zkfcfbzr @ zkfcfbzr @lemmy.world

Posts

22

Comments

397

Joined

2 yr. ago

So since he hasn't executed on the options, there's nothing he has to actually pay back, but he also won't be allowed to exercise those options and purchase what would have been $56 billion worth of dirt cheap stocks?

I also assume that calculations of his net worth did take the options into account, so assuming the order stands, it's effectively an immediate $56 billion hit to those calculations?

Your article says:

As part of a compensation package Tesla finalized in 2018, Mr. Musk received options to buy 304 million shares that are now worth more than $50 billion. While he has met the goals needed to receive those options, Mr. Musk does not appear to have converted them into shares of Tesla. If he had, he would be barred from selling them for five years.

What are options? Does this mean he didn't receive this compensation yet, and now he simply won't receive it, assuming the company doesn't appeal or move states like the article mentions? It says he had the option to buy 304 million shares - I assume he can buy them at a deep, deep discount compared to their current price?

This stance has nothing to do with anglocentrism and everything to do with making Lemmy usable. You set your languages in your profile so you'll only see posts and comments in those languages. No one likes seeing lots of posts in languages they don't understand, and that that only happens when people are too lazy to set the language indicator. I'd fully expect and encourage non-English speakers to downvote improperly tagged English posts in their feed as well.

I downvote non-English results I see on my All page as a punishment for not correctly setting the language on the post, which takes 1 second to do and would ensure it doesn't spam the feed for non-speakers. I can't imagine I'm alone - was the post in question not correctly tagged as Polish content, like your post is correctly tagged as English content?

If it was correctly tagged, then those downvotes were all from people who speak Polish.

I think this is true of traditional Republican voters - their ability to fall in line and unify, both as a voter base and legislative block, has been a strength for decades (notably less so more recently). But I'm not so sure this applies to Trump's core voters. They seem much more of a "my way or the highway" crowd.

That said, I