we hired that third party ad security company to do blocking post-auction. Google continues to let the exact same creatives come through, just with different domains/ad accounts. Their models can handle this, they just choose not too.
Seeing the CPMs these scam ads pay, it must make up a big portion of a reportable revenue source for google, where blocking would hurt their numbers for the quarter.
Facebook doesn't sell data to other ad companies because that'd be giving away the very thing that makes it the most valuable advertising company in the world. Hell, we spend a huge amount on facebook, and it's impossible for us to get reports on basic things like "Spend per placement per hour".
The only area that I could see them _maybe_ still monetizing an opt'ed out user is with Meta Audience Network, but I bet they would still opt them out of seeing ads on 3rd party sites that have MAN ads in their stack because that business segment is likely small compared to potential PR and fines in the EU.
This could be why you see less targeted ads. Scams, high-ctr and broad appeal ads thrive in places where targeting doesn't exist because their margins can support it. Watch a show on cable or broadcast these days for an example of this.
How would facebook monetize non-ad-enabled customers?
He did have a long term lease with her. From the ladies lawyer:
> “This is not a short-term Airbnb — it was a long term rental, they had a separate long term rental agreement and there’s documentation to prove it. In fact, the City of Los Angeles has sent multiple letters to Jovanovic outlining to him why his conduct is illegal and must cease.”
That's the whole premise of this legal loophole. He didn't have the permits to rent long term, yet did so because airbnb makes it easy and he didn't know the law.
Then he was nice and let her stay longer, which gave airbnb an out for liability.
Then she realized she had an ace up her sleeve and is milking the system to get a payout.
The net result is that this lady wins, but society loses because people will read this, and start question if it's actually worth taking advantage of SB9 and building that ADU for long-term leases, if something like this can happen if you make a single mistake with the law or rental ordinances.
This type of thing just hurts housing availability, and drives consolidation to corporate landlords.
It's lack of natural light and the size of the typical floor plate for offices that often render the projects impossible without significant structural rework.
This building in manhattan is in the range of ~$400/500/sqft to renovate existing offices to apts [1]. ANd that's with concessions from Adams in NYC to allow for windowless office rooms in the space.
Still likely better economics than a ground up rebuild, but likely only because the project can be completed and permitted much faster than a ground up project in big cities.
1 - https://gothamist.com/news/the-countrys-biggest-office-to-ap...
What LLMs are you using?