> $100k buy in at the hedgefund I know. Its a big figure for most but starting salaries, friends & family, and personal loans will get you there.
Surely this is a HN culture bubble? Very few people can borrow tens of thousands of dollars from family and friends to lend to a hedge fund. Not only would I be refused, I'd damage friendships by exposing the moral vacuum at my core.
It has more to do with the nature of the industry and firm. If your TC yearly is all cash and exceeds 500k, asking 100k of that as buy in is not too different from being granted stock options as an outcome. They could just reduce your TC by 100k one year and replace it with equity in the pool.
Being able to borrow that amount might be a bubble, but depending on the fund I don't think it would damage friendships at all. If you had access to the internal Renaissance fund for example I think your friends would be happy to get in on that.
> I wouldn't believe you if you told me you're subscribed to every Patreon of every content creator you consume the content of.
Everyone’s YouTube consumption is different. I’m not the person you directed the comment at but I realistically follow less than a handful of creators on YouTube. Subscribing to all their Patreons (not sure if all of them have it) would be quite doable.
If the platform operators want to offer a service that's free for the user, there are more ethical business models they could use. e.g. implement p2p video distribution (conveniently, they also make the most popular browser, and could bake p2p in, e.g. support for IPFS), and let the uploader pay for the platform to act as a seed box (or just let the uploader seed). For users that don't want to run a p2p client (phones, etc.) offer paid gateway services. Provide other creator support services like patreon.
Note that the above architecture is modular in a way where other businesses could compete within individual components. E.g. a seed box provider, or a gateway provider, or creator services. Obviously, this is not as good for them (they'd like to force their vertical integration), but better for everyone else.
Or they could stop giving their service away for free, but we all know they benefit from network effects and mindshare, so they want to keep everyone there.
As long as they provide a free service that's bundled with malware, people will accept the service and just remove the malware. When you do something unethical to start, you can't be surprised that people don't play along as planned.
Point is, they chose to corner the market and be a vertically integrated platform with all the costs involved. They didn't have to. They do bad things to maintain that position. No need to shed any tears for their decision.
In hindsight I agree, but I'm confused why only the comments on "one side" (which all seem to be equally substantive) are being flagged, and not all the participants in general.
That's either randomness (every random sequence has long strings of all-heads or all-tails) or cognitive bias (it always feels like the other side is getting treated better) or some combo of the two.
I don't mean to be glib or dismissive I'm just writing this rather hastily! and this is a pretty well-established finding, at least in my own head, having gone over I don't know how many thousands of these cases...
Edit: but if you want to link to specific cases where you feel like there was an asymmetry, I'd be happy to take a look.
You're spot on - it's the idle thoughts of a privileged white man trying to justify racism, but he presents no new arguments, and dresses the whole thing up in academicese.
> There's nothing at all dehumanising about the phrase "The Poor" (if you think there is, compare to eg “the rich”. Are we dehumanizing the rich every time we call them that?)
Yes. That's why anti-capitalist protests will criticise "the rich" and not "rich people".
I like this article but this is actually a good point. "The rich" is mostly used in a negative way.
I'd argue this is because most attempts to reduce large groups of people to an idea like "the rich" or "the poor" are done in bad faith.
A support of this would be, within academic sociology or economics these terms will be used in a non slur way and it's because they actually have a reason to be thinking in terms of these groups instead of throwing them out as stawmen for some argument
Does it matter? When Google automated the scanning and digitization of millions of books for searching purposes, they were awarded Fair Use[0] protection despite using an automated system to derive unauthorized digital copies of copyright-encumbered material.
AI is clearly more derivative than that. It's too early to call for sure, but it's hard to imagine what a "victory" for copyright holders even looks like at this point.
Yes. This is because they cannot provide you the full text of the book; that would be illegal.
They can provide you a snippet, within the legal limits of what they are able to reproduce. They can also direct you to buy a copy of it through them, if the publisher has a deal with Google. Seeing as all roads lead to Rome... most books in Google Books are also available for purchase through Google. Funny system.
If OpenAI did the same with Dall-e (provide you a snippet, within the legal limits of what they are able to reproduce. They can also direct you to buy a copy of it through them, if the publisher has a deal with [them]) things would be different.
I avoid it where I can, but some folks only post videos on youtube. It's much harder for a video-sharing alternative to get off the ground because google (and others in big tech) completely distort the playing field.
I'm not sure where I was born. As I said, I was taken away from my real parents as an infant and abandoned to live with an awful family who adopted me without even telling me I'm adopted. I guess my parents are of European origin. I tried changing my legal name, dropped the last name and made some spelling correction to the first name. Legally, the procedure was complete. But when I went to have it updated on my national IDs, they sabotaged it three times. Made me go through the entire procedure of verification, generated acknowledgement receipts, and eventually gave me bullshit reasons like technical error. The employees at the office were confused as well, even they didn't have any idea why it wasn't updated. Perhaps I got the attention of the government when I spoke out against the war on public forums. And they're now sabotaging my life. So, I don't even have a name right now, which is good because I didn't like the name that was given to me. I wish I could find my real parents, I know they are out there somewhere. I don't know what to do.
I suggest you try to get in contact with charities specialising in human trafficking. They may be able to help you find your original identity and country of birth. If your parents were European it's likely your birth was registered
You can try having a DNA test to get some clues of your origin. Also, there should be a ton of paperwork done during adopting and it should be possible to find traces.
Most of the alternatives you suggest are implemented in PAX, which is an extension of the tar format. The EoF block is useful if the archive is written directly to physical media without a filesystem: it lets you determine where the archive ends.
yes; but then people wanted to be able to read the tapes they'd written long before the hardware and media acquired such features, so TAR kept the ability (it was more don't change things that aint broke, i think).
ARC and ZIP files are written as a fresh take on the idea of archive files, with much more capable hardware, after TAR had been around a couple decades. They have many features designed to use those new hardware capabilities, and were (and still are) very popular because of those.
They have bits that probably seem dated now, too. Breaking archives into floppy size chunks? but without any sort of forward error correction? No format support for unicode? (who cares it wasn't invented when the ZIP file spec was created?)
Surely this is a HN culture bubble? Very few people can borrow tens of thousands of dollars from family and friends to lend to a hedge fund. Not only would I be refused, I'd damage friendships by exposing the moral vacuum at my core.