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

Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

longbets.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 79 posts

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#51

Post by asmosoinio »

AJ007 wrote: post #44
pbz wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be very surprised if they don't teach English in elementary. In Eastern Europe they start teaching English from kindergarten.

I have not met any Russians who were proficient in English, that learned it locally in school. I have met Russians who were fairly good with English that learned it after living in the US for a while. Compare that to, for example, someone from the Philippines who will be proficient enough in English that you think they are an American.

Not arguin against you, but I think your example was a pretty poor one: The Philippines was basically owned and ran by the US for a hundred years. So when discussing English skills, it is not a good example of a "regular other country".

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#52

Post by mangodrunk »

olefoo wrote: post #40
natrius wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allow me to restate my claim without the words of which you disapprove. The most common message of OWS reduces to "households that make more than $500,000 a year are against everyone else." This is problematic.

It is problematic; more so because it is true. Households that make more than $500,000 a year pay less in taxes as a percentage of their earnings than households that make $50,000 a year. They also benefit disproportionately from the protections our society offers and suffer less from the economic uncertainty that has become the bane of middle-class existence in the last two decades. Now I am certain you can find mor…

They are still paying more for the same services. What if I went into a restaurant with you and the charge 10% of the amount of money you have in your wallet if it's less than $1,000 and 1% if it's more or equal. You have $50 so you pay $5 but I have $1,000 so I pay $10. How is that fair to me? We got the exact same meal. If anything it's unfair to the person who pays the most regardless of the percentage.

We all benefit from a stable government and economy. I don't see how one using it more efficiently should be punished.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#54

Post by Djehngo »

mangodrunk wrote: post #52
olefoo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is problematic; more so because it is true. Households that make more than $500,000 a year pay less in taxes as a percentage of their earnings than households that make $50,000 a year. They also benefit disproportionately from the protections our society offers and suffer less from the economic uncertainty that has become the bane of middle-class existence in the last two decades. Now I am certain you can find mor…

They are still paying more for the same services. What if I went into a restaurant with you and the charge 10% of the amount of money you have in your wallet if it's less than $1,000 and 1% if it's more or equal. You have $50 so you pay $5 but I have $1,000 so I pay $10. How is that fair to me? We got the exact same meal. If anything it's unfair to the person who pays the most regardless of the percentage. We all ben…

In terms of currency value they are. However if you assume that the relationship between money and utility follows a sigmoid curve: in terms of utility it cost them far more than it did you.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#55

Post by sp332 »

brc wrote: post #48
martythemaniak wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OWS is a protest movement, the core of which is against corporations buying laws. The corporations do this because they want to protect their inefficient business models by enshrining their way of doing things into law. For example, content owners wish to censor the internet so they can keep selling consumers crap, while banks wish to tax everybody when they make a loss on their trades. OWS is not anti-business, it i…

I think I can agree with your points, however, the images of OWS protestors have failed to get this across. In the worldwide spread of the OWS theme, the further you get from Manhattan, the muddier the statements. My local occupy demonstration is a rag-tag collection of the usual suspects with signs calling for socialism. I guess this is the problem with any protest movement - you have no top-down control, and so any…

Even the statements in Manhattan are extremely muddy. That's because the "Wall Street" types have pissed off a huge swath of the populace. It's not just one coherent group that's angry. Lots of unrelated people have come together against a common enemy.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#56

Post by lolcraft »

javert wrote: post #5

People tend to assume that in today's era, progress is inevitable. The is a dramatic illustration to the contrary. Progress depends on a stable, pro-business system of government. Which, in turn, depends on a certain kind of underlying culture. (This is why I find Occupy Wall Street threatening.)

There is no such pernicious myth today as the "right-wing pro-business" government.

An example: progress requires, above anything, a rentier class not hell bent on furthering their greed at the expense of everyone else, via shadow banking, obscure contracts and general, short-sighted stupidity. Regulated, if you will.

I don't see many "pro-business" governments doing anything to solve that. I see many of them giving their corporate friends cool, undeserved subsidies under the pretense of "industry being of national interest".

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#58

Post by bh42222 »

vtail wrote: post #38
WildUtah wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> When I was helping some friends to find VC funding in 2008 in Russia, I learnt that most VCs in Russia require kick-backs(!) from startups that they're investing in There are stories on HN all the time about US investors requiring the same. There are fancy meals on the company's tab, first class airplane tickets from all around the world for board meetings and various other abuses that HN founders complain about.…

In this case, they were requiring 10%(!) of the investment as a kick-back. Another interesting feature: there are plenty of 'funding advisors' that can help connecting you to a right VC[1] for a fee, typically a few percent of the funding. Kick-backs are also typical if you are a mid-size company a need to get a commercial loan. [1] They all claim to have connections to some government-backed VC funds such as governm…

Another interesting feature: there are plenty of 'funding advisors' that can help connecting you to a right VC[1] for a fee

Same in the US. I think Massachusetts might have a law against it?

But as another Eastern European currently in the US, I agree with you and know what you are trying to say.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#59

Post by bh42222 »

DevX101 wrote: post #17

Here's an interesting long bet: Warren Buffett has bet $1M that the S&P500 will outperform hedge funds over a 10 year period. http://longbets.org/362/

I don't think it's that interesting.

Buffett knows what he's doing. And we all know that the wast majority of managed funds perform worse then index funds.

And Buffett did not bet on any one hedge fund, which might actually outperform. He has bet on an index of them! And not over a short time period, where again, they could outperform. But over 10 years!

I would be SHOCKED if Buffett loses this bet.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#60

Post by bh42222 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #34
timiscool999 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but they look like two separate problems to me. Russia's is a "resource curse": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse Our current financial system looks more like a twist on a "rent seekers": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_seeking They're kind of similar, but only because resource curse countries end up with a bunch of rent seekers and corrupt officials.

I've got to mull this one over a bit. After several decades of study, I'm just starting to really grok money and finance. Notable WRT resources curse / Dutch disease is the Norwegian counterexample: http://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/377.html

Norway had a strong law and order foundation before they hit oil.
Post reply on HN