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

Why YC went to DC

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 407 posts

Re: Why YC went to DC

#211

Post by p51-remorse »

hosh wrote: post #183
jandrewrogers wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of these, the Section 174 debacle (software R&D amortization) is arguably the problem that needs to be addressed most urgently.

It's kinda nuts how little this is taken seriously on HN. When combined with: - Pressure to make use of office spaces again, away from remote work - The AI bubble - The layoffs that started before section 174 that demonstrated how headcounts had inflated - The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank last year ... it is not looking good for software engineers in the US.

To be fair; the pressure to use office space again helps US workers. A lot of us don’t like it, but it’s a fair bit better than someone in Guatemala getting your job.

(Better for the US engineers, not for the Guatemalan, who is probably a competent engineer himself. But the topic is the outlook for US engineers).

Re: Why YC went to DC

#213

Post by throwaway5959 »

singleshot_ wrote: post #209
romanhn wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they're referring to Section 174 changes. Here's a primer: https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/section-174

This seems like a very strange take on 174. The author seems to be saying that all developer expenses can be expensed under old 174, but that’s not true (under my reading). My take was that exclusively research and development - where you are unsure of the outcome - is eligible under old 174. Notice the analysis of big companies and their tax bills. Author notes that Google only expensed software development expenses…

From what I understand a lot could be classified as R&D. More than one would think.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#214

Post by robertlagrant »

siliconc0w wrote: post #9

If you need more things to fix: * Software R&D Amortization - taxes on make-believe profits * Patent law - protect small businesses from patent trolls * Automate government-driven compliance standards - enable small businesses to sell into large companies/government entities, automatic certification when using pre-approved cloud solutions. * Healthcare insurance - employees of SMBs automatically get access to medicar…

> Automate government-driven compliance standards - enable small businesses to sell into large companies/government entities, automatic certification when using pre-approved cloud solutions.

This is something the market can solve. You can't lobby it into existence.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#215

Post by robertlagrant »

luma wrote: post #101

Why should healthcare be tied to employment? "Quit fucking around" and institute a national, single-payer plan that covers everyone, like every other modern industrialized country.

> institute a national, single-payer plan that covers everyone, like every other modern industrialized country

The two (real, non-politicians are corrupt) downsides to contend with:

- countries do this by limiting what they will spend; in the US you have access to unlimited treatment. E.g. in the UK the NHS will spend £30k for each good year it buys you

- this one isn't fair, but the US is where health innovation happens. Companies sell into it to make money to survive. They then sell into the other countries to make much less margin, and if those countries were all they had as customers, they wouldn't exist. The US is why we have the advancements we have, and all us non-US countries have silly smug citizens who think our countries are better at negotiating deals. If the US didn't do what it did, we'd be a lot worse off.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#216

Post by stetrain »

dheera wrote: post #192
stetrain wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't want my at-will employment status to be the arbiter of whether an unforeseen health issue will bankrupt me. Tying either private insurance or public insurance eligibility to your employer seems like a bad pattern we should be trying to get away from.

Not only that, but very often health issues are the cause, not result of, bad employment performance.

And it’s great how your employer can change which insurance provider they offer every year and along with it your coverage, provider network, prescription costs, etc.

Sometimes even more frequently than once per year if an acquisition takes place.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#217

Post by light_triad »

mrb wrote: post #14

"This year, we’ll fund more than 500 companies out of 50,000 applications, and almost all of them are related to AI in some way." So, what this means: that in 2024, if you want to get VC capital, your startup must be related to AI.

It makes sense that startup folks will gravitate to where there's VC interest as they always have (including the fakers and scammers). But regardless of the current hype cycle the same rules still apply: the reasons why you're doing the startup, if you're an expert in the space, whether you can build a 10x solution, your access to early adopters, your unique point of view on the market. AI is just a new set of tools to generate more value for your specific users, if applied in a unique way that makes a significant difference.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#218

Post by singleshot_ »

throwaway5959 wrote: post #213
singleshot_ wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a very strange take on 174. The author seems to be saying that all developer expenses can be expensed under old 174, but that’s not true (under my reading). My take was that exclusively research and development - where you are unsure of the outcome - is eligible under old 174. Notice the analysis of big companies and their tax bills. Author notes that Google only expensed software development expenses…

From what I understand a lot could be classified as R&D. More than one would think.

Read 26 CFR section 1.174-2. “Activities intended to discover information that will eliminate uncertainly concerning the development or improvement of a product.”

Specifically, check out example three in this section. I would be very careful about sweeping all my expenses in this category, but my familiarity with this part of the law is not deep.

I’d love a 174 practitioner to jump in here but that might be asking a lot.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#219

Post by carbotaniuman »

janalsncm wrote: post #141
mjewkes wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are truly netflix-to-be, you should be able to affordably incentivize your 12 key employees with equity. An exit for Employee < 50 at a netflix-to be will be in the hundreds of millions.

Sure, if you knew you were getting a $100M exit in 5 years a rational agent would even agree to a $0 salary. A bank would gladly give them a $1 million loan for all of their life expenses until then, given the certainty of being repaid. Unfortunately, these things aren’t certain and are contingent on many things including those that have nothing to do with technology. It’s unfortunate because people have a bias towar…

I feel like if you're working at a startup, you value some things more than just straight cash. Hour for hour, I'm fairly certain FAANG pays more than all but a few startups.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#220

Post by light_triad »

bko wrote: post #155
mrb wrote: post #14

"This year, we’ll fund more than 500 companies out of 50,000 applications, and almost all of them are related to AI in some way." So, what this means: that in 2024, if you want to get VC capital, your startup must be related to AI.

I love the constant flex of their tiny acceptance rate. "We only accept 1% of applicants. Btw everyone should apply!" The collective man hours wasted on appe every year for what is essentially a lottery is insane.

It's the same as selective universities telling every student that they should apply regardless of their chance. It makes sense they would do this since it's completely open.

It's not really a lottery, more like a messy matching algorithm for supply and demand. They give everyone a shot since they look at everything, but getting in is not evenly distributed :)

Post reply on HN