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

Poor Drew, if only he’d taken Steve’s advice! /s

I think you make a good point but the use of samples in hip hop doesn’t support it; those samples need to be licensed.

This is very much untrue, and the debate about exactly how much sampling constitutes fair use has gone one for many years and court cases.

Here are some examples of the questions in the benchmark. If these are representative, they seem pretty cut and dry. https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/omniscience#exampl...

"Sometimes you have to change things that are perfectly good just to make them your own." --Jack Donaghy, 30 Rock

Former E36 owner here as well. What are "monkey pissers"?


Sorry, that's local vernacular jargon and I should do better to define these terms on introduction of them. ;)

Most people call them windshield washer nozzles, or similar. But I find that they're about as useful for that job as I imagine that a monkey pissing on the window might be, so I find the other description -- while vulgar -- to be a better fit.

Anyway, they're heated on cold-weather E36s. IIRC, it's temperature-activated and independent of the defrost switch.

---

It's supposed to go something like this on a ice-crusted day with an E36:

1. Find the door lock completely frozen and inoperable

2. Lift the outside door handle for a few seconds to engage the lock heater (!)

3. Succeed at unlocking car.

4. Get in. Start the car. Turn on the front and rear defrosters and the headlights. Retrieve the scrapey-thing

5. Back outside, start scraping.

6. Get tired of that and climb back inside.

7. Try the wipers to see how clear the windshield isn't.

8. Engage the monkey pissers, which are probably de-iced on their own by now and flowing freely

9. Grumble a bit at the results

10. Go to step 5


"Disingenuous?" Just because someone finds the style irksome, and chooses to share that here, they're deceptively, calculatingly trying to derail the conversation? That's an extremely cynical and uncharitable take.

If I were the author of the post, I'd value the feedback.


Except that is not what this place is for, at all, and flirts with several explicit posting guidelines. It doesn't make for good discussion, doesn't address the topic at hand, etc.


Open core can work, but you really have to find very strong product market fit on the proprietary side--ideally with features that discriminate between users who are relatively happy to pay and users who are not. (There's a reason "SSO tax" is so common.)

And you really have to believe in open source and have the discipline to keep investing in it, otherwise the temptation is ever present to throw more and more effort and resources into the proprietary parts.


Quaid Army?


For that purpose I think most people are using bubblewrap or seatbelt/sandbox-exec with CPython.


From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47171887 re: [agent] sandboxing :

pydantic/monty, vercel-labs/just-bash, amla sandbox, csl-core, microsandbox, workerd, wasmtime-mte

containers/bubblewrap: https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap#sandboxing

The bubblewrap readme mentions containers as binaries with binctr; I guess without overlayfs or other file-level re-deduplication due to the container fs in the binary.

Perhaps similarly, also TIL UKI are easier for UEFI Secure Boot to check signatures on than (kernel, initrd) pairs


Details: $2MM/year in salary, the rest in performance based incentives. The $692MM figure is based on hitting all of the maximums (200% of a few different targets) and is the total for three years.


[flagged]


No, not at all. You're taxed on equity at fair market value when it vests. It's only after that when you get taxed at a lower rate on the capital gains.


This seems to say the opposite. If your employer grants you a statutory stock option, you generally don't include any amount in your gross income when you receive or exercise the option

https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc427


The IRS page refers to Incentive Stock Options (ISOs) as "statutory" options. These are the "holy grail" because they allow you to avoid income tax at exercise and only pay capital gains when you sell.

ISOs have a 100k cap per year.

Further, the next line after your exceprt is "However, you may be subject to alternative minimum tax in the year you exercise an ISO", which is an income tax


Sundar's stock is not in the form of options, so this explanation is irrelevant.


[flagged]


You're thinking of realized capital gains, not tax on the exercise/grant. I don't think there is a way to dodge the latter, and you can't take out a loan or pass down options you never exercised or stocks you were never granted.


You should probably read the filing. First, these aren’t options, it is straight up stock and it does vest.

