aneth3

5 ms·

1.
by aneth3 14y ago
This article is out of touch with what it's like to not yet be a financially independent, respected, and successful entrepreneur. Making a few million dollars, one path to which is selling a company, solves a huge number of problems. You st
2.
by aneth3 14y ago
Only those in the cockpit needed to know. The rest were in charge of subduing the passengers and could have been told they were hijacking the plane for ransom, or to meet demands, or any other story. If you consider the long lead up to 9/11
3.
by aneth3 14y ago
When humanoid robots become passable as humans, I would expect us to have technology capable of distinguishing between warm blooded humans filled with water and robots filled with artificial compounds, and to detect bomb embedded in anythin
4.
by aneth3 14y ago
> surely no shortage of people willing to die to do that I think there is a major shortage of people willing to be suicide bombers. There is a grand fallacy out there that the world is full of suicidal terrorists. It is not. Suicide bom
5.
by aneth3 14y ago
I am not suggesting people form corporations as a first step, only that they come to a general consensus on equity and commitment as early as possible. Personally, I've had long discussions with potential cofounders who suggest exactly what
6.
by aneth3 14y ago
> if Zuck was operating Facebook under the same legal entity as the candy store in which his partner had equity, said partner might have a claim, though it would be hard to establish if the partner produced no work for the new idea Now,
7.
by aneth3 14y ago
I agree in the beginning - "get to work and build a product." Spending a day or a week on something without having this difficult conversation is not a huge risk, but don't spend months or years. The conversation only gets more difficult an
8.
by aneth3 14y ago
I ultimately decided not to join a cofounder who was in a situation analogous to this. An investor owned > 1/3 of the company, but cash was almost gone and the original idea had failed due to TOU issues with a third party. The only opti
9.
by aneth3 14y ago
Could you guys expound on why this is the "right thing?" I see this very differently. Personally, I would never have agreed to this based on my understanding of the situation. It's clear from the article that Ecquire evolved from Dropcard,
10.
by aneth3 14y ago
> We have laws in this country to prevent people from getting screwed. Work with people you like and trust, and focus on building a product, not on what your "stake" is. The most important reason to negotiate equity early is not to avoi
11.
by aneth3 14y ago
You are certainly entitled to give up whatever equity you like, and perhaps you are a better man than me for not feeling you deserve such a minor stake. If you feel you did the right thing and fully comprehend the situation, it is not my pl
12.
by aneth3 14y ago
Two former cofounders with a combined 1% of equity should not have any effect on the future of the company. Even if it did have some minor impact, those shareholders earned and deserve their shares. Companies regularly give shares to adviso
13.
by aneth3 14y ago
If the early shareholders invested significant time and effort into the business, I don't see why it's 'right' for them to give up their shares. While they are certainly entitled to do so, pressuring them to drop even their 0.5% seems uneth