With stuff like this, I am always curious: ok, you send it a picture of a plate, how does it know the food was cooked in butter instead olive oil? Or either way, with 2 tbsp of fat instead of 1?
Of course. I mean this has never not been the case unless you are independently wealthy. Work always expands, that's why it's a fallacy to think that if we just had more productivity gains that we'd work half the time; no, there are always new things to do tomorrow that were not possible yesterday.
Basically yeah. You live in a world of layered servitude and, short of a financial windfall that hoists you up for some time, you’re basically guaranteed to work your entire life, and grow old, frail and poor. This isn’t a joke, it’s reality for many people that’s hidden from us to keep us deluded. Similar to my other mini-rant, I don’t have any valid answers to the problem at hand. Just acknowledging how fucked things are for humanity.
> No, it's quite easy to make $1mm in a rich country and move to a poorer country and chill if you so desire.
On an aggregate level this is true and contrary to the prevailing sentiment of doomer skepticism, the developed world is usually still the best place to do it. On an individual level, a lot of things can go wrong between here and a million dollars.
It's not that easy, as in, you can make the money but the logistics of moving and living in another country are always harder than expected, both culturally and bureaucratically.
>logistics of moving and living in another country are always harder than expected, both culturally and bureaucratically.
You know what's hard? Moving from a poor "shithole" to a wealthy country, with expensive accommodation, where a month of rent is something you'd save up months for.
Knowing and displaying (faking really) 'correct' cultural status signifiers to secure a good job. And all the associated stress, etc.
Moving the other direction to a low-cost-of-living or poor shithole country is extremely easy in comparison with a fat stack of resources.
You literally don't have to worry about anything in the least.
Apart from the tax office suing you in oblivion because the startup you’ve founded is now worth 10x its revenue, so you need to pay 40% CGT with only 1/10th the income (at least that’s the French exit tax).
So basically once you are rich, you have to choose to leave most of it on the table to go to a poor country.
If you have an early startup valued based on vibes, and they tax you on those vibes (do they... source...?) then you are not rich. A xoogler who saved 500k post tax is arguably richer in that scenario.
All companies are worth more than their revenue. It’s not vibes, it’s just how it works.
Same goes for employees with stock options in USA: They get taxed on CGT every year until they sell, for money they don’t have yet.
Same goes for development costs: A change in the US tax code circe 2016 made that development costs were assumed to be an investment over 3 years, so if you have 1m$ sales and 1m$ costs in the first year, the IRS only counts 333k$ real costs and you own them tax on the 666k$ revenue.
It’s a classic problem in capital. So yes, a 300k€ revenue means you are valued at a multiple of that and owe tax.
I think exercising an option may be an event that realizes gains and causes issues for someone who has to pay tax but can't sell the asset as it is not liquid. But I think that isn't what you are taking about?
As for revenue. Many companies are priced at X revenue, but those are companies you expect to grow. If a company raises $1m and sells AI tokens for $1m/y (the revenue) in order to "dominate the market" but they pay AWS $2m/y for, and they can't raise any more or increase prices then that startup is probably worth nothing. For example.
Another example is a bar that sells $1m in revenue drinks and food, makes 500k gross and 50k net after staff, rent taxes etc.
Just because it's easier elsewhere doesn't mean it's per se easy. There are lots of bureaucratic challenges one must face even with lots of money, as my expat FIRE friends have found out over the years.
Fun fact what most people ignore:
There have been around ~7000 people on Mount Everest - while the US alone has around 300.000 / 350.000 people earning more than 1 million USD a year.
So - its clear: Is more easier to become an "income-millionaire" than to climb Mount Everest! :-)
Yeah not so sure. If you are a mountaineer there is a plan that gets you to the top of Everest. There is no plan that gets you $1m/y. Also consider many on high incomes will be daddy's wealth in one way or another.
In reverse:
Usually, you wont die if your "business-plan-to-go-to-1m-income" comes not true, in case of Everest climbing your next step maybe the last, regardless of the plan.
Perhaps its better to say there is very little "out of the box" wrt language support, but otherwise I am not quite sure what you mean for >90% of situations. Eglot + the right lsp server gets you really far these days.
I learned that many people seem to share that sentiment, and further details and analogies about it from the discussion thread. It’s learning about others’ opinions, assessments, and thoughts.
Someone might make a little game or fun experiment and might post it on here. Someone might write a blog post that is giving their opinion about a coding paradigm or framework and post it on here. I don't know if in any of those cases I am learning something, but they are still something I expect to see on HN frontpage. At least: I thought they were acceptable. But I guess thats not the case? Only educational things are technically HN worthy? I will take your word for it.
It's just a little bit of a bummer tbh, sometimes I just want to have fun or feel something or read a certain articulation of something... But I have other places I can find that kind of stuff I guess.
Thanks for your reply and your concern for propriety!
> Someone might write a blog post that is giving their opinion about a coding paradigm or framework and post it on here. I don't know if in any of those cases I am learning something
You, specifically you, don't need to learn something, but is there any value to submitting an opinion about something where nobody learns anything? What if the blog post (or social media post) were one sentence: "React native sucks!" Would you consider that to be a good HN submission? Such a submission might provoke intense debate on HN, but the post itself adds absolutely nothing to the debate. It's just an expression of emotion.
The submission here is a mere 19 sentences and 144 words. And frankly, there's nothing interesting in those words. They're mostly platitudes.
> Only educational things are technically HN worthy? I will take your word for it.
> I just want to have fun or feel something or read a certain articulation of something... But I have other places I can find that kind of stuff I guess.
You continue to make a strong, incisive argument! Thanks so much, and thanks for the charity of discourse you show here. It's sad that such a sharp, critical mind's time is wasted by, what I can see now, such low quality, near-worthless submissions. I hope the standards don't continue to fall, just for your sake. On my end, I guess I'll just have to check out this "TikTok." Thanks for the rec.
Ok, I'll bite: in your view, what were the illiberal "demands" post-2020? Reading tfa, this kind of rendering feels a little too pat for him. Namely, its one thing to argue against the kind of knee-jerk moralism of well-meaning woke liberal arts kids, its quite another to imply a kind of "capital L" program to "chill speech."
Like, c'mon, are we really still doing this now? Roth himself is sensible enough to not be, in his words, "blaming the victim" at this point, what calls you to essentially do it for him anyway? It's nothing but out of touch at this point, and adds nothing to the discourse but conspiratorial noise. If I may assume a rough age based on your forthrightness, any single kid in school in 2020 was and is a lot less culpable for this current moment than you or I. We can set an example and be mature enough to own that, instead of, I don't know, forever being tortured by the real or perceived condescension of kids.
It is a smaller step to further the justifications than to deal with the often severe implications (to the self-image) of having been wrong. The more obvious it becomes having been wrong, the more necessary the justifications are and the more absurd they become. As having someone accepting your absurd justifications becomes proof of being blameless.
It's nothing but out of touch at this point, and adds nothing to the discourse
Exactly. Its a communications problem.
Its hard to have a decent critical conversation when one side has a biased view about $symbol. Both communicating parties need to reach the same interpretation of a message, otherwise the conversation is broken. Thats why you shouldnt say the N-word or throw out a heil heart on stage (unless you want to hide behind this ambiguity). Or why its so difficult to have critical conversations with strong believers, for you its just evolution or vaccines but for the other side it may affect the core of their identity and the ape goes defense mode.
The result is that the discourse does not deal with differentiated cases but _only_ with simplistic labels like "chill speech", "woke", etc. because the more biased side drags it down into the mud.
For instance, the "chill speech" label is actually dependent on the "racist" label that initiated it. If a case shows clear racist behavior, then dismissing the lefts reaction as censorship is unjustified or biased. The other way works too, if there is no racist behavior, the censorship blame would be justified.
And since you cant look into peoples heads to clearly identify racist intentions, it falls back to interpreting messages. The problem with biased people is, they are not aware even of their unawareness. If you would ask Musk whether he is a neo-nazi, his response would be something like "hell no". Fast forward the dystopian timeline and his response might be "always have been".
The left has IMO more unbiased awareness about systemic issues -- but is not free of bias either. The right is in its core biased indentity politics about $culture -- but is not totally host to tribalism either.
My advise, avoid popular symbols at all cost and if you come close to using one, augment it with case specific background, even a vague "_unjustified_ chill of speech" would suffice. If someone opens with "the woke left" and shows no signs of differentiation -- or even better, acknowledgement of core leftist topics -- i mentally turn away. The comment you replied to was about personal anekdotes and projections and the one symbol that rubs me the wrong way too, even before trumps abuse.
In "Bruce Almighty" Jim Carrey uses his God powers to move the moon closer to create a more romantic view for his date. If my memory serves correct, the next day we hear briefly on the news about terrible freak flooding over the world.
reply