In the case of a crash, "typical" companies do not re-grant equity. Look at your typical big tech company, did they regrant equity? All of tech is down -- few tech companies have granted additional equity.
Depends on the crash and if employees are underwater or not.
In this case Stripe cut their validation by 28% and may give more stock based on that price. Assuming they do, will employees come out ahead when compared to if they had been able to lock in 5yrs of equity up front at whatever the price was when they started?
You can always negotiate for more if your locked equity becomes worth a lot less, it's a stronger position to be in as an employee. The equity is a bet on capturing value of large upside imo, their structure limits that.
"In a statement, Mr. Rukstales said he regretted his participation, saying he exercised “extremely poor judgement” in following others into the Capitol..."
I agree. Honestly I don't grasp the value in such stories except the typical clickbaiting via emotional content.
Putting statements like the one in the article out there as fast as possible can be classified mostly as self preservation, that in itself is natural.
While I do believe that there are people among them that actually finally got a wakeup call and regret their actions, I do not think there is any reason to accept the signaling of regret of an individual person that participated in this as genuine.
> I agree. Honestly I don't grasp the value in such stories except the typical clickbaiting via emotional content.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but this story has some value in disrupting the stereotypes many people probably have about the mob members (e.g. low education/rural people).
It's a trespassing charge (on "public" property), not embezzlement or insider trading or any sort of crime that directly benefitted him.
I'm as cynical as it gets but even I can see how easy it is to get swept up in mob mentality.
You too can see it play out in venues as innocuous as Sunday church. Nobody ever knows which hymns to stand up for, but everybody else goes along with it when the first person stands.
>You too can see it play out in venues as innocuous as Sunday church. Nobody ever knows which hymns to stand up for, but everybody else goes along with it when the first person stands.
I see people using such damage-reduction parallels on Twitter and Reddit, but it's strange to see it on HN.
Is this the best comparison you came up with? Trespassing on private property with an armed mob :: standing up for the wrong hymn at a church?
I dont think it is meant as an absolvement of his actions but rather a sensible explanation how certain people cooperated with the crowd without obvious benefit.
That still doesn't hold water. A closer parallel would be breaking into the church with a group of armed people with the intention of disrupting the proceedings.
Standing up for the wrong hymn doesn't necessitate a lawyer-approved 'statement' to the press.
Yeah I mean the key difference is if you get caught up in the actions of a mob of armed insurrectionists, that means you were in a crowd of armed insurrectionists in the first place.
I'm not denying that they have committed a crime. They did. But a coup requires manpower, military power and very intelligent people behind. They didn't have any of that.
Just because they're incompetent doesn't change the fact that they were illegally invading the capitol, with the hopes of overturning the election (thereby installing their leader into power for 4 more years).
If you look at it that way, yes. But I don't think it was a coup as it wasn't even planned. Maybe some of them actually wanted to get in but I still don't see it as a coup but as insurrection.
> But I don't think it was a coup as it wasn't even planned
What? It just so happened to magically line up when the Senators / Congressmen were tallying the electoral votes? It was a planned march. It happened on the day of the electoral tally for a REASON. This is beyond symbolic: they wanted to overturn the election.
And they still do. The next march is Inauguration day, but this time I think people will be more prepared and better defended against it.
With luck, maybe we can knock enough wind out of their sails and prove to them that this behavior is unacceptable. But this is not the time to feign ignorance or become apologists for their cause.
They are still proud of what they accomplished (!!!). They were harassing Senator Graham just a few hours ago (https://twitter.com/iheartmindy/status/1347616155394043904). (EDIT: Twitter has removed comments. Good move, but it means you aren't seeing the planning that's going on from those crazies anymore)
Now is the time to prepare and defend. They're throwing down the gauntlet for Inauguration day, so we need to defend ourselves and our democracy. (EDIT: DC National Guard is debating M4 rifles or 9mm Berettas. They're taking this threat seriously)
> Maybe some of them actually wanted to get in
They live-streamed themselves getting in and bragged about it on Twitch and Youtube. By their own words they're trying to keep Trump as President.
Wait what? So you don't have any argument against what I said and now you change the subject?
The same senators and congressmen that objected were interrupted from doing so because of the mob. None of the elected officials did anything illegal by objecting. Did they have anything to back their claims? No, but that's another discussion.
I don't see neither how harassing a senator today has anything to do with the other day events. I don't support that just as I don't support the ones who almost beat Sen. Rand Paul.
Any of this makes me become an apologist. I only stated that a coup wasn't the idea behind the Capitol assault.
> Wait what? So you don't have any argument against what I said and now you change the subject?
Take a step back and breath. Lets cover things.
1. You're clearly not seeing the big picture here. Planning for this event has taken place over social media. A large portion of Americans were ignoring thedonald.win, and other websites, but the events on Wednesday means we can no longer ignore these fringe sites.
2. The intent of these trespassers is clear. They're not saying "Some anomalies in some votes", they want Trump to remain president. This is a far more extreme view.
3. They are now harassing Graham because Graham was supposed to support them in the electoral college tally. But Graham changed his tune after the events of Wednesday and is now arguing that the protesters be arrested.
From the perspective of the insurrectionists / would-be coup, Graham has betrayed them and their cause. That's why they're harassing him.
-------
And yes: arguing that they are "not a coup" is the very definition of apologist. You are trying to whitewash their actions by using a weaker word to describe their illegal actions.
My point to you is this: they were not defeated on Wednesday. All that has happened is that they have revealed themselves on the national stage. As we move forward, we need to take them into account in our planning. Calling them for what they are: a coup, a dangerous insurrection mob who wishes to literally take over the country, is the bare minimum.
We need to properly describe the nature of the threat before we can plan against them.
They are a coup. They WILL be back. Hopefully we will be ready next time.
I'm not trying to whitewash anything. I'm saying I don't consider it a coup because it wasn't planned as such. I can plan a move like that with my friends and it wouldn't be a coup.
With a dozen officers they wouldn't have been able to get inside, which is something that blows my mind. Thank god suicide bombers didn't know how easy was to get inside.
I can't reply to your other comment so I'll leave it here.
I'm pretty well aware of the force they needed to get them out. I said they wouldn't have entered with a dozen officers there, which is completely different. The situation wouldn't have escalated that much. But well, that's only a conjecture.
Anyway, I don't want to keep this discussion going which is basically more about the semantics than the facts.
> I'm pretty well aware of the force they needed to get them out. I said they wouldn't have entered with a dozen officers there, which is completely different. The situation wouldn't have escalated that much.
Apologist:
a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial.
You're literally trying to defend the honor of the mob right now. At least you're shifting your argument as I present video footage, so you're smarter than most. But yes, you're an apologist at this point. I only hope you're playing "Devil's Advocate" right now in the interest of spurring discussion.
-----
For your actual discussion point:
They killed an officer and injured dozens more. They were taking the barricades and shoving them against officers. 12 cops sitting at the front asking them to be nice would have done jack diddly squat.
These people were willing to steal the riot-shields from the officers stationed there, and then use them to break windows elsewhere. They were scaling the building, attacking from multiple floors simultaneously.
There's more than 12-windows in the US Capitol. They needed tons of officers at every entrance, on the top floor, on the base floor, covering all windows and doors. US Capitol police simply didn't have the resources to defend the building.
All of this would be obvious if you spent 30 minutes looking at a few livestream videos. Seriously: look them up. They're still all over Youtube and Twitch. The mob literally livestreamed themselves invading the Capitol. All this information is out there for you to see yourself.
I'm not calling it a coup because it was not a coordinated attempt to overthrow the government. I'm only trying to be as objective as I can.
Maybe you're the one who should look at more videos. Like this one https://twitter.com/christina_bobb/status/134759627858319769... where you can see how police officers didn't do anything. They opened the doors. All the violence started later. You can also check how 3 German police officers made sure nobody could enter a government building.
> I'm not calling it a coup because it was not a coordinated attempt to overthrow the government.
* It was __coordinated__ with the Electoral College tally. The size of the mob proves the coordination in of itself, and we have proof of conspiracy on thedonald.win, Twitter, Twitch, Youtube, and more.
* It was aiming to install Trump for another term as President (aka: overthrow the Biden administration before they took office)
Do you disagree with either of the two facts above?
Try looking at histories of successful and unsuccessful coup attempts. They require several orders of degree better planning, coordination and execution.
That was just hooligans, not different from hundreds of other riots happened in the US last year.
I'm reminded of a case my civics teacher mentioned. A lady was convicted of felony theft. She walked into a store grabbed a mink coat and tried to run out with it. Not realizing it was chained to a pole.
Appeals court ruled that just because it wasn't possible doesn't mean it's not a crime to attempt.
These guys tried to prevent congress from transferring the presidency from Trump to Biden. That's a coup attempt. Being an idiot isn't an excuse.
If some drunken man threw a TV out of the windows and shouted let's overthrow the government, that is technically a coup, and a good reason to write about it again and again in social networks and MSM.
Technically you are right. But it would be misleading at best.
Whats the difference between a group of people tresspassing the capitol versus a group of people attempting to overthrow the government? Can your explanation be falsifiable?
Given that it was done as part of a protest against the election results, and at the perceived direction of somebody trying to keep their office, I think a jury could make a reasonable interpretation.
What exactly do you think would have happened to the Congresspeople had they this mob encountered them? The mob sure looked prepared to take some of them into "custody." And some of them clearly had no qualms with beating that Capitol Police officer to death.
Clearly Congresspeople, regardless of party affiliation, were not interested in finding out.
When it was immediately preceded by a rally in which an ousted president ranted about how the election was stolen and they should march on the Capitol and prevent the election results from being certified.
Very interesting - some US examples that come to mind are Chime, Current, and Petal, all sporting the same modern "sleek" design.
Was the Robinhood debit card the first mainstream card for this? I distinctly recall my friends and I thinking it looked cool, and we wanted it just for how it looked.
Though I guess it's always been about the status - thinking back to the American Express Centurion card. It seems like modern cards are shifting from signaling wealth (old metal cards) to hipness (new sleek cards).
Glad it worked out for them! I left NYC recently because my lease ended - most people I knew in the city also left and are living with their parents for the time being (I'm in my early 20's for reference).
My friends and I have discussed the renting AirBnB / VRBO as well. Seems like the perfect chance to do it! Although, I'd probably pick a spot with more hiking (Utah? Colorado?)
Not sure if this is what you meant, but I'd correct it to "what is allowed to be said" is probably 5-10 years behind certain spheres of thought. Reuters certainly wouldn't want to alienate readers with something controversial - hence the lack of strong analysis.
What different roles did you do? I'm a software engineer (new grad), and have been thinking of switching roles to learn more, i.e sales engineering. How did you make the transition?
I started out as a C dev, then moved to ops, then consulting (infra, etc -- pre cloud), then devops style work (embedded with dev, cloud ops, automation etc), spent a while doing presales for a consultancy setting up CI/CD stuff POCs..
Fintech / HFT firms are known to be the highest paying for SWE, even higher than FAANG companies.
I routinely get LinkedIn messages and emails for companies like Citadel, Two Sigma, Hudson River, Jane Street - new grads for these companies make around $250-300k, and I imagine you would make a good deal more if you can negotiate well.
