[1] On Google maps view, i can't maybe 8 houses there? https://www.google.com/maps/place/Jack+Wade,+AK+99732/@64.15.... But it's on wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Wade,_Alaska
6,863 karma · joined August 22, 2017
[1] On Google maps view, i can't maybe 8 houses there? https://www.google.com/maps/place/Jack+Wade,+AK+99732/@64.15.... But it's on wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Wade,_Alaska
Edit: what would be really cool is if I could leave a note on a page saying "hey, I visited this page and I'm looking to connect with other people interested in the Peruvian Foovius Barivius Moth"... ping me
I think that this list might be talking about unsecured claims though. I think that secured claims might be separate. So, for example, if an individual declares bankruptcy and they owe $500k on their house, that claim would come before child support payments. I am definitely not a lawyer and bankruptcy law strikes me as particularly complex.
The third priority is tough to parse. From looking over it quickly, it seems like this might be claims from doing business between when i file bankruptcy and when i go into foreclosure. Again, not a lawyer, but my guess here is that if I'm a store and I file bankruptcy on Monday, but don't have a trustee until Wednesday, and I put in an order for a palette of water bottles on Tuesday, then the distributor of the water bottles might have a priority claim.
That said, I understand why people hate subscriptions. I'm not claiming there are no downsides. And also, yes, as you pointed out, this is the military/industrial complex, so who knows how this will play out.
YC certainly provides a nice package to founders. But they are definitely in the unicorn business.
+1 to this.
There are definitely different models for VCs, but in general, the big "brand name" VCs are in the unicorn business. This tweet [1] does a succinct job of explaining why.
The result of this is that as a founder, if you own 49% of your company and big-VC investors own 51% of your company and someone comes along offering to buy your company for $100m, your investors are likely to turn it down. For you, that would likely be a life-changing amount of money. For a big-name VC, it doesn't move the needle. In most cases, they'd rather roll the dice and end up with $0 then get their share of a $100m exit.
[1] https://twitter.com/jasonlk/status/1670021902612549632?ref_s...
The end result of this situation would probably be a mad dash to automate away any blue collar work, which may not be such a great thing.
It’s a tough problem.
On the other hand, sometimes you are hiring to fill a specific position rather than to generally grow a team. You have two candidates you like and you can't afford to let candidate 1 sit on the offer for three weeks. People treat it like it's nefarious on the part of the company to ever have an exploding offer, but sometimes it's just not practical.
But the reality is that most code is written in a language that's good enough. It's a metal wrench that might be showing some rust. Do I think that PHP is a good language to start a project with today? Of course not. Do I care if you wrote your site 15 years ago and it still runs on PHP? Not really.
I think I agree with the author here. Code is a tool. This is like saying "a wrench can be the solution and a good wrench is even more valuable". I'm sure that car mechanics have very strong opinions about various wrenches. But I'm paying to get my car fixed. Sure, it's nice to hear that your shop has the latest equipment, but at the end of the day, the thing that matters most is that you can fix my car.
Even as a developer, I hardly care about the code quality or what language you use if you provide a good and reliable service. I've never thought to myself, geez, I love AWS, but I really wish they'd move away from Java.
I know people like to rail against it, but I actually like the SAAS model. It keeps incentives aligned. It used to be that I might shell out $200 for a piece of productivity software. Now, I might pay $10 a month instead. The thing is that under the old model, a company was incentivized by make a sale but retention didn’t matter. Now, a sale is almost worthless, but retention is very valuable. Yes, over time I will pay much more with SAAS, but I also have companies that are incentivized to keep the software working. It doesn’t matter that I have a perpetual license on accounting software I bought in 2005… it no longer functions with my operating system anyway. SAAS helps solve this problem.
But, for example, I recently signed up for HubSpot as a CRM and while I think that overall, the product is well organized and intuitive, it's just difficult if not impossible to make it as intuitive as a smartphone. The product tours really help.
Step 2: open app, see your stupid tour, close it
Step 3: click around, realize this might be what I’m looking for but more complex than I realized
Step 4: look for that maybe-not-so-stupid tour again, realize there’s no way to restart it
It’s not all that different than opening up a piece of assembly-needed furniture that arrives in the mail. Usually I look to see it I can build it intuitively before I go to the instruction manual
A framework 13" is 15.9mm thick and weighs 2.9 lbs. A macbook air M1 is 16.1mm thick and weights 2.8 lbs. So it's pretty darn close.
I'm sure that thinner and lighter laptops exist, but yeah, the framework is pretty thin. And at a certain point, it stops mattering. Being thinner wouldn't really provide much utility at this point.
The fact is that repairability is just not profitable for companies like Apple or Dell. They would rather you replace your entire computer when your screen cracks. But I very much hope that enough people do care about repairability to keep Framework afloat (and profitable). As an owner, I was astonished how easy it is to take this thing apart and replace things; I would guess that most of my non-technical friends can probably replace a monitor or a touchpad on one of these laptops with very little difficulty.
The best product managers I know seem to have a natural talent for it. And plenty of them found their way into it by accident. Maybe they were working in another part of the business, but realized that they had a knack for understanding how the product could be better. Maybe someone told them that they would be good at it.
My take on it is that yes, lots of people want to be involved in tech, but don’t know how to code. Product management is a Way to do that that’s accessible to non-engineers. Some people will try it out and find that they have strong abilities at it, and many will fail at it. But I think it is seen as a desirable job.
That said, I think it’s an incredibly hard job as well. You have to deal with people above you constantly pushing on deadlines, you have to stay super on top of things, and you won’t succeed, unless you earn the respect of the engineers you work with. It can be very demanding. Most people don’t seem to have the skill set for it. And if you are in a company with a bad culture, it can be a very thankless job.
Lol. Millions to JP Morgan would be like dollars to the average person. Upper management there is not making any big decisions over anything involving less than 9, and maybe 10 zeros.