Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 79 posts

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#61

Post by progressive_dad »

ianlevesque wrote: post #29
jakobegger wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't even bother trying to disable my ad blocker, I just closed the tab. I don't want to look at websites with ads. If the only way to view a website is with ads, I'd rather not view the website at all.

And you didn't miss anything. A useless fluff piece promoting their social network builder.

I for one encourage our new adblock paywall overlords. To extrapolate this idea further... How much more blatant could you be in saying, "To us, the ads are more important than the content." Which inevitably progresses toward better ads and worse content... It is a perverse thing to do, but a useful filter bubble imposed by the content providers themselves. Likely far more accurate than my own ability to judge the quality of the content in the long term in most cases.

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#62

Post by forgetsusername »

jerf wrote: post #42
forgetsusername wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wish for interest rates to be higher then. Why? There are people on both sides of the interest-rate trade, so any change in rates creates winners and losers. Higher rates aren't inherently "better" than lower rates. Personally, I want LOW rates. I'm young and have a mortgage and car payment. I want cheap money, so that I can put it to use investing in my future. Why should I pay more to subsidize the Baby Boomer's…

"I'm young and have a mortgage and car payment." Your mortgage costs more because interest rates are low, making lending easy, making it easy to take out loans, meaning all the buyers can get bigger loans, meaning you have to bid more to win. Second order effects. Interests rates are not low in a vacuum. It is likely that because there's nowhere else to make good returns, there's a lot of money sloshing into stupid n…

>"Second order effects. Interests rates are not low in a vacuum."

Uh, no. My mortgage is inarguably cheaper due to low rates. So is my car payment.

Is it possible that the price of the asset I'm borrowing against is higher because low rates are inflating asset prices? Possibly. It depends where I live and when I bought my house. If I just re-fi'd at lower rates, it's cheaper, period. Besides that, the inflated price shows up as an asset on my personal balance sheet.

These second-order effects are relevant, but not substantial.

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#63

Post by jerf »

forgetsusername wrote: post #62
jerf wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm young and have a mortgage and car payment." Your mortgage costs more because interest rates are low, making lending easy, making it easy to take out loans, meaning all the buyers can get bigger loans, meaning you have to bid more to win. Second order effects. Interests rates are not low in a vacuum. It is likely that because there's nowhere else to make good returns, there's a lot of money sloshing into stupid n…

> "Second order effects. Interests rates are not low in a vacuum." Uh, no. My mortgage is inarguably cheaper due to low rates. So is my car payment. Is it possible that the price of the asset I'm borrowing against is higher because low rates are inflating asset prices? Possibly. It depends where I live and when I bought my house. If I just re-fi'd at lower rates, it's cheaper, period. Besides that, the inflated price…

"Besides that, the inflated price shows up as an asset on my personal balance sheet."

Until interest rates go up and it deflates again. That's not a reliable asset.

With all due respect, you really don't know what you're talking about here. Your model of economics is too linear and static.

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#64

Post by forgetsusername »

rwj wrote: post #41
forgetsusername wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wish for interest rates to be higher then. Why? There are people on both sides of the interest-rate trade, so any change in rates creates winners and losers. Higher rates aren't inherently "better" than lower rates. Personally, I want LOW rates. I'm young and have a mortgage and car payment. I want cheap money, so that I can put it to use investing in my future. Why should I pay more to subsidize the Baby Boomer's…

Those low rates have probably also propped up the the value of your house. Look at the ratio of the median house price to income over time, and you will be less convinced that low interest rates have been helpful.

>you will be less convinced that low interest rates have been helpful.

So the fact that I'm paying less interest AND the value of the asset has increased isn't helpful?

Again, I'm not making the argument that low rates are "good"; I'm saying they're good for me.

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#65

Post by dragonwriter »

jerf wrote: post #42
forgetsusername wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wish for interest rates to be higher then. Why? There are people on both sides of the interest-rate trade, so any change in rates creates winners and losers. Higher rates aren't inherently "better" than lower rates. Personally, I want LOW rates. I'm young and have a mortgage and car payment. I want cheap money, so that I can put it to use investing in my future. Why should I pay more to subsidize the Baby Boomer's…

"I'm young and have a mortgage and car payment." Your mortgage costs more because interest rates are low, making lending easy, making it easy to take out loans, meaning all the buyers can get bigger loans, meaning you have to bid more to win. Second order effects. Interests rates are not low in a vacuum. It is likely that because there's nowhere else to make good returns, there's a lot of money sloshing into stupid n…

> Interests rates are not low in a vacuum.

This is true in almost exactly the reverse of the sense you intend; interest rates are low as a fairly direct result of poor results on a number of economic measures; its true that the conditions in which low interest rates occur are bad, but that's not because of low interest rates, it is what low interest rates are a response to.

Inflation in prices is one of the signals which leads to higher interest rates. (While there are some wrinkles, pretty much the main purpose of monetary policy is short-circuiting destructive positive feedback loops in the economy by introducing negative feedback mechanisms to counteract them.)

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#66

Post by [deleted] »

jerf wrote: post #63
forgetsusername wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Second order effects. Interests rates are not low in a vacuum." Uh, no. My mortgage is inarguably cheaper due to low rates. So is my car payment. Is it possible that the price of the asset I'm borrowing against is higher because low rates are inflating asset prices? Possibly. It depends where I live and when I bought my house. If I just re-fi'd at lower rates, it's cheaper, period. Besides that, the inflated price…

"Besides that, the inflated price shows up as an asset on my personal balance sheet." Until interest rates go up and it deflates again. That's not a reliable asset. With all due respect, you really don't know what you're talking about here. Your model of economics is too linear and static.

[deleted]

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#67

Post by TuringTest »

RUG3Y wrote: post #49
TuringTest wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but then people should not be disregarding regulation, they should be asking for the right kind.

Color me cynical, but asking for the kind of regulation we want rarely seems to have any effect.

Because you are not a multinational corporation.

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#68

Post by forgetsusername »

jerf wrote: post #63
forgetsusername wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Second order effects. Interests rates are not low in a vacuum." Uh, no. My mortgage is inarguably cheaper due to low rates. So is my car payment. Is it possible that the price of the asset I'm borrowing against is higher because low rates are inflating asset prices? Possibly. It depends where I live and when I bought my house. If I just re-fi'd at lower rates, it's cheaper, period. Besides that, the inflated price…

"Besides that, the inflated price shows up as an asset on my personal balance sheet." Until interest rates go up and it deflates again. That's not a reliable asset. With all due respect, you really don't know what you're talking about here. Your model of economics is too linear and static.

>With all due respect, you really don't know what you're talking about here.

Benefits of interest rates are ambiguous, as I argue. Inflated asset prices benefit asset owners, as I argue:

https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/inside-the-vault/spr...

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#69

Post by rosser »

apalmer wrote: post #54
rosser wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish companies would concentrate on providing value to their customers. That's just it, though. "Customers" are just another measure of your value to the people to whom you're actually beholden: investors. As long as you're providing value (perceived or actual) to them, you're winning this game. Ideally, that involves providing value to customers, as well, but it's demonstrably not necessary.

No. Full Stop. what is being said here is maybe you should minimize the number and scope of investors. your response is 'your' value is whatever your 'investors' think it is. The key point in this is businesses aren't founded to gather investors, businesses are founded to make money. If you can make money more efficiently by taking on investors then you should, if you can make money more efficiently by not taking on…

You seem to think we have some point of disagreement.

The key point in this is businesses aren't founded to gather investors...

Maybe together, we can explain that to the rest of Silly Valley, where "getting funded" has for some time now demonstrably been a more important goal than, I don't know, "getting traction".

Re: A Unicorn Is the Last Thing This Web 2.0 Survivor Wants

#70

Post by calbear81 »

sirkneeland wrote: post #19
tempestn wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then if you do disable adblock, it's difficult to read the article because there's a never-ending stream of animated big macs and bank ads and crap pasted beside it, helpfully fixed position so you don't accidentally scroll it off the screen. I say as someone who makes his living largely from ads, if you have to force someone to view your ads, they're not going to click on them anyway ! What's the point? All you'…

If they're paid by CPI, do they need you to click on them?

For something like McDonald's what's the point of tracking a click? Few will click and it's not like you can order a Big Mac and fries online. They'll most likely track it to some type of in-store sales/visit number based on where they have targeted the ads.
Post reply on HN