throwaway2041

Why? From the company's perspective it makes sense to ask if an applicant has a criminal record. Statistically someone with a prior conviction is much more likely to commit a future crime

His proper title is "Crypto Genius James Altucher"

I mostly agree and would argue it's due to the slow erosion of the middle / consumer class. Advertising-based businesses slowing down might be a leading indicator of a bigger macro trend: the reversion back to pre-WW2 levels of inequality :-/

Sadly this same article would be unlikely to be published by Time in 2018.

No, but more folks in the middle class might be able to remain in the middle class if their modest portfolios had access to high-growth companies, ideally through index funds rather than individually-picked stocks

That's not a terrible idea. You might also give some users free access if they're net-beneficial to the network

Chatting up a stranger is not 'borderline harassment'. Harassment is harassment. There's a correct way to approach someone in a non-threatening manner, and more men should take the time to learn how to respectfully strike up conversation with strangers (in both romantic and non-romantic contexts)

Given the cultural norms around dating require men to initiate the conversation 95%+ of the time, there's a real risk of demonizing men's efforts to initiate conversation. If nobody approaches, then a lot of great connections never get formed.

Someone said this in the congratulations thread, but I think the salient point is that BrandonM's comment was upvoted highly, not that it was particularly offensive.

Hacker News has a strong negativity bias. Most of the time the top voted comment is a snarky takedown of the post. Especially in the earliest days of startups, its far better to be a cheerleader on the outside than a cynic (unless the startup is unethical). It's just so hard to build successful companies, and so easy to dismiss things at that early stage.

And yes, I know this very comment is deeply ironic in a way

edit: thanks for down-voting me OP!

Correct. There are many stats relevant to the national discussion that a patriotic Facebook employee might leak. One is the effective CPM (eCPM) rate between the Trump and Clinton campaigns. My hunch is there was a massive disparity there, in favor of Trump. Facebook has only released the "paid CPM" rates, which is suspicious. Most Facebook advertisers look at eCPM, which combines paid + "organic" reach, in other words: the net reach per dollar spent.