bhupy

129 ms·

931.
by bhupy 6y ago
I think this link seems to suggest that that day is closer than we think...
932.
by bhupy 6y ago
Tesla's super charging network is essentially the future of gas stations, and there's no reason to believe that Shell, Chevron, et al don't re-purpose their petrol pumps to become battery superchargers once the demand for IC
933.
by bhupy 6y ago
Tesla's current valuation is predicated on it essentially becoming the new Toyota (it's worth more than $TM right now). There's little doubt that Tesla can be a sustainable, successful electric automobile business in the &quo
934.
by bhupy 6y ago
And pessimists don’t?
935.
by bhupy 6y ago
Uber already re-uses this type of supply/demand matching platform for Uber Freight[1] to match shippers with "haulers". They also have a vertical agnostic "Uber Works"[2] that lets contract workers find jobs, sort o
936.
by bhupy 6y ago
Lyft announced that it would do the same: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/12/lyft-president-says-it-may-h...
937.
by bhupy 6y ago
Right, you get price increases instead, which are a more regressive way to guarantee a basic minimum standard of living than a publicly funded safety net.
938.
by bhupy 6y ago
> I wish I could mod down this article. This looks like the beginning of an FSF smear campaign. This is what the "Paradox of Tolerance" idea looks like, when taken to its logical conclusion. By simply tolerating this person&#x2
939.
by bhupy 6y ago
> the leninist soviet system was an utter failure but germany and scandinavia seem to be doing pretty alright Yes, and Germany and Scandinavian countries are liberal capitalist economies where the means of production are predominately ow
940.
by bhupy 6y ago
No disagreements there.
941.
by bhupy 6y ago
Yes, there is nothing wrong with that statement. Arguing in favor of censorship is not the same as censorship. The whole point of free discussion is that you can talk about the philosophical merits of anything , regardless of whether or no
942.
by bhupy 6y ago
Um, yes? Nothing is off the table for discussion. If you don't like it, don't participate in the discussion, or downvote, or move on. Don't police other's willingness to engage certain arguments.
943.
by bhupy 6y ago
HN's values are limited to the site guidelines. Arguing against freedom of information is tolerated in the context of Tik Tok, and IMO should be tolerated in the context of terrorism in Kashmir. I want to re-iterate that I agree with
944.
by bhupy 6y ago
I don't agree with jammucoder that information restriction is a justifiable way to reduce terrorist attacks, but I think HN is exactly the sort of place that tolerates this exact kind of viewpoint, especially directly underneath a com
945.
by bhupy 6y ago
But we're not talking strictly about non-commercial transactions. Prohibiting US advertisers from doing business with TikTok removes a lot of incentive for TikTok to operate in the US. > US advertisers can be banned from doing busin
946.
by bhupy 6y ago
Americans have no such right — the US government has the authority to impose economic sanctions on foreign governments that explicitly prohibit doing business with their companies.
947.
by bhupy 6y ago
The US President is granted wide-ranging authority to regulate international commerce The executive order doesn't outright ban the use of TikTok (the app), it just places a ban on "any transactions subject to the jurisdiction of t
948.
by bhupy 6y ago
> Lots of HN comments are here like "I know people who prefer to be contractors", "My sister's neighbours little brother actually doesn't want to be treated with respect by Uber", blah It's a willful mi
949.
by bhupy 6y ago
A weekend barista is only comparable to a gig economy driver the day that they can decide on a whim to show up to work for an hour or take a 2 week break unannounced, bail in the middle of a shift, or skip a shift altogether with no repercu
950.
by bhupy 6y ago
Well first of all, this is in response to the idea that "Most of Amazon's workers are badly treated and either actually in poverty or less than a month's pay away from it.", which we KNOW to be untrue. But even with the
951.
by bhupy 6y ago
Yes, that's how welfare works. When you pay taxes for a single payer healthcare system, you're absolving the company the responsibility to provide health insurance to their employees (read: "underpay their workers"). Man
952.
by bhupy 6y ago
Not only that, the warehouse workers in the US are part of the same group health insurance policy as their software engineers and executives. It's one of the most generous health insurance plans available in an entry-level job that req
953.
by bhupy 6y ago
It wouldn't work because the mapping isn't one-to-one, it's many-to-one. Google is essentially taking advantage of the fact that it's basically impossible to reliably reverse a many-to-one function. That is to say, you
954.
by bhupy 6y ago
The writer is ex + early Uber, I'm sure he's doing fine.
955.
by bhupy 6y ago
The counter-counter-argument is that if you don't decouple the "doing of the scientific research" from "influencing human choices", you might compromise the endeavor of scientific research altogether. The same insti
956.
by bhupy 6y ago
This is a great argument that I'd never heard before. Never knew about the per-hour statistics either. All that being said, it sounds like one can "control the level of risk" by taking a bus instead of driving/Uber/
957.
by bhupy 6y ago
Depending on the market, I can’t imagine it being easy/straightforward for someone with “trash credit” to find a landlord willing to lease an apartment at the market-rate. That $1000 is likely getting spent no matter what, either in re
958.
by bhupy 6y ago
I wouldn’t call it “demonizing”, per se, but it’s a real phenomenon. I live in Brooklyn where rent isn’t the cheapest. The rents aren’t driven up because I’m in a bidding war with Jeff Bezos; they’re driven up because I’m in a bidding war w
959.
by bhupy 6y ago
I encourage you to read the original article. Couple things: 1. The argument isn't that it's a monopoly, it's that it's arguably monopsony . The issue is less that users don't have the choice to buy the phone they
960.
by bhupy 6y ago
No, I'm an idiot, please explain it to me. Of course I know what it means — the argument is way more nuanced than "hurr durr there are 2 and 2 > 1".

More ›