lovich

13 ms·

331.
by lovich 4mo ago
I know they can’t be permanent because of the rule against perpetuities[1], but since this was in 99 I don’t think that applies. IMO the non permanent nature of these sorts of grants is a good thing because if we don’t have limitations then
332.
by lovich 4mo ago
The longer the period in between reviews the larger the gap can become between the manager and employees perception of the employees performance. Personally I don’t think once a week is absolutely necessary but I tailored it to the employee
333.
by lovich 4mo ago
You are working against human nature if you think most people are not going to feel more comfortable talking about private matters in a 1:1 vs a public environment. You're also an asshole manager if you're giving any sort of negat
334.
by lovich 5mo ago
Yea, but by law the name change must come from Congress which it hasn’t. So it’s still The Department of Defense legally. For an admin so obsessed with legal names instead of chosen ones, you’d think they’d be less hypocritical.
335.
by lovich 5mo ago
pedantically, the defense department.
336.
by lovich 5mo ago
I don’t know what that term means and I was more asking for the personal reason to file so late. Like a literal, “I didn’t feel like it” is an answer, it’s just an action I can’t imagine taking so I was trying to understand your state of mi
337.
by lovich 5mo ago
We’re a bit past the deadline at this point. What would make you not have filed yet? I’ve heard of people missing it but never the reasons why and I can’t imagine one since I always file ASAP to figure out if I owe or am owed money.
338.
by lovich 5mo ago
You won’t find me arguing against the fact that Trump haphazardly implemented his ideas and was incompetent. If you’re trying to argue it wasn’t a Muslim ban because Indonesia wasn’t in it, then I’ll just have to point you to Trump himself
339.
by lovich 5mo ago
Why was this interesting beyond historical trivia? Edit: actually nah, I’m not gonna wait for you to walk into this conclusion. You put a single presidents name down for these bans with Biden, which was in response to a global pandemic wher
340.
by lovich 5mo ago
I did not forget a /s. The Wikipedia page has linked references. You’ll have to provide more evidence for me than your statement for me to disbelieve them after I read through to confirm that the Wikipedia article wasn’t misinterpretin
341.
by lovich 5mo ago
There’s commodities and then R&D. Ignoring every other moral consideration, this horse cloning has turned a biological asset into a (relative)commodity, and if people were looking for better horses they’d stick to the randomized mutatio
342.
by lovich 5mo ago
Because no one has shown profitability, only made claims that are unproven so far. This combined with being one of the largest investments of capital since the rail system, and being backed by known conmen like Musk, make a subset of the po
343.
by lovich 5mo ago
Yes, but it’s a guaranteed event, so it needs to be accounted for if you’re serious about engineering. The accounting could just be, we accept that downtime, it’s all calculated in advance and we’ll prepare the system for it, but it still n
344.
by lovich 5mo ago
Nah, he was talking about taking their stock. That’s morally theft even if by some convoluted reason it’s not legally theft. I get the business as usual analogy but the specifics of the interaction are different. You just showing up to your
345.
by lovich 5mo ago
How would they handle eclipses?
346.
by lovich 5mo ago
It doesn’t? > power It still needs power, you’re most likely going to do it with solar if you’re on earth orbit but that isn’t free and you will have periods of no sunlight so a significant amount of batteries will be needed. > coolin
347.
by lovich 5mo ago
> 6 months is far more than enough time for the market to decide a fair price of an equity. I disagree. > The rule change never ended up happening, hence this post. There is zero "cheating", I don't understand why you k
348.
by lovich 5mo ago
It currently would exclude all 3 companies because they aren’t publicly traded. Post IPO they wouldn’t immediately be included. Every benchmark I am aware of doesn’t immediately include companies because there is a decent amount of volatili
349.
by lovich 5mo ago
> Baseball rules exist to prevent cheating. > The S&P rules exist so the index can accurately reflect the market. I personally believe that accurately reflecting a market involves not allowing cheating. I personally believe that g
350.
by lovich 5mo ago
> Rules against corked bats / steroids exist so people don't cheat at a sport and all players can compete equally. > The profitability requirement is something made up by the S&P committee. Those are both equally made up
351.
by lovich 5mo ago
It’s a public benchmark fund that has much of its value based on its decisions being publicly stable and publicly consistent. Who would want to invest in a benchmark fund with arcane(the literal term as opposed to mundane) rules that were
352.
by lovich 5mo ago
It’s a benchmark of the market under certain rules, like having multiple quarters of earnings for the market to value them at. These companies want special exceptions. If you are an exception why should you be included in a benchmark? At be
353.
by lovich 5mo ago
> There is no “zero” immigration policy, this is a strawman. Japan and Korea(can’t remember their names at the time but pretty sure it wasn’t those two) were famously hermit kingdoms until the US showed up and threatened war if they woul
354.
by lovich 5mo ago
Just put it up for display. Me and my wife built several sets just to have an activity to do together, and then the resulting displays are memories of those fun times.
355.
by lovich 5mo ago
when I had >8 direct reports I was usually allowed to give a single 5/5, greatly exceeds expectations, etc, but it was also made clear to me in unrecorded formats that I also better have someone with a failing score if I did that.
356.
by lovich 5mo ago
If you can meet their goals, that just means there is more they can squeeze out of you. The incentive structure for our corporations means there is literally never enough and they will always demand more.
357.
by lovich 5mo ago
Taking that as a concession since you don’t want to provide any sort of evidence or debate. Have a nice life.
358.
by lovich 5mo ago
If you are incorrect, you don’t have to be Nostradamus to predict that everyone else will claim you are also incorrect. If you go through my comment history you will find that I am fully willing to declare hills I will die on and can respec
359.
by lovich 5mo ago
Not enforcing the laws isn’t criminal in the United States, although I wish it was. The police in various jurisdictions have gone all the way to the Supreme Court to confirm that[1][2] > It’s not just me, you see it all over social media
360.
by lovich 5mo ago
Then have pushback, that’s how democracy is supposed to work. If your complaint is that enforcement isn’t 100% perfect then you’ll find most laws are lacking. I say this as someone who also hates public pot smokers but I’m not talking about

More ›