will_brown

Well not to rock the boat or beat a dead horse here, but it would appear my down voting/flagging privileges have been removed since this post, could they be reinstated?

>The public markets are generally very unforgiving. This is why so many tech companies are choosing to stay private longer.

Can you even explain what that means?

In my estimation the companies are staying private longer so the VCs can blow up the valuations pre IPO higher than anytime in history, whereas, if the startup IPO’d from the start there is no way to continue the growth while sustaining the loss (in the real world business have to make a profit to continue) and VCs couldn’t make the same profit they do now, but in all other respects the risk would be the same.

Anyway it wouldn’t be to hard to look at the IPO of VC backed tech startups and determine what % had profits vs operating losses (obviously my guess is the majority are IPOing at losses). Then, a further analysis could be done to see if the average startup company valuations/market caps declined post IPO and how much pre IPO investors/shareholders took off the table.

Edit: looks like since 2010 there have been 100+ tech unicorns ($1B+ valuation) and ~2/3 didn’t make profit. Wish I could readily calculate how much VCs made taking those companies public, maybe someone can link an article/data.

>There is no way where Bird becomes a viable business that grows into its absurd valuation.

I was recently chided and reproached by the HN mods for knocking scooter companies (even got the old “this isn’t personal, but don’t...”).

the point is with any SV funded company you don’t need revenue or even to be a viable business. You just need SV money (I think Bird has already burned through $415M and now asking for this $300M) to launch the business and “grow” the user base and/or metrics(someone here once fittingly described the model as selling $5 bills for $1).

So now you raise $500M sell $5 bills for $1, the startup staggers their sales so they show constant growth month over month, in reality you raise additional rounds to get more VCs to buy in and help market the company, then finally when you show tremendous growth (metrics), show revenue of $100M, then you file for a IPO and explain away the losses of $400M by saying at any point you can “flip the switch” and cut costs by no longer reinvesting in growth but make profits. Then at IPO you cash out and dump the shit company that’s never made a dollar on the public because all they see is the media pushed by SV/VCs with the media contacts, the big SV investor names, 100% growth month over month metrics, and the hope they to will get rich.

>From a computer science perspective, what should Google do to train its models in a privacy conscious way?

Install these devices in the homes of google employees, executives and offices and allow the public to listen in. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander and all.

Maybe when google has trained the systems enough to not need to train them by collecting and listening to customers conversations, then they enter them into the stream of commerce.

Because the US doesn’t care about helping people who would take public transportation...instead we prefer VCs funneling money into innovative startups disrupting transportation by littering scooters all over our public walkways and allowing them to eventually take these companies public for billions in return.

God forbid you have an opinion other than US transportation is the best, US healthcare is the best, US education is the best...you can’t even look at other countries models or actual global rankings showing the US outspends every other country in those area yet our outcomes are nowhere near the top.

>Contrast this with acquiring a business name through any Department of State/Division of Corporations.

What do you mean by this?

Generally if a corporate name is registered (example: ABC, INC.) most states will not allow another “ABC” to be registered (even if ending in another suffix like “Corp” or even if another type of entity like an LLC).

I had a client in a certain state who registered their entity name as MSG HOLDINGS and wouldn’t you know I got a call from General Counsel of Madison Square Garden one day making an offer to purchase my clients entity solely for the name.

Here is a suggestion for the strike as well...launch a decentralized anti-libra coin.

I thought about that, and it’s just spit balling something off the cuff, but address to address self-spending may have positive impacts on the network vis-a-vis additional transaction fees for miners.

Maybe Satoshi should have built in such a feature into bitcoin (you don’t use it you lose it). That would have been a much more interesting dynamic (maybe) insofar as the original concept of P2P cash which morphed into digital gold/store of value (ie no incentive to spend, create a market/economy).

And of course Schlegel diagrams which are commonly used for visualizing four-dimensional polytopes.

It’s been over 100 years (very close in time to the publication of flatland) and I don’t think anyone has proposed an alternative diagram of a 4 cube/hypercube/Tesseract.

As I mention to a number of other comments...it simply depends on the accounting method.

It can be waived (not treated as income at all as you say) or it can be treated as income (taxes paid) and the loss carried forward for future deduction.

Sorry I meant “accrual method of accounting” auto corrected to “actual”...looks like you caught my gist.