> The vast majority of cases stock options end up worthless
Also, even if the company ends up worth a lot of money, there's no guarantee that a way to liquidate, such as an IPO, exit or secondary market, will become available in any reasonable time frame. And as a regular employee you have exceedingly little to say in bringing about such events. There's not much fun in having a winning lottery ticket that can't be cashed in, in fact it's highly stressful.
"While less access to health care and weaker social structures can explain the gap between the wealthy and poor in the US, it doesn't explain the differences between the wealthy in the US and the wealthy in Europe, the researchers note. There may be other systemic factors at play that make Americans uniquely short-lived, such as diet, environment, behaviors, and cultural and social differences."
Off the top of my head, obesity seems like the obvious culprit to investigate. If so, I wonder if semaglutide will close this gap again?
to me, the rabid response to anything remotely resembling socialism, and the inability to see life as anything but a zero-sum game is the obvious culprit. this precludes caring for eachother, and creates a life that's essentially a never-ending rat race for everyone, rich and poor alike.
you cant inject your way out of a society that is, at its core, defined by class/racial segregation, systemic inequality and distrust of governments.
We don't yet know if there's actually any gold in the mine or not this time around, but we know for certain that there is money to be made selling pickaxes to the miners.
Or a very quick way to get your personal email address blocked. Pretty sure this will eventually trigger some sort of automated spam response and that account will promptly get blocked.
Hope they used a throwaway google account with absolutely no link to his domains or main email address.
Some percentage of those are missing their actual targets due to GPS jamming (others, just straight up terror bombardment). Also, part of the purpose is to create dilemmas for an air defense with limited resources - save the ammo factory or the children's hospital.
I still vividly remember pictures of a strike on a kids hospital in the very first days of the war, where a 2 year old has been killed by a Russian missile. No one has been using that hospital as a military base at the time.
Nothing justifies this. There is no logic that could be twisted here to somehow make it look like it was OK for Russians to fire at those targets. In fact it isn't "OK" for Russians to fire at any targets within Ukraine, no matter their setup or positioning - I don't think it can be any clearer than this.
Which doesn't add up either. It's Ukraine's largest children hospital.
Meanwhile there is a sprawling military plant Artem nearby, which has been a target of multiple Russian missile strikes.
The Russian MoD said the hospital was hit by a malfunctioning Ukrainian anti-missile, but if you don't believe that, what do you think is more likely: that the military plant was the target and a Russian missile missed it, hitting a corner of the hospital building instead, or that the hospital was the target, but the missile failed in its attempt to kill scores of children being treated for cancer, which would be one of the most heinous war crimes imaginable?
I literally don't understand what point you're trying to make - even if Russia only accidentally hit a children's hospital.......they are still the ones firing the missiles. They are still killing children. They are still kidnapping and moving them to Russia. They are still killing their parents in a war that they started. The "legality" of their strikes on civilian infrastructure is an idiotic thing to discuss when they shouldn't be doing any strikes in the first place.
My point is that saying that Russia deliberately target hospitals is a lie.
>The "legality" of their strikes on civilian infrastructure is an idiotic thing to discuss when they shouldn't be doing any strikes in the first place.
And yet people are busy spreading atrocity propaganda. Why is that?
Russian representative at UN SC two days before that mentioned in his statement that Ukrainian military forced inhabitants out of a different maternity ward in Mariupol and made fire points there. [0]
Now look at the woman at 1:10 in your video. Here is a BBC's interview with her[1]:
"But Marianna told me there were no Ukrainian military stationed in the building where she was. She says she saw Ukrainian soldiers in the oncology unit in the building opposite the maternity unit."
My take is that at worst it was a strike made by mistake by people who were unaware that the hospital wasn't evacuated.
So then if Ukraine strikes Russian maternity hospitals or other civilian assets it would plausibly be because there were Russian soldiers stationed there?
This organization has no creditability at all. It lost it complaining about countries defending their borders from immigrants and recent antisemitism campaigns. Sorry. It’s now another anti western propaganda machine comparable to Russia Today. Long way traveled for once Nobel prize winning organization.
> Also, part of the purpose is to create dilemmas for an air defense with limited resources - save the ammo factory or the children's hospital.
And how it would happen? Putin calls an AA site and tells them "tehre is two missiles your way - one for ammo factory and other for the children's hospital - it's your choice what to defend"?
> If everything is a legitimate target the defender has to decide whether to expend limited AA to protect civilian or strategic targets.
And this is precisely why targeting civilian infrastructure is a war crime, as is hiding/embedding military infrastructure in or below civilian infrastructure.
Fortunately for Russia & Israel, not to mention the US, there are no longer any earnest attempts to establish an architecture for enforcing the Geneva Convention, except as vengeance of the victors on the losers.
> why targeting civilian infrastructure is a war crime
Remind me, who was tried for this?
>> NATO planes have attacked bridges, oil refineries and other targets in raids that have affected civilians. But until Monday they had refrained from striking the electrical system. The alliance has repeatedly insisted its fight is with President Slobodan Milosevic, not with the Yugoslav people.
>> "The fact that lights went out across 70 percent of the country shows that NATO has its finger on the light switch now," said NATO spokesman Jamie Shea. "We can turn the power off whenever we need to and whenever we want to."
>> "We realize the inconvenience that may be caused to the Yugoslav people, but it up to Milosevic to decide how he wants to use his remaining energy resources: on his tanks or on his people," Shea said. While NATO sought to downplay the effect of the strikes on civilians, the raids remain politically sensitive.
I agree that the US / NATO has bent and crossed international rules (way) too much in the past and without consequences - the US didn't sign the ICC accords for a reason.
>> But until Monday they had refrained from striking the electrical system.
>> "The fact that lights went out across 70 percent of the country shows that NATO has its finger on the light switch now," said NATO spokesman Jamie Shea. "We can turn the power off whenever we need to and whenever we want to."
>> "We realize the inconvenience that may be caused to the Yugoslav people, but it up to Milosevic to decide how he wants to use his remaining energy resources: on his tanks or on his people," Shea said. While NATO sought to downplay the effect of the strikes on civilians, the raids remain politically sensitive.
There will be quite the aftermath in the Israel/Palestine conflict for that. No matter what, the ICC investigation is here to stay - and both sides will have to face justice.
For Russia/Ukraine I'm less certain that anything will come around because even if Russia gets driven out of Ukraine in its entirety, there is zero chance any Russian will be held accountable by anyone on the world stage.
We can hope that Russian economy will be driven to collapse under the weight of military expenditure. Then we might see their elites sacrificing some talking heads to appease US and get sanctions lifted.
Why would Putin needs to call? The missiles announce themselves.
It sounds like you think the dilemma can only appear in the spur of a moment. Once the missile is already in the air. But the dilemma also appears before that. When you decide where to put your AA batteries, and when you set policy on when and how to engage.
Not at all. There are visible discontinuities that show the underlying geometry. It's also a very different kind of effect to begin with - more resembling print patterns rather than the more pixel-based dithering from older computer graphics.
I don't know what discontinuities you mean. The point about the "print pattern" seems confused. He just made the dots bigger to see them better in a compressed video. I still think this is clearly better, as it is perfectly temporally stable, unlike the Obra Dinn method.
I'm glad the pendulum is swinging back with this one. With UI paradigms, we seem to have this tendency to throw out the baby with the bathwater, or be so intrigued with the possible new benefits we can get (buttons can change according to context!) that we forget what current benefits we would give up to get them (learnability and muscle-memory because the button always does the same thing, being able to feel your way to a button without looking at it)
It reminds me of what happened with the flat UI/anti-skeuomorphism wave a bit over a decade ago. It seemed like someone got so incensed by the faux leather in the iPhone's Find My Friends app (supposedly made to look like it had the same stitching as the leather upholstery in Steve Jobs' private jet) that they went on a crusade against anything "needlessly physical looking" in UI. We got the Metro design language from Microsoft as the fullest expression of it, with Apple somewhat following suit in iOS (but later walking back some things too) and later Google's Material Design walking it back a bit further (drop shadows making a big comeback).
But for a while there, it was genuinely hard to tell which bit of text was a label and which was a button, because it was all just bits of black or monocolor text floating on a flat white background. It's like whoever came up with the flat UI fad didn't realize how much hierarchy and structure was being conveyed by the lines, shadows and gradients that had suddenly gone out of vogue. All of a sudden we needed a ton of whitespace between elements to understand which worked together and which were unrelated. Which is ironic, because the whole thing started as a crusade against designers putting their own desire for artistic expression above their users' needs by wasting UI space on showing off their artistic skill with useless ornaments, but it led to designers putting their own philosophical purity above their users' needs, by wasting UI space on unnecessary whitespace and forcing low information density on everyone.
I don't think that while ever ended! Have you seen Jetbrains' IDEs "new UI" (now the only UI except for a soon to be deprecated plugin)? You can't tell where a tab ends and the next one begins, it's just floating text on a solid background, with slightly more space between names. They also got rid of most labels, so it became a game of guessing what each symbol could possibly mean (another provably awful trend).
And the worst is, they're likely just copying competitors because as a sibling comment days, some people see the old accesible UI and think it looks old fashioned.
I love the new UI. Reduces a lot of visual clutter and lets me focus on the code. I don't understand the problem with telling where a tab ends and the next begins; I don't click on the borders of tabs anyway, just the text. (And there's an icon in front of the tab name.)
Plenty of UI designers just follow trends because everyone just copies the current popular things, especially when their competition starts doing it too. They don't really put a ton of thought into it or don't do it as part of a wider cohesive strategy where it makes sense for what they are building.
Really shows the power of UI designers at big organizations like Apple, Google, and Tesla.
That "flat everything" design trend of 10-15 years ago was sooooo annoying. And it was so apparent that extremely little thought about the usability of it was considered once the trend gained momentum.
I remember when Android (don't recall exactly which release) replaced their standard back, home and menu buttons with just a triangle, square and circle. It was so bizarre. I felt like a toddler playing with a "fit the blocks into the different shaped holes" toy.
"Was"? flat UI is still here and it's horrible. It drives me crazy having to guess that a featureless piece of text might be a button because its position in a window vaguely suggests it may be a button and not just a random piece of floating text. So much subtle information is just gone from modern UIs.
It's due to fashion. New tech trend comes in and companies want to use it to differentiate their products as newer so they seem more valuable. When the tech ages and becomes just another commodity the usage settles down. When blue LEDs came out every hardware company put blue LEDs everywhere but that's no longer the case as they're not fashionable. Another example is glass-look UI buttons from the first iPhones.
I got an email from Microsoft recently with that funny thin font used for headers. It reminded me that that was a trend around 2016 or so. The headers would have thinner font strokes than the body text, despite being substantially larger.
I remember that around that time (I was quite young) I was putting it in all my attempts at websites (all hideous, even at the time) and I thought it looked really cool. Funny the way trends go.
In the case of the email it was clear that it just hadn't been updated with the times.
I'm still waiting for tech to return to the decades of UI/UX design guidelines they all ditched during what I call The (Not-So) Great Flattening.
Actionable items were indicated by a button, highlight, or underline (hyperlink!). A scrollbar showed you when there was more to see. There was consistency across all apps on a platform.
It took me a year of using Apple CarPlay to realize that if you touch the album of a song on the Now Playing part of Apple Music, it will bring you to that album's tracklist. Needless to say I felt very dumb upon discovering this so late, but I didn't feel at fault. Why?
Because when I touch the artist's name - it does nothing. When I touch the song title, it does nothing. When I touch the album art, it does nothing. All despite these having the same design style as the touchable album title. There is no reason to expect that the album title would be any different.
iOS, macOS, and Windows improved a lot, but the design is still horribly lacking in usability problems that were already solved decades ago.
IIRC Material Design actually came before iOS' pivot to Immaterial Aero We Have At Home. Metro was indeed first, though, so kudos for actually mentioning it. Everyone seems to forget that the Zune was what really got things rolling.
Material came out in mid 2014. I know that for sure because I was at the Google I/O where they presented it together with Android L/5. iOS 7 was released in 2013.
Also, even if the company ends up worth a lot of money, there's no guarantee that a way to liquidate, such as an IPO, exit or secondary market, will become available in any reasonable time frame. And as a regular employee you have exceedingly little to say in bringing about such events. There's not much fun in having a winning lottery ticket that can't be cashed in, in fact it's highly stressful.