Second, even if they were options, they definitely vest, otherwise Pichai would never gain control to be able to use them as collateral for a loan.

What you might be thinking is that they never get exercised, which is when the person uses the option to actually buy the share. But even that isn’t as straightforward as you seem to be making it out to be. The money to actually pay the interest on those loans and that is usually done by selling stock acquired this way. And then that income is almost certainly subject to AMT as well as other special taxes in California.


Those share options need excising, which probably incurs income tax on the allocation Vs strike price. Then the shares are only worth something to inheritors if that company is doing useful work for its customers over an extremely long period of time. That is likely far more valuable than the tax going towards paying off the interest for a year on some vote-buying spending that happened 20 years prior.


What do you think happens with loans?


That they pay interest at a lower relative rate than the cost of the taxes that would be due, what do you think happens with the loans?


No, these are RSUs, which - to your shock - are taxed as ordinary income upon payout (if that even occurs).

He did not get some custom stock now that will appreciate in value magically, if and only if he meets targets - or certain types of options can also act like this.

Even if GOOG stock grew so much, that this ended up being a $3B pay package, he'd be taxed as ordinary income on the full amount at payout - not even the reduced capital gains on the extra ~$2.7B in growth between agreement and payout.


These aren’t options, but you are otherwise correct.


Shocking? Taxed on payout is a discount versus ordinary stiffs who get taxed every year. A percentage taken from the increase of an amount every year, is more than the same percentage taken at the end; as the former foregoes the opportunity to earn a return on the amount taxed earlier. This is quite significant over longer periods. (I learned that from one of Warren Buffet's annual letters - I think he was explaining why insurance is a great business to be in, because the same effect applies to long-horizon insurance policies).


Getting a lump-sum payment at the end of three years is worse than getting paid incrementally, and is sort of the opposite of how insurance companies make money (which is taking frontloaded payments for long-term liabilities and investing the float).


You're thinking about cash. This is options


He is not getting options. ISOs have some interesting tax properties that are completely irrelevant to this.


> A percentage taken from the increase of an amount every year, is more than the same percentage taken at the end

It sounds like you're describing a hypothetical tax on unrealized gains? Do you have a link to the Buffet letter?


No; just the difference between someone who gets a fixed number of shares and has to sell them (and pay the tax on them) that year, versus someone who is allowed to accumulate the shares and pay the tax at the end.

This may assume that there is more alpha in the shares than other investments you have access to, which is perhaps less true today. But it should probably be your position if you're CEO of the company...

All the Buffett letters are online, but I don't remember what year it was. If I get time I may find it and report back.


Why do you think they get to accumulate shares and pay tax at the end. If options Sundar will have the pay income when exercised, or if RSU, they will have to pay income taxes when granted.

If you want to research the tax imlications, the relevant term is PSU (Performance Stock Units), which is the form almost all of these CEO incentives take.


(edited) My bad, I meant to type "options" not "shares". You get to choose when to exercise options. When tax is incurred will vary according to your jurisdiction.

I'm fairly sure that Sundar Pinchai will have paid someone to research the tax implications before negotiating this deal.


I don't think this would be considered capital gains if it's being paid to him. You typically pay income taxes on your income, if it's in the form of money given to you by your employer.


> then up to $230M/year is "lower tax rate than his secretary" income?

Why do you think that?


The IRS thinks that too. Stock grants, assuming they're EVER taxed (which isn't a given), are taxed at a lower rate than income. But as I indicated, most are never vested in the traditional sense, and are even lower than standard capital gains.


Stock grants (RSUs, like Google gives out) are taxed as ordinary income at the moment they vest.

If you sell them immediately, then you don't pay any additional capital gains tax, because there were no capital gains from the moment you got them to the moment you sold them.

If you hold on to them, you will eventually pay capital gains on any increase in value from the moment they vested until the moment you sell them.

Perhaps, once they are vested, you could take loans against them, to get some cash while avoiding selling them.

But no matter what, they are taxed at the moment you receive them, and again at the moment they leave your possession.


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

Search: