crazypyro

7 ms·

1.
by crazypyro 4mo ago
See's Candy is also what Charlie Munger considered their shift from distressed companies to high quality companies; its sentimental on a company level because it represented a real shift in investment philosophy.
2.
by crazypyro 4mo ago
I mean... you've spent how many articles talking shit about Disney and then complain they won't sell you back your baby that you sold to them. Hard to get sympathy here.
3.
by crazypyro 7mo ago
One of the most annoying things is senior leadership thinking that these tools give them the ability to just go do things, then the actual engineers are stuck reviewing the massive amount of slop. Output from AGIs used by experienced engine
4.
by crazypyro 7mo ago
I don't think that's what the original comment was discussing at all... If governments want to require private companies to verify ages, those same governments need to provide accessible ways for their citizens to get verification
5.
by crazypyro 7mo ago
I think in WC3, if you clicked certain critters enough, they would explode.
6.
by crazypyro 1y ago
He was also placed under electronic monitoring program and immediately went about installing a VM to allegedly circumvent the monitoring software along with searching for a very controversial website relating to pedophilia... He also lied a
7.
by crazypyro 2y ago
Love your game. Is there any plans for expansions? I find the different maps to be less interesting. I want some kind of harder progression, higher levels of difficulties and of course more of everything that exists. I found myself out of s
8.
by crazypyro 2y ago
Sure, that makes sense, if you also get rid of all the cute looking bombs being carried around (gacha games).
9.
by crazypyro 2y ago
I don't have any involvement in OSS besides using it at my job, but I still enjoyed the post because of the notes on AI. I have noticed a similar disconnect in technical discussions between those who see the use of AI as a multiplier a
10.
by crazypyro 2y ago
In simple terms, people want airports, but nobody wants an airport near their house.
11.
by crazypyro 3y ago
The one that tries to upsell hard is so annoying, I can't be arsed to go find it right now, but the other two make it so easy, yet the one that tries to upsell, its like every other click takes you to a "input your credit card&quo
12.
by crazypyro 3y ago
Why does it seem bad? Less of something doesn't necessarily mean its bad. Perhaps the brain is simply making use of extraneous matter for energy or its purging out unnecessary neurons. Maybe it decreases creativity, but increases arith
13.
by crazypyro 3y ago
> The hiQ decisions give a green light, at least in some circumstances, to scraping publicly available websites without fear of liability under the CFAA. So at a federal level, it seems relatively clear. The only uncertainty is on the st
14.
by crazypyro 3y ago
Where do you see that they won the case? Can you provide a source because the wikipedia article directly contradicts what you are saying...? I see they went to the Supreme Court who kicked it back to the Ninth who then re-affirmed their pos
15.
by crazypyro 3y ago
Locking comments on a website built on the commenting system. Something hilarious about that.
16.
by crazypyro 4y ago
Because people buy it without it being proven and proving anything related to cognitive ability is both difficult and expensive. This makes doing studies on their effectiveness a neutral to losing scenario. Either: The nootropic works. Grea
17.
by crazypyro 4y ago
It's amazing, if you pre-filter all the non-successful outcomes, the success rate raises tremendously...
18.
by crazypyro 4y ago
There is a large difference in lootboxes that have the ability to give you more power in the game versus lootboxes that just drop new cosmetic items with no gameplay affect. Some of those games that you mentioned only contained cosmetic ite
19.
by crazypyro 5y ago
This happened to me, someone somehow got my account and then they asked for the payment id of the Paypal transaction from over a decade ago for me to recover it. I don't even know if I can find that. I ended up just buying it again. Pr
20.
by crazypyro 5y ago
Doesn't seem that expensive when the article also mentions they were making $2 million per year in royalties.
21.
by crazypyro 5y ago
Is this not just the continued dismantling of Jack Ma's Ant? This company is completely doomed because the founder is basically treated as an enemy of the state. "China plans to break up Ant" could have been a headline nearly
22.
by crazypyro 5y ago
>(the poor neglected shareholders and exec bonuses aside) Well, to provide a different perspective, there are car plants around the US that have been shutdown for months and the people formerly employed there haven't been able to wo
23.
by crazypyro 5y ago
Because Twitch focuses largely on marketing directly to children? You cannot separate the fact that Twitch is trying to become the site for all gaming (including children) and also allowing nearly-softcore porn on the same site. Its literal
24.
by crazypyro 5y ago
I wouldn't doubt that a large percentage of the viewers are underaged users who actually do not have any experience with adult material. Twitch is a gaming site. Kids watch youtube videos of people playing games, they get funneled to c
25.
by crazypyro 6y ago
I'll pay $300/year for global security any day of the week. Honestly, I don't give a shit if it costs $10,000/year, I want the U.S. being the global police because I am most comfortable with the status quo. Simple as tha
26.
by crazypyro 6y ago
There will always be a segment of any oppressed population that is willing to side with their oppressors.
27.
by crazypyro 6y ago
I don't understand your 4th conclusion at all. He never once said he's excited, you are assuming quite a lot... People are allowed to analyze world events and their consequences like this without having to individually pander to e
28.
by crazypyro 6y ago
If anything, the new changes will be a huge signal (YC doesn't think this company is one of its most valuable investment opportunities), except in this case, outside investors without insider information will be the ones left holding t
29.
by crazypyro 6y ago
Well now every rational investor must reduce the value of YC's brand being attached to a company. If YC only invests in X% of YC companies, there must be some Y% discount to the YC brand as a whole, no? If there's a 100% chance YC
30.
by crazypyro 6y ago
So now if you are a YC company and YC declines to invest, every other investor loses out. Does this not strongly dilute the power of being in YC? Seems nuts to me. Why not just shrink the number of incoming companies?

More ›