Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | steevenwee's commentslogin

I sense a lot of bitterness from this post. I don't think you have a full context on history of 409a valuations industry.

Considering the fact that 409a valuations pre carta would cost $10k, $2k doesnt sound like a such an unfair deal. You could always go the legacy lawyer companies route and pay way more for a single 409a valuation.

As for onboarding process - you do need a hell of a lot information to conclude said valuation.


I wonder if Facebook going to repeat that.


FB had $10.2bn net income in 2016 on $27.6bn revenue. How can it drop back to its $100bn IPO valuation?


If FB were to stop growing at the rate it has been, ~100bn would be a reasonable target market cap, given a P.E. Ratio of around 10.


2017 is half over. Facebook is going to make about $14bn net income in 2017. At a PE of 10 that's $140bn.

The S&P has an average PE of 15.6. That brings us to $218bn.

It's mindboggling any of you can think FB would drop back to IPO valuation at this size. Maybe in 40 years when the world has changed dramatically and most of us are retired or dead.


Facebook is way over that kind of instability.


Something like Iceland or Sweden?



I don't think it's correct to compare index to what basically is a stock.


A stock share is partial ownership of a for-profit venture for gain. Bitcoin is more akin to a precious metal or commodity, except that btc doesn't have any utility value like gold, silver or copper do.

Stocks pay dividends and entitle the owner to certain rights. Btc gives you some crypto that others trust.

Not very similar.


Arguably precious metals don't have much more utility value either.


Gold, platinum, silver and copper all have use in electronics manufacturing and jewelry. Platinum is used in catalytic converters for exhaust treatment. They are very useful.

Btc is actually a detriment to the environment without any real utility. The evidence of work algorithms burn fossil fuels and add CO2 and other pollution into the atmosphere, and at the end of the day, all you have is a bunch of useless 1s and 0s that we attribute with value that are incapable of doing anything other than represent a finite portion of a really complex math problem that we attribute value to.


> Gold, platinum, silver and copper all have use in electronics manufacturing and jewelry.

From my understanding their "actual value" is massively inflated through a similar monopoly as De Beers for diamonds (except it's China as opposed to a single company).

I agree that BTC is a massive determent to the environment and so on, but rare earth mining isn't a picnic either. While all of those materials do have practical uses, their perceived value is massively over-inflated.


Yes, they are both detriments to the environment, but precious metals provide value. Not only do they provide value, but in many cases, once they are used, they may be recycled and used again. You get to amortize the pollution over the lifetime of utility of the material until it can no longer be recovered.


For some, it costs 1 life.


My favorite so far: Raymond Hettinger Modern Python Dictionaries A confluence of a dozen great ideas


YT video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npw4s1QTmPg slides for the 2016 talk: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3967849/sfmu2/_build/htm...

The 2017 slides are better, but I can't find them they are mentioned in the beginning of the talk though.


Slides are below the video. Click on "show more" to see them.

https://github.com/PyCon/2017-slides


Any Raymond Hettinger talk is worthwhile.


He shows a Sphinx/RTD output during the video as his slides. Is that published anywhere public?


AFAIK Telegram is banned in a number of countries for the reason of being secure and not letting authorities monitor what people are messaging about.


That's not evidence that its encryption algorithm is well designed or secure.


it is circumstantial evidence. Isn't it should be a red flag if one messenger is prohibited in a country with an authoritarian regime, and the other is not?

I mean that's enough for my social messaging. If I'd need to transfer some top secret information, I would use neither of them.


> Isn't it should be a red flag if one messenger is prohibited in a country with an authoritarian regime, and the other is not?

No.


If you want to use less information than available for your decisions, it's your choice.


That was before WhatsApp started using Signal protocol.


How whatsup using any protocol relevant to telegram being banned?


I use a number of telegram bots, which took very little time to write. The bot api is super easy and straight forward.

I also use it for most of my communications.


Getting 504. I guess it's HN effect.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: