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

That's not fair, Sam can love money too and there is no conflict here.

Reminds me of Effective Altruism and the collective results of people claiming to believe in that virtue.

The more messy a problem is, the less it should be decoupled and siloed into its own team.

Instead of making actual improvement on the subject (you name it, safety, security, etc), it becomes a checkbox exercise and metrics and bureaucracies become increasingly decoupled from truth.


He would just become a software engineer like the rest of us, and probably would have started google or netflix.

Possibly- but a prodigious intellect and capacity doesn't necessarily translate to "founder" type entrepreneurial talents.

> difference between suborbital flight and putting a payload in orbit. What looks like a next logical step actually takes 10X or more effort, scale, and testing.

But suborbital flight and payload in orbit is much less of a difference than you might think.

The delta V is not that significantly different. Scale is almost the same, and a little bit more power and (second stage) your payload is now hurtling around the earth instead of falling like an ballistic missile which was what their suborbital predecessors are.


Suborbital ballistic "travel" beyond continental distances, is almost as expensive as orbital. If you can make it to the antipode, you're basically almost orbital.

Suborbital "trips" straight up, beyond the atmosphere, are very cheap.


If they allowed oauth token to work like that then that is their (Google's) problem.

It is basically impossible to disallow the token to work that way on a technical level. It would be akin to trying to trying to set up a card scanner that can deny a valid card depending on who is holding it. The only way to prevent it from working is analyzing usage patterns/details/etc in some form or fashion. Similar to stationing a guard as a second check on people whose cards scan as valid.

Exactly, so charge on usage or cap on usage.

Either the token works for all times, or works until it doesn't, or does not work at all.

Punishing the account for using a token you have vended for the exact same purpose is extremely poor product design.


So it sounds like the trillion dollar corporation can actually do it but they don't want to spend the money too because they are extremely cheap?

Well, it looks like they're not allowing it.

Tangential piggy back: If you prefer CLI, here's a free and open source HN browser in terminal:

https://github.com/Aperocky/hnterminal

Install: `pipx install hnterminal`


I enjoy this one as it helps keep me mostly on task while goofing off.

This article seem to be confounding external impact with internal motivation.

Yes the jobloss impact caused the people to be unable to save and in turn they wished they have saved more.. but ignored is whether they could to begin with.

Of course external impact had little to do with internal procrastination.


It's not confounding at all. It's making the point that internal motivation, according to the study, has no major factor in savings regret.

It says that understanding risk (as operationalized by understanding probability) has a larger effect.

But it is also saying that the more external impact someone has, the more they regret saving more -- in the United States but not Singapore.

The study is explicitly saying that internal motivation does not seem to matter. And the article is arguing the reason why.


Maybe I read the article too fast but I didn’t get that takeaway at all?

It’s basically just saying that the uninsured catastrophic event risk in America magnifies shock events.

E.g., if you have a major hospital visit in America you’re way more likely to regret not saving enough, but in Singapore there’s basically no effect since hospital stays don’t drain your savings account.


That’s what I also got from this article

Not just healthcare stuff, but also apparently Singaporeans tend to have a lower unemployment rate, so they be able to recover from stuff faster


That sound like being a manager IRL.

This is where the debate has another axis - when.

Quality matters, delivery speed matters, shipping also matters, where it matters and when it matters is much harder to get right. But it's also self correcting - if you don't, the project or business die - you can only get it wrong for so much or for so long.

To only discuss on one axis is presumably why GNU Hurd have never shipped or how claude-c-compiler doesn't compile hello world.


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

Search: