basseq

13 ms·

331.
by basseq 9y ago
1. Most people wouldn't have the desire or expertise to upgrade with third party stuff. Most people don't want to muck about in the guts of their PC. 2. Apple could sell those parts themselves at a much more reasonable profit ma
332.
by basseq 9y ago
Majorly cheap, but you're also highlighting a massive bystander effect. "What hope do I, one citizen, have of changing anything?" The other point is (arguably) that government should not be risking bankruptcy for the sake of
333.
by basseq 9y ago
The answer, as I see it, is big dollars and moral focus. A VC investing a couple million bucks in a long-shot startup? You expect risk. Ditto, say, a $300k mortgage to a family of four, but that's more portfolio statistics. Multi-billi
334.
by basseq 9y ago
There's a difference in perception between personal, corporate, and government bankruptcy. Personal bankruptcy is seen as a black mark of either poor personal discipline or a string of bad luck. Corporate bankruptcy is largely ignored,
335.
by basseq 9y ago
It's not the "pro" market: Apple considers ~30% of their user base to be "pro". You wouldn't ignore that. Now, within the pro market, notebooks are far-and-away #1, iMacs are #2, and the Mac Pro is #3 (and is d
336.
by basseq 9y ago
Gruber asserts it's the opposite: Even among pro users, notebooks are by far the most popular Macs. In second place are iMacs. The Mac Pro is third. Apple declined to describe the Mac Pro’s share of all Mac sales any more
337.
by basseq 9y ago
Also, note[1] that Apple isn't being stupid here. Their strategy was just wrong (namely expansion via Thunderbolt peripherals and multi-GPU performance). John Gruber suggests this is a bit of an "Oh Shit" moment for Apple, to
338.
by basseq 9y ago
I suspect they got wrapped around the axle on too much industrial design and painted themselves into a corner where they couldn't upgrade it easily. The ROI of going back to the drawing board so soon was a non-starter. They're n
339.
by basseq 9y ago
The problem isn't that the Mac Pro isn't upgradeable. That is a symptom and a potential solution , but not necessarily the best one. The real problem here is that Apple itself hasn't been able to keep up with demands. If t
340.
by basseq 9y ago
>> Google had search and used that to prop the rest. Simple. > If it's so simple why aren't there other companies doing the same? Because the "simple" strategy is predicated on a market-dominant search product.
341.
by basseq 9y ago
This is just EITC expansion / very low "basic income". There's nothing about "for startups" here, except that "poor founders on ramen noodles would benefit". Note also that "start-up" in the
342.
by basseq 9y ago
So the bigger point here is that RSUs are worthless ... until they vest (at which point they aren't RSUs anymore). So, technically, Juno is being incredibly generous by offering any value whatsoever for RSUs ("unvested stock&
343.
by basseq 9y ago
Once would be too many, but I suspect most of the "tricks" (liquidation preferences, "secret" cap tables, etc.) are in play well before an acquisition. The acquisition is just laying your cards on the table.
344.
by basseq 9y ago
Careful reading too much into that. There's a difference between, "We will give you $100 or 500 RSUs" and "The street value of a RSU today is $0.20". How many times have we seen startups say, "We can't pay
345.
by basseq 9y ago
Here's the other thing: those RSUs may still be restricted . According to the article, Juno launched "right around this time last year". Those RSUs may not have vesting schedules <12 months. Which could imply the company
346.
by basseq 9y ago
Most commonly (and traditionally), RSUs are "real shares" of common stock, just wrapped in another layer of requirements (e.g., vesting schedule). This is not always true (e.g., Facebook and "phantom shares"). Regardle
347.
by basseq 9y ago
Oh, and for those who are thinking, "Huh, 6.5% return is pretty good", remember that's based on individual contributions alone . Your employer contributes the same amount on your behalf. Meaning that for a Top 20%-er, you an
348.
by basseq 9y ago
Correct. Given average life expectancies, the IRR of contributions vs. benefits of Upper-Middle and Top 20% are 2.9% and 1.7%, respectively. Given a 3.22% inflation rate, both are negative (meaning the returns don't even keep up with i
349.
by basseq 9y ago
I built a quick model to compare IRR of contributions vs. benefits using the numbers in the Bloomberg article and income distribution reports[1]. With some massive assumptions (that I can enumerate if anyone is interested), the Bottom 20% q
350.
by basseq 9y ago
I'm unclear if this replaces in any way their existing (annual?) performance review process. Employees do request immediate feedback: it's a major "best practice" and a very common performance improvement area. Now,
351.
by basseq 9y ago
I agree with you, but is this also a symptom of another problem? I'm thinking about it in the government-to-industry direction, and particularly where compensation is so high for these ex-govvies. Why are these people worth so much?
352.
by basseq 9y ago
This is a very good writeup. I think we can all agree about the terrible perception this has on United (and once you have perception, facts don't matter). But clearly outlines that the facts are against United, too . Whether he knew
353.
by basseq 9y ago
I did some work for the IRS several years ago to explore the same idea. There are many benefits, including simplicity and accuracy of filing (closing the $500B tax gap), as well as better fraud protection (another $25B). Protectionism of th
354.
by basseq 9y ago
Fearless Girl absolutely changes the original intent and meaning of Charging Bull . ('A symbol of the "strength and power of the American people".') In a sense, Fearless Girl is a derivative work—using the original
355.
by basseq 9y ago
But is the difference due to some secret that "non-rich kids" don't know? That most kids don't do more isn't a surprise. But why don't they know more? This article suggests that "they didn't know
356.
by basseq 9y ago
The "formula for success" appears to be: study. Is that concept so alien if you're not a "rich kid"? Now, don't get me wrong: there's a clear disconnect in ability and means to prep. Even though there are
357.
by basseq 9y ago
I used to hear this kind of humblebrag all the time in consulting: “I was up working until 4am and only got 2 hours of sleep.” Or, “I didn’t go home last night.” Or college: “I pulled an all-nighter finishing that project.” Extend that to p
358.
by basseq 9y ago
By the way, here's an article from last summer on the same topic, quoting Uber as saying: “With upfront fares, riders agree to a fare that’s calculated in advance while drivers get paid based on a per-mile, per-minute rate as is normal
359.
by basseq 9y ago
Good point! We'd have to dig into the user agreement itself to see what nuances exist there. Based on this complaint alone, I suspect Uber will argue "determined fare" may not mean "fare charged to rider" and that d
360.
by basseq 9y ago
More than that: they're different vatiables . One is actual, measured time and distance: this is how drivers are paid. The other is estimated time and distance wrapped up in a risk modeling / worst-case analysis: this is how ri

More ›