Because I have a whole bunch of employees who still like to eat and a whole bunch of customers who love what we do. If I stop, all that stops too.
The state of my partnership might be crap, but the worst day I’ve ever had working for myself is still better than the best day I had working for someone else.
One yes and the other no. It’s a rather complicated, self-inflicted situation. Cleaning up the mess would definitely raise the joy factor. I’ve been working for awhile to find a mutually acceptable solution but we are at an impasse. So, I can get a bigger bite of the apple but probably never get the whole thing.
Ok, then you should offer them to buy you out at the same valuation at which you would be happy to buy them out. And if they don't want to accept that you have to walk.
Keep in mind that your loyalty to your customers and your employees can and will be used against you if you don't put your foot down and put some kind of ultimatum on the table.
Then they can choose between having money in their pocket or a large chunk of nothing at all.
Alternatively, find new partners that are interested in funding the buyout. Post in Who is looking to collaborate and just mention that you are looking for deeper than normal pockets, maybe?
From the second link, looks like the plan is that Snowflake will annoy cloud providers less by only using the domain-fronting channel to propagate routing info:
> sending Tor traffic directly through domain fronting (rather than using it only to distribute bridges and snowflakes) enables these platforms to claim that this technique is used by malware and therefore harmful to users, justifying shutting it down.
> Snowflake is a more sustainable way for us to use the expensive but high censorship-resistance features of domain fronting as a low bandwidth bootstrapping channel.
If I'm allowed to guess, Tor Browser has Meek built in and it includes a few services hosted on Microsoft cloud. As far as I understand it, it can be quite expensive consider the total amount of traffic those Meek server must relay.
However, I wouldn't consider it "censorship-resistance".
From reading their Technical Overview document, I got the impression that they put a lot of faith on Domain Fronting which might not be a good thing
> ... the censor cannot block the broker without blocking all of Google, or all of Amazon, hence collateral freedom.
The US adult obesity rate is 42.4% [1]. To get to 75% of deaths being obese people, you'd need about a 4x death rate of obese people compared to non-obese people. Most obese people find it extremely hard to stop being obese and often fail despite immense effort.
Meanwhile, getting a COVID vaccine reduces the chance of death by >10x at a cost of <$40 per person. My impression is that vaccines are unusually cost-effective medicine and that the low-impact medical spending is elsewhere in the system, but it is nonetheless thought-provoking to consider this specific example.
> Most obese people find it extremely hard to stop being obese and often fail despite immense effort.
I used to help out at a slimming group. Like many self-improvement quests, the effort waxes and wanes. Much as I wished for people to achieve their dream of being slimmer, and even though their wishes and often their attempts were laudable, I wouldn't call them "immense". They're people, most wanted an easy fix and struggled to remain dedicated when faced with the harder bits.
This. It's not hard to make the necessary changes if sufficiently motivated. In fact, formulating the motivation is kind of the only step, everybody, and I mean *EVERYBODY* can achieve appropriate weight and even above-average fitness if following the right precepts.
Sorry, I'm not sure I expressed what I meant clearly so I'll try again: I mean that it's sufficient to be motivated WHEN armed with the proper knowledge; I think many people fail DESPITE being motivated because they are simply misinformed as to what works.
Yes, reading my comment again it doesn't seem I was saying that. Anyway, I don't think that much motivation is required, and if a diet / lifestyle change is hard to stick to, it's often because it's a misguided strategy. For illustration, counting calories while not making qualitative changes in the composition of the diet is just simply never going to work, long-term. Some foods are just too hyperpalatable, too prone to form emotional / addictive associations, but conversely that also implies those dietary changes will have to confront some emotional regulation issues as well. It sounds complicated, but I don't know, I think looking at how widespread the overweight issue is nowadays we have to conclude almost all of us are doing something wrong wrt to diet and lifestyle.
Oh I agree, I think we've been greatly underestimating how damaging all these are and so should be treated like cigarettes with very heavy taxation that should go towards subsidizing healthy food.
Weight is a direct results of the calorie equation.
Appetite is regulated by a bunch of different factors. Actually, when you think about it, someone could live just fine being constantly hungry (so completely broken appetite signals) in a food scarce environment.
even bariatric surgery seldom produces thinness. It only makes a very obese person only mildly obese, optimistically. The diet and fitness industries are worth billions of dollars, with pitifully poor results to show for it. Biology is fighting all efforts to make humans thinner.
It could be true that obese have 4 times higher death rate. Note that obesity often comes together with diabetes and cardiovascular diseases which increase the risk even more.
Vaccines are effective, they reduce death rate approximately 10 times. It still seemed quite high that several EU countries have reintroduced restrictions despite good vaccination uptake.
Besides this is about long-term issues, not just covid or something we can fix in 1 or 2 years.
This essay set may superficially appear to be another repetitive salvo in the interminable US healthcare political conflict, but I recommend reading a bit deeper. I think the perspective these essays offer (that, at the margin, medical spending doesn't affect people's wellspan much, at least not in the US) is both quite important and underrepresented in most discussions of healthcare.
I mean, why would we expect it too? Spending is about profits accumulating somewhere, so why would that have anything to do with optimizing healthspan? Note, I'm vehemently critical of the modern medical establishment, and a health loon myself (by necessity, was hit with a though illness early on in my life).
As a company, why would I want to pay the hourly rate at all? Why not contract with a reputable bounty hunter, give them the level of access I'd give the hourly consultant, and pay the hunter bounties for what they find?
Seems like that captures the "higher bugs per hour" advantage of the consultant while retaining the "you only get paid for directly producing value" advantage of bounties.
It seems like what you're describing here is simply a bug bounty program.
The reason companies pay for app pentests and also run bug bounties is that the two modalities find different kinds of bugs. App pentesters generally get a lot of intel about their targets (source is not unusual). You're also getting a team with bios and a final deliverable that records the diligence work done, which is not an outcome you get with a bounty program.
But you can do things in between. It's not crazy to offer a gig to someone who has delivered a good finding on a bounty project. But you have to do something to incentivize them beyond what the bounty already does, and the most normal way to do that is to not make payment contingent.
