stephen_greet

But running an ISP requires a metric ton of capital upfront. No matter the motivation, how do you get that capital?

What do you mean by "applied to the existing telecoms"? For this RDOF subsidy, no major telecoms have been given any money.

It's totally fair to criticize subsidies that have been historically given major telecom companies when they failed to deliver (and they have). But, I don't think it's fair to say "historically the US government has given subsidies to telecoms that have failed to deliver, so you should keep doing that".

Reactionary opposition. Doesn't matter the facts, doesn't matter the substance. Trump is right, Biden is old & stupid.

I mean, look at this Reddit thread. Somehow, Trump was the deterrent for 4 years despite his ongoing infatuation with an authoritarian dedicator.

Enough is enough, if you pretend both sides are the same you are the problem.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/t009rq/breaki... https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/22/trump-rea...

I noticed something similar. I quit drinking ~4 months ago once I realized I was drinking way too much during quarantine.

Since then I can't stop noticing the prevalence of alcohol in nearly all aspects of pop culture. Even innocuous seeming sitcoms have episodes where the whacky, lovable characters drink to excess and have to deal with a hangover.

I don't think you need to get the attribution exactly correct. Rather, you need to be able to defend how you arrived at a metric.

You can walk through the assumptions you made then build up the components of those assumptions to arrive at an estimated impact.

I think that's a really interesting middle ground. Do you think it can fall into the same trap as mentioned in the article, where it can become "sub-optimal" due to not being as expert as the non-profit?

It's like they didn't even read the information they are arguing against. It just seems like the author wanted to rail against the "ideology of wokeness" as they call it without regard to the merits of this specific argument.

I think the author is arguing here that the solution to combating institutional gambling via trading is not to allow retail investors to also gamble.

Should someone who has no idea what they're doing be able to leverage themselves up 100X to buy a call/sell option by pressing a few buttons in Robinhood because they read about YOLO stock on Wallstreetbets?

As someone who has lost a lot of money by following the Reddit sentiment on an investment, I think the author's point here is fair.

This is not to say I wasn't an idiot. I was. But at a hard time in my life I needed more money so I gambled big and lost big. I worry other people will fall into the same trap.

Close Tools [1] is run by one person and they're currently at $40k MRR.

[1] https://jdnoc.com/open/

It makes sense that you lose out on customer insights/problems when you're reliant on a help center FAQ to answer questions. Essentially losing out on free customer development.

I had a very similar experience during undergrad. I loved most of my classes through Linear Algebra but developing proofs felt like trying to learn a new language. Unfortunately, it never really clicked for me.

I'd love to know how to develop an intuition for writing proofs from scratch.

I am a huge US soccer fan and an even bigger fan of Daryl Grove. I'm also a runner and listen to 15-20 hours of podcasts a week.

When I'm in "the zone" of a run and a podcast comes on that particularly resonates with me, I tear up (maybe 3-4 times in my 6+ years of running). I think that's due to a combination of the power of the podcast episode and my heightened emotional state when I'm on a long run.

This Artifact had that effect on me while I was sitting on my couch. I am blown away.

Hey Ross,

Love this idea! How are you thinking about sharing Artifacts with less technically inclined recipients?

I'd love to give this as a gift to my parents but I've unsuccessful tried a few times to get them set up with listening to podcasts.

Thanks a lot for the thoughtful feedback, it's much appreciated it!

Right now the resume builder is general purpose for people wanting to work in tech. We went down the path of charging companies for access to qualified candidates and the lesson we learned is that you first need a critical mass (which is bigger than we initially thought) to make it scaleable.

To get enough job seekers looking for a specific job in a specific location with a specific skillset with a specific number of years of experience (companies are very specific with what they're looking for) requires a large number of job seekers on your platform.

We want to start with a resume builder to provide value to these people at the first stage of their job searching process so we can then layer in more services and tools as we grow to that necessary critical mass.

Eventually, we intend for one of those services to be the forwarding to companies when the candidate matches what the company is looking for and vice-versa.

It's a good point, I just wish I learned that lesson a bit quicker. I guess some lessons you have to learn the hard way.

Thank you, the credit for that goes to my brother. If it was left to me the site would look like some 90s monstrosity.

That's a fair point. Personally I've been convinced by research that diversity improves business and financial performance.

Value of diversity in leadership: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our...

Another article: https://hbr.org/2018/07/the-other-diversity-dividend

Ya, I agree it doesn't fix anything. I think that the first step in addressing the issue is to have companies be more open with this data so you can actually track if things are changing for the better. That's my goal with this article.

Trail Router is incredibly well done. I've had the exact problem that you're describing. I'm currently training for my first 100 miler and I'm getting bored of my regular routes (which hurts motivation) so I'm really excited to try it out.

Really great work!

Couldn't have said it better myself. To justify that financial models are a waste of time by saying "90% of startups fail" is aken to saying that professional athletes shouldn't train because "99.9% of athletes don't become pros".

Do you think that the remaining 10% of successful startups aren't utilizing forecasts and testing their assumptions? People love to be contrarian just to be contrarian on this site sometimes.