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

Who Owns Nebula?

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–108 of 108 posts

Re: Who Owns Nebula?

#101

Post by sitharus »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #95
jasode wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is this a huge problem? It depends on what the company is trying to build. The dollar amount of debt a company can take is limited by its revenue because it requires ongoing payments to service that debt. Whether it's debt from a bank business loan or by issuing corporate bonds, they both require real revenue to make those payments. Equity investments don't have a ceiling capped by the company's present day earnings…

So then how could it remain a co-op?

To remain a co-op, in the sense that most co-operatives operate, they cannot remain a cooperative and take on equity funding from non-contributing parties. There's just no way to do this.

An external party could agree to debt funding with deferred repayments, but they can't link repayments to profit.

Hence the structure of Nebula - a regular stock LLC with a constitution that has an exit trap.

Re: Who Owns Nebula?

#102

Post by blagie »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #80
jszymborski wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The accusations of it being a scam are speculative for sure, but they come from a relatable place: the inability to understand why creators would agree to take on "shadow equity" while a small handful of creators get actual real equity. It sounds like a few creators can sell the equity that is built by many creators at any time, but that all the other creators can only realize their equity if and when the company exi…

I can't really figure out how the stakes of your analogy are supposed to map to the Nebula situation. Nebula is a source of income. If it implodes, everyone still goes home. And who would be buying shares if the company is sinking so badly? How does the ransacking work in the analogy, and does it even make a difference? The part that sounds scary is that they're on the "first" life boat and everyone has to wait until…

It'd be pretty fair without the false advertising.

With the false advertising, it's pretty darned unfair.

Re: Who Owns Nebula?

#103

Post by blagie »

gverrilla wrote: post #97
blagie wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find Real Engineering to be pretty good for aerospace, and horrible for everything else. There are errors, but no more so than any other resources I've seen on aerospace. The problem I have is that it's trying to do electronic engineering, fusion, and now history. The worst is interviews / human interest / travel / behind-the-scenes, etc. My question is always: Why? Why do you think you're at all qualified to do a…

> and now history I told him not to that unless he has actual knowledge, and he got very angry at me. On the occasion he made a very poor analysis of political and social situation of an African country (that's all I remember).

> On the occasion he made a very poor analysis of political and social situation of an African country

Cultural sidenote:

I do the same (although in personal conversation; I would obviously never do that on Youtube). I am very happy to espouse on topics I have little knowledge of, as did most of the community I spent time in when I was in grad school. This is looked down upon in most mainstream cultures, but it's actually very helpful. If I espouse something incorrect, someone can correct me. I learn something. It's a form of constructive / interactive learning which I find hyper-productive, and we did that all the time.

It's also helpful in social situations. The point isn't to convince you of something, so much as to communicate the state of my brain to you. That makes it much easier for us to debug who is wrong where.

Of course, that's completely incompatible with:

> he got very angry at me

Conversations got heated but never angry. There's a distinction:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/04/opinion/sunday/kids-would...

What I struggle with is that in mainstream Western culture, this mode of communication comes off as arrogant, and conveys many subtexts which I don't want to convey. Part of that is that we expressed too much confidence when making those statements, but that's maybe 10% of the problem; even expressed with modesty, it mostly breaks in mainstream Western culture (and 90% of the other cultures I've been in; parts of Eastern Europe tolerate this a little bit better).

Re: Who Owns Nebula?

#104

Post by kragen »

blagie wrote: post #103
gverrilla wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and now history I told him not to that unless he has actual knowledge, and he got very angry at me. On the occasion he made a very poor analysis of political and social situation of an African country (that's all I remember).

> On the occasion he made a very poor analysis of political and social situation of an African country Cultural sidenote: I do the same (although in personal conversation; I would obviously never do that on Youtube). I am very happy to espouse on topics I have little knowledge of, as did most of the community I spent time in when I was in grad school. This is looked down upon in most mainstream cultures, but it's act…

yeah, i agree that that's a very productive mode. if i'm wrong about something, i'd much rather be corrected because i said what i thought instead of remaining wrong because i kept my mouth shut. it's embarrassing but worthwhile to realize how wrong i was

a big part of the problem is the nature of the youtube medium, which is effectively a 10-minute monologue desperately begging for mass attention. if it turns out something you said was wrong, you can't go back later and add a correction in the middle of the video. the best you can do is add a pinned comment or delete the erroneous video. people correcting you in the comments will only ever be seen by a tiny fraction of viewers. previously there was an option to add a "card" that overlaid the video at a given timepoint with text, but youtube removed that some years ago

Re: Who Owns Nebula?

#105

Post by gverrilla »

blagie wrote: post #103
gverrilla wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and now history I told him not to that unless he has actual knowledge, and he got very angry at me. On the occasion he made a very poor analysis of political and social situation of an African country (that's all I remember).

> On the occasion he made a very poor analysis of political and social situation of an African country Cultural sidenote: I do the same (although in personal conversation; I would obviously never do that on Youtube). I am very happy to espouse on topics I have little knowledge of, as did most of the community I spent time in when I was in grad school. This is looked down upon in most mainstream cultures, but it's act…

The problem with this approach, which yes can be productive, relies on cases of extremely high complexity. I had a friend who acted this way all the time, but sometimes all I could answer was "You need to read a few books", and then he thought I was the arrogant one, didn't read any book, and continued promoting his false, absurd and nazi-friendly ideas. Not a friend anymore...

Re: Who Owns Nebula?

#106

Post by Dylan16807 »

blagie wrote: post #102
Dylan16807 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't really figure out how the stakes of your analogy are supposed to map to the Nebula situation. Nebula is a source of income. If it implodes, everyone still goes home. And who would be buying shares if the company is sinking so badly? How does the ransacking work in the analogy, and does it even make a difference? The part that sounds scary is that they're on the "first" life boat and everyone has to wait until…

It'd be pretty fair without the false advertising. With the false advertising, it's pretty darned unfair.

I don't think the specific detail I called fair is very relevant to outsiders.

Re: Who Owns Nebula?

#107

Post by blagie »

gverrilla wrote: post #105
blagie wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the occasion he made a very poor analysis of political and social situation of an African country Cultural sidenote: I do the same (although in personal conversation; I would obviously never do that on Youtube). I am very happy to espouse on topics I have little knowledge of, as did most of the community I spent time in when I was in grad school. This is looked down upon in most mainstream cultures, but it's act…

The problem with this approach, which yes can be productive, relies on cases of extremely high complexity. I had a friend who acted this way all the time, but sometimes all I could answer was "You need to read a few books", and then he thought I was the arrogant one, didn't read any book, and continued promoting his false, absurd and nazi-friendly ideas. Not a friend anymore...

I've gotten that feedback before.

When it came with specific book recommendations, it was extremely helpful in some cases (and in a few others, I didn't have time to read the books, so I shut up until such time will come).

It's less then helpful generically.

Re: Who Owns Nebula?

#108

Post by steakscience »

jszymborski wrote: post #48

I'm cancelling my subscription. I was always suspicious of the "50:50 SB/Ceator" deal. The real way to do something like this imho is via a cooperative, with investors like CuriosityStream and SB providing capital loans. That said, the "ownership" claim is apparently provably false and I've been lied to. The company has operated dishonestly, and frankly the biggest reason I had a subscription was because of what I th…

But it is a 50/50 split, so I don't understand what your concern is.
Post reply on HN