Recent submissions

Comment · 2 years ago
I'm JJ's brother and an investor in Double so I'm a little bit biased but I believe reducing/eliminating AUM fees is a huge net positive for the world. The performance drag over long term that money managers charge is a tax on people's retirement savings. What Vanguard/Bogle did with Index funds was massive, and I think Double can be this generation's Vanguard. Professional and powerful money management tools with rock bottom/no AUM fees is a massive opportunity. Congratulations on the launch JJ and Mark!
Comment · 6 years ago
I love the idea and vision but I think you are underestimating the benefits of a good name. I can’t pronounce Terusama, couldn’t remember it, and it would be hard to spell if heard. Also it doesn’t suggest what you do at all which is important in a name. A combo of simple words that allude to what you do make the best names IMO. Otherwise anything that can improved such a huge industry sounds like a great market to tackle.
Comment · 9 years ago
Agreed. Fuck Benchmark. Travis makes each partner $1 billion personally and this is how they treat him? They should be blackballed by every great founder out there. I had respect for benchmark but not anymore. They are greedy assholes.
Comment · 10 years ago
Without the solar ITC and wind PTC most projects wouldn't be feasible. I'm skeptical these will last past a major tax overhaul as planned this year. I don't think your view on oil prices is correct. Even if supply cuts work US shale producers will pick up any slack. And I don't agree with your long term take on electric cars. Gasoline cars are just better for anyone who actually needs their car. Electric is a luxury and not necessarily cheaper at current gas prices.
Comment · 10 years ago
Not exactly how it works. The projects are leveraged off balance sheet with separate, often tax advantageous entities owning the panels in a complicated lease buyback structure. 'Losing money is a good thing' is not true if you understand time value of money and debt leveraging. I haven't done much research but Solar City is probably hurting now because Nevada renagged on gridnbuyback provisions and lots of other states are eliminating residential incentives and subsidies for solar.

Also although they were the first to do some of the complicated financing stuff, rooftop solar installation has turned into a very low margin business with lots of competition in most markets. It's not really groundbreaking stuff they are doing.

Comment · 10 years ago
A real life Ayn Rand story.
Comment · 11 years ago
That was what I was getting at ;). I had an old boss who used to call hydrocarbons 'Mother Nature's Battery'. Its almost a miracle when you think of it. Millions of years of solar energy stored in solid, liquid, and gas forms, available for the ingenuity of man to extract and use to power the marvels of the modern world.

For all the hate that hydrocarbons get they are probably the main reason most of us aren't still living a very primitive existence.

Comment · 11 years ago
Not questioning whether innovation can and will occur. Question is whether the innovations to be developed can compete with what is the present reality which is ~10cents/kWh price that we currently pay for power.

All things considered that is pretty cheap and even a minor improvement on price won't change the sunk costs of current infrastructure. The service of getting electricity is pretty cheap around the country and any replacement will have to be substantially cheaper. 'Better' doesn't count for much here because its just electricity and without government mandates people generally don't really care where it comes from.

Idealists like to say that we 'should' be getting power from somewhere else or in a different way. These idealists tend to ignore the market reality that our current situation isn't that bad for almost everyone.

Comment · 11 years ago
I'm all for innovation in storage and think there might be a breakthrough at some point. But this goes to the heart of it. Right now a fully renewable grid that matches what we currently have is not financially viable. Not saying it won't become so at some point but it's a high hurdle. All things considered having close to 100% reliable electricity in every home in America for less than ~$100/month is hard to compete with.
Comment · 11 years ago
Case in point is a very cloudy day with no wind. Depending on where it is demand could be very high if it's cold out and heaters are running full blast. You will essentially need a full load supply to come from somewhere or you'll get rolling blackouts. Some regions can compensate with importing or hydro but otherwise you would have to power up the coal and gas. Batteries could maybe work in the future but again this would drastically increase the cost.
Comment · 11 years ago
'Storing solar power underground' - what if it's in a pressurized and compressed form that's easily transported and has a high mass to energy ratio? Brilliant!
Comment · 11 years ago
These cost comparisons don't take into account reliability. Power is almost useless if it's not reliable. A large part of your monthly bill goes towards reliablility and transport of power, not just the power itself.

A 100% wind or solar grid would require an equal amount of backup gas or coal power in order to provide reliability which essentially doubles these cost estimates. Even now most wind and solar is considered a novelty to most grid operators because you can't take it into account for long term planning. In some cases (like Denmark or Quebec) there exists ample alternatives available for when the wind stops blowing but most jurisdictions don't have this.

Considering how smart people in Silicon Valley are the level of ignorance around renewable energy and the'why don't we all use solar panels' mindset is crazy.

Comment · 11 years ago
Great idea, RICO investigate everyone who doesn't toe the party line! How do these people believe this a good idea? If their science is good it should stand against all falsification arguments without the need for government protection.
Comment · 11 years ago
It could also very easily spin out of control and increase instability in Asia.
Comment · 11 years ago
Amazing what Obama is willing to give up in order to secure 'his' legacy issues. 60 years of post war Asian defense strategy thrown out the window. I don't see this ending well. Japan a has a deep militaristic underbelly and most japanese hate their regional neighbors (South Korea, China). They are our allies but this increases instability in Asia enormously and could lead to a regional arms race between China and Japan and greatly increases the risk of a military conflict in Asia in the next 30 years.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton