That can't be true when so many of these small businesses have such massive margins. They're not spending the earnings on other small online businesses.
That's irrelevant to above point. That they could pay themselves a salary out of earnings means there is more money going in that just what is cycling around between these sites.
Via what method? Iirc, there are many economical methods of transportation between those two cities... Also, that $100 per hour is pure cost with no markups to provide for revenue or growth.
I could easily be wrong, but the aircraft they were displaying looked like a 2 seater, not 4.
WRT Caltrain, I remember using it for commuting, and certainly don't remember paying $50 a day to do so. But perhaps the times have changed and the prices with them. Still, $25 per ticket one way seems ridiculously high.
If there's no need to market a product as America-first, then why is there a need to market these as India-first? Like they said in the article, the products made won't just help India.
Because Google is trying to build the monopoly they have in America in India as well. They are specifically targeting the market they hope to gain capture in.
A lot of users may prefer a locally-branded competitor because they feel it is properly tailored to their needs and culture. (I've specifically heard Yandex understands the interests and needs of Russian-speaking users better than Google, which is not a shock.) Presumably, specifying "India-first" is intended to convey that these apps are developed specifically for Indian users and their needs.
> Presumably, specifying "India-first" is intended to convey that these apps are developed specifically for Indian users and their needs.
Oh, I understand this completely. It makes perfect sense for Google to focus on an emerging market to become a monopoly there, and I feel it's a fantastic strategy.
What I'm more curious about is why an Indian-first focus is met with fanfare and acceptance, while an American-first focus is met with derision and contempt against something anti-globalist, and that these two opinions often come from the same group of people. I just find it an interesting dichotomy.
Presumably the same way saying you're a "women's rights activist" makes you fighting for a good cause and saying you're a "men's rights activist" makes you a sexist, and saying "black lives matter" is fighting for a good cause, but saying "white lives matter" makes you a Nazi.
The language is preloaded with a lot of existing conceptions about the state of the world currently, and the sort of people who use each set of terms.
Not really America-first, but western world first definitely. Nothing about Google’s products screams USA, and they have more users outside the USA than inside it.
I think more than what we are taught in engineering, the field itself tends to attract more conservative minded people (maybe because it's a safe field?). There's also correlations shown between religiosity, conservatism and studying engineering.
I agree but those people are around 18 when they enroll into college, they can't be that close-minded. At least not until you show them (via curriculums) that there's to life more than science.
> A needle of length L is dropped at random onto a sheet of paper ruled with parallel lines a distance L apart. What is the probability that the needle will cross a line?
Thickness of line is needed right? Otherwise P approaches 100% as thickness approaches 0?
The lines are infinitely thin. Equivalently you can imagine the paper is divided into regions of width L, and the question is whether the needle will cross a region boundary (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffon's_needle).
I don't think that page explains it very well, but have poor math background. I imagined notebook paper with horizontal lines spaced L apart and then the needle dropping at any angle. When the needle is vertical the probability it cross a line is 1, when horizontal it is zero. The length of the needle L is the hypotenuse of a triangle. If we call the angle from horizontal x, the "height" of the needle can be anywhere within h=Lsin(x) for x between 0 and pi/2.
The "lines" are like a sample of a point from a uniform distribution U with width L, and h is an interval inside U. The probability a number sampled from a distribution of width L will fall within interval h is h/L. Substituting for h gives p(cross|x) = sin(x).
Then assuming the needle is equally likely to drop at any angle, for any one angle theta we get probability density p(theta=x) = 1/(pi/2-0)= 2/pi.
The probability the needle drops at angle x AND crosses a line is the product of p(theta=x)p(cross|x)= (2/pi)sin(x). As mentioned, x can range between 0 and pi/2. To get the probability the needle drops at angle x1 OR x2 OR x3, etc and cross we need to sum all these. So take the integral of (2/pi)sin(x) from 0:pi/2. This gives 2/pi.
I read a comparison of the Liberia to Uganda, Kenya examples before that said its because Liberia('s slums) are at a worse of starting point. For the programs to be effective it needs to target extreme poor who still at least have access to infrastructure and resources to develop. If that isn't there then charity would be more effective in developing those things.
