Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more NSMutableSet's commentslogin

They completely destroyed the value of their brand with that. It was crazy. I really liked the concept of Triplebyte, even though I never found a job through them. I would get requests from reputable companies occassionally. After that incident, I never got anything again. I would have considered using Triplebyte from the employer side prior to that, but not after. What a disgrace.


Manhattan Beach is a nice city. The median for SFH is close to 4 million.


What happens if you don't actually spend VC money? Do they still get partial ownership?

This is the first time I hear of a situation like this, and I'm really curious.


> What happens if you don't actually spend VC money? Do they still get partial ownership?

Yes. Just like you still pay interest on a loan even if you just let the cash all sit in a bank account.


A lot of banks will set up an offset account with your loan so you only pay interest on the money you use.

A loan is fundamentally different from a share purchase though, you can try to buy back you shares but that would be a separate negotiation.


What's the reasoning for not using it?


I have no idea why Hashicorp didn't use it. The point is just that if you made a contract for something and they hold up their end, you've gotta hold up your end, even if you ended up not using what they provided.


Are there VC contracts where actually spending the money is a stipulation?


I'm sure there are cases where doing a specific thing (e.g. buying another company, or paying off particular debts) with the money is part of the deal. And sometimes an investor will demand a board seat which gives them a way to influence other decisions. But I'd be amazed if a VC wanted a "spend the money on something" provision - if you really can't think of anything to use the money for, letting it sit is better than burning it. You're always obliged to use your best business judgement on behalf of your shareholders, which would seem to cover making use of the money if you have a good use for it, and not if you don't.


Unless you grow everything yourself, the production of fruits and vegetables that you consume also involve exploitation and suffering. The humans aren't being eaten, but they're hung out to dry all the same.

Even if you do grow everything yourself, people had to suffer to obtain the nitrogen and phosphorus in your fertilizer.


However the levels of suffering is magnified by animal agriculture especially because it takes a large amount of crops for feed

> 1 kg of meat requires 2.8 kg of human-edible feed for ruminants and 3.2 for monogastrics

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22119...

As for fertilizer, the usage is lower without animal agriculture even compared to best case usage of manure

> Thus, shifting from animal to plant sources of protein can substantially reduce fertilizer requirements, even with maximal use of animal manure

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09213...


To administration.


I think I would need 1.2 million to retire, assuming I planned to not have a full-time job for 30 years afterwards. This is based on my annual spend being roughly ~$40,000, with interest and inflation (hopefully) cancelling each other out.

I don't see myself retiring unless I become unable to work in tech. Unless I somehow got rich.


> I don't see myself retiring unless I become unable to work in tech. Unless I somehow got rich.

Yeah, the classic vision of retirement is mostly a 20th century quirk from the era of pensions.

More generally, people just tend to do different work as they age, enjoy the growing support of people they were generous with or loyal to while they were younger, and eventually maybe get infirm and need full support for a little while.

If you worked yourself to death as a bureaucratic cog for forty years and need to finally reward yourself with a decade of full-time travel and golf, that’s fine, but there are other ways to have navigated the whole experience such that you don’t seed such a harsh transition (nor the giant stockpile of wealth that dream begs for).

For a lot of us “hacker” people that are careful not to burn ourselves out along the way, we’ll be tinkering on things that are valuable for people right up until the end and can expect some cash flow from that if we need it.


> enjoy the growing support of people they were generous with or loyal to while they were younger

Lucky them. This isn't the rule though. The rule is that they will be paying it forward to the next younger generation, not to pay it back to the one before.


It’s cultural.

But even among deeply Americanized families we’re already seeing a return to multi-generational households as independent living becomes harder for everyone. As that takes hold, you don’t see a lot of families throwing the old fella to the street just because he can’t pay an equal share of the rent anymore. Everybody’s just making it work together.

So we’ll see.


> I don't see myself retiring unless I become unable to work in tech. Unless I somehow got rich.

Assuming you get rich from working hard for many years:

With some probability, you really like your work.

My goal is to reach a point where not having to work makes me want to keep working.


This is great, and I'm really amused to see that someone is already posting as Lowtax.


It depends entirely on your life circumstances. It can feel like a vacation if your partner is still earning 6x+ the median national household income, you have ample savings and multiple years of runway for any immediate debts that can't become delinquent without significant consequences, and you have wealthy parents to fall back on on top of everything else.

(for the record, I don't have any of these aside from the runway, since I have no significant debts due to the lack of a mortgage)


200,000 native allies

900–1,300 Spanish infantry

90–100 cavalry

Looks like they had some help.


The native allies were the main sources of victims for those mass sacrifices, so I think their motivation to fight and kill their former masters was rather high.


Japan's pacific coastline is twice as large as China's. Your logic here is extremely faulty.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: