From what I gather from the Perplexity CEO, he is just that type of Musk-tier cringelord, so yes, probably

Aha! Sounds like a combination of a cliff (but not quite if the grant is just not given until 1 year) and continuous refreshers.

If I understand correctly, that’s what’s called a cliff - during the first period of your grant, you have no ongoing vesting, until a set date in the future where all of that period vests at once.

For example, first 12 months: 0%, then 12/48 at once, and finally 1/48 every month for the remainder of the grant.

Correct me if I misunderstood.

Evenly weighted vesting schedule: Your grant vests the same amount every month for every year of the duration of the grant. For example, 1/48th of the grant vests over 4 years.

Back-weighted grant: Your grant vests less or not at all for the early period of the grant, and then a majority in the later part of the grant. For example: Year 1 10%, Year 2 20%, Year 3 30%, Year 4 40%.

Why it’s fucked up: The company is incentivized to abuse your labour early in your employment and then push you out before the majority of your compensation package kicks in.

Equity is already enough of a pair of golden handcuffs as it is, there’s no need to make them worse from this perspective.

My god, could he have chosen a name more cringe than this? Fuck.

To add insult to injury, she cut the prices significantly, gutting the potential revenue the MTA could have gotten, for not that much benefit for the drivers who still choose to drive in.

Back-weighted vesting schedule is some truly fucked up shit. Reddest of red flags

I don’t. She’s the one who delayed the implementation of congestion pricing because she was scared that the Democrats would lose some suburban votes. Were it not for her betrayal, congestion pricing would have been live for 6 more months, and probably built some more resilience against this attack.

Is it any good? MeidasTouch, that is

Without taking either side of this debate - you realize that the vast majority of the duration of a flight is already automated by software, right?

So I get how this could sound compelling with that framing, but note that:

• This was part of a hack project by 4 students in 2020
• The tool they built in the hack was an ML computer vision system to validate ballots, in an effort to reduce mail-in ballot rejection rates
• As a part of testing this project, they needed a way to generate a large amount of ballots which the system could then validate
• Five years later, one of the authors of this hack works for DOGE

Like, take a look at the code - it’s trivial, in large part because it was made by college students in their early academic career. Creating something of similar caliber would be extremely trivial.

That this student hack project would have been used as a part of a greater scheme of election fraud seems highly unlikely.

Then again, a fast cyclist is likely to hit those speeds on flats. And cars will still try to run me off the road even if I go that speed and the road I’m cycling on had a speed limit of 40 km/h.

I’d vote for anything smaller than a class 1 moped (upper speed limit 45 km/h) should be allowed to use the bike lanes.

Keep it codified that bikes and buses are allowed to use the space, and that specifically only private cars and commercial transport vehicles are prohibited.