Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | johnny4000's commentslogin

Yes to bring the car too me! And pick it up too! This is a pain and a problem worth solving (in that people would pay for this). I rented a car last weekend to use on Saturday where I was leaving at 7am. I had to pick up the car Friday because the rental place is closed at 7am Saturday and spend 20 min finding a spot. Then had to spend another 15 min finding a spot on Saturday night, and they were of course closed by the time I got back at 9pm. Then Sunday returning the car I had to essentially park in the middle of the street blocking a lane of traffic along with about 10 other rental cars waiting for them to open at noon. At noon a rental employee comes out and starts yelling and essentially tells you to leave the car in the middle of the street and that you are good to go. I guess that was the good part.

Haven't tried Zip car. Too many NYC Zip car reviews of dirty cars left w/ empty pizza boxes etc and wouldn't want to be in such a small car in a highway in upstate NY.


Having willfully worked there in the past (I was not abducted Boko Haram style) I can tell you first hand they value evidence and reason (which includes both saying 'I agree' and dissenting), not sect like religiosity. The people in our prevalent culture today can't handle the truth, because their egos are in their way. Bridgewater in that specific way is much more counter culter.


What exactly is the argument or implication in the last two sentences? There are many works of art that use "blunt" instruments. Say the Venus of Willendorf or a Serra sculpture, though that depends on what you mean by blunt. Even in literature blunt tools are use such as a pencil.


This deflation argument seems to me it's an argument for the status quo, so if you are say Warren Buffet it is a vary valid concern. If on the other hand you just graduated undergrad and had a huge debt and your wage was actually set in bitcoins this would be great for you because the cost of paying off your dept would be from your bitcoin point of view spiraling to zero, as would the cost of everything else. That sounds like a pretty awesome situation to be in.

Be wary of financial explanations, because in most cases when a business person or economist says its good, they either mean its good for keeping things stable, its good for the elite, or its good for the average person, all of which might not be you. For example, you might see someone on CNBC saying they need to make sure they don't have a disorderly default, but really if you are in a position to take advantage of that temporary disorderly market you could gain from that.


"If on the other hand you just graduated undergrad and had a huge debt and your wage was actually set in bitcoins this would be great for you because the cost of paying off your dept would be from your bitcoin point of view spiraling to zero, as would the cost of everything else. That sounds like a pretty awesome situation to be in."

It would be! Except for the part where that very spiral discourages employers from paying wages in Bitcoin, since they'd make more money just holding on to those Bitcoins and letting the spiral make them money than they ever could paying workers with them. So those Bitcoin-paying jobs never leave the realm of the theoretical.


> If on the other hand you just graduated undergrad and had a huge debt and your wage was actually set in bitcoins this would be great for you because the cost of paying off your dept would be from your bitcoin point of view spiraling to zero, as would the cost of everything else.

It would be good if your wage was fixed in bitcoins and your debt was set in dollars, but bad if the reverse was true.

I think, given a deflationary currency, it'll be a lot easier to find people willing to lend money with the loan obligation denominated in bitcoins than it is to find people willing to offer employment with a long-term salary base fixed in bitcoins.


Seems to me it's an argument for the status quo, so if you are say Warren Buffet it is a vary valid concern. If on the other hand you just graduated undergrad and had a huge debt and your wage was actually set in bitcoins this would be great for you because the cost of paying off your dept would be from your bitcoin point of view spiraling to zero, as would the cost of everything else. That sounds like a pretty awesome situation to be in.

Be wary of financial explanations, because in most cases when a business person or economist says its good, they either mean its good for keeping things stable, its good for the elite, or its good for the average person, all of which might not be you. For example, you might see someone on CNBC saying they need to make sure they don't have a disorderly default, but really if you are in a position to take advantage of that temporary disorderly market you could gain from that.


If you are going to insist on a deflationary economy, you have to admit the possibility of wages going down over time.

For a cartoon example, with high enough deflation and a less than perfect job market, that debt might represent more years of work when you are 35 than it did when you were 25.


Wages in what currency? Bitcoins or USD or? If wages in USD decrease by a huge amount and I get paid in Bitcoins, I can eventually hire more people for a cheaper amount if I pay them in USD.


Wages in bitcoin.

But I really want to talk about it in terms of units of productivity. If the value of bitcoin goes up over time, then each unit of productivity will be worth less bitcoin over time. Meaning that relative to units of productivity, a debt will increase.

In your first example, you relied on the assumption that your boss or customers or whatever would not take the current BTC value of your productivity into account. In your new example, you are relying on the people you hire not taking the value of their labor in BTC into account. Neither of those are reasonable assumptions.


And Sendgrid is down... http://status.sendgrid.com/


I think you misread sergiotapia's comment. They were objecting to how Sendgrid was supporting the actions of Richards. The tweet seemed like a poor example.

I also don't see an issue with having non-technical attributes being part of the equation in the criteria for selecting a vendor. Price is clearly important, as can be a business' ethics; both are not technology related but can important depending on the circumstance.

Lastly Mandrill does seem like a slightly better product for the cost, but that of course might vary based on requirements.


Thanks for the heads up on Mandrill, I'll check out their solution for when I launch my project.


i used to work at bridgewater as a developer. i liked the culture there and wish more companies had cultures like them. why would you want to work at a place full of problems hidden from sight. no one calls you out because they don't like you. they do it so that you can get better and don't make the mistake again and that your peers also do not make that mistake. if you are not confident enough to be able to learn from your mistakes and make sure your cohort are also not making mistakes then you should look else where to work.

also its not cult like there. cults try to remove you from your previous surroundings and indoctrinate you so serve a leader because they promise you salvation. i was not promised salvation and i was given a pay check and could leave if i wanted to. i will say it is some what like a club in that if you don't fit the mold then you will be fired. by the mold i mean from a business perspective you should act according to proper business protocol (which for them more or less means learn from everyone's mistakes, call out bad business decisions so that others can learn from someones mistake, know your understanding of the market decays so it should always be questioned and updated).

as for the siavosh's comments relating to finance being a "dubious field", i would change that to there are many dubious people in finance. also by dubious i'm assuming he is referring to random walk hypothesis or some such logic. If you look at ren techs 45% return since its inception in 1988 i would not call that dubious, so there are players who understand the market and many dubious people who do not.

i think having a binary opinion about the merits of finance (specifically capital allocation) benefiting society are wrong. You can easily point to bernie madoff and say see...useless! or you can think of all the investors who had the courage and means to invest in apple computers or genentech. was correctly picking to allocating capital to apple a waste of societies resources?


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

Search: