tdylan

Link to data/research?

From your comment it appears you weren't tracking avurately before, "close to". If you track energy expenditure as well as precise caloric intake you'll lose the same quantity of mass, give or take a few percent.

They didn't control the energy expenditure to any meaningful degree. Essentially worthless.

From what I've seen Garrys hypothesis was proven wrong by Alan Aragon.

It's not a coincidence that the two cities which have the most regulation on housing are also the two most expensive cities (SF & NY).

Patents seem to have a net negative effect, blatantly anti-competitive.

Any econ101 book will do. I'd suggest Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell.

Short version: Supply (housing) is being artificially restrained from being built out (through regulation). While demand (those moving to the area) keeps increasing. Low supply and high demand = higher prices.

Solution: Build more housing.

It's a simple problem, navigating the bureaucracy is the hard part.

Genuine as compared to other CEOs talking about their products. See: recent talk by Blackbery CEO.

Didn't think it was rude at all. For what it's worth I enjoy Steve's talks more than Elon's, I think it's fair to say he's the smartest VC out there. Incredible breadth of intellect, and from what it seems, a really cool guy.

I hope it's release on time, but Musk doesn't have the best track record when it comes to timing.

Well aware of the history, did not find it immediately relevant. Also, Steve doesn't sell shares of most/any of the companies he invests in, he donates them.

Only recognised the last one. It's Steve Jurvetson, from DFJ. He got the one of the first Model S's. Also invested in Tesla.

I doubt that it'll be only a few years, Musk has a pretty bad track record on timing (great track record on results though).

Uber raised their funding on the basis of their current business, not autonomous vehicles not any other delivery/logistics plays.

Simple solution = rating system a la Uber.

Absolutely not. Sending a kid to jail because he brought a clock to school is silly. However, a kid who bought a clock from the 80s, than repackaged it in a pencil box claiming it his 'invention', and put a timer on it making it beep in class, who was then evasive when answering questions, on the day after 9/11 anniversary, definitely deserves some suspicion.

What I object to is the praise he's gotten, from Obama to Zuckerberg. Without even one look at the facts of the situation.

Given that they have three founders (assuming initial 33/33/33) as well as their 6 rounds of funding. Founders probably have ~3-6% each.

What data do you have to support these conclusions?

As bad as this situation is, Internet mob justice has a terrible track record and is not the solution. Most recent example is Ahmed the 'inventor'.

Their revenue is strong, hence the valuation. They could also be profitable if they decided to, but are instead focusing on growth.

Uber has far more control and safety with their supply than Airbnb does, even more so compared to Taxis in foreign countries.

>"they will ever earn back $57million"

>"Why is medium so popular"

These things might be related.

>"almost any of the HN readers could create a similar service"

Same could be said about Airbnb. There's more to a business than the technology.

What achievement? Buying a clock from the 70s and putting it in a suit case to bring to school?

No. SF has ample space horizontally and more importantly vertically for housing. The problem is the construction of housing has been hindered dramatically by bureaucrats.

We're working _a lot_ less. http://ourworldindata.org/data/economic-development-work-sta...

Of course they're going to be spending/losing. Why else raise 8bn? To grow.

I was assuming you were the parent commenter, who has since deleted their comment.

Politicians with their own self interests. It's not an actual serious economic theory.

Do you have any evidence to support that?

If most humans are _not_ intrinsically good, why do we have leaders who have vast amounts of power? Unless you're suggesting that all the leaders are the 'good' people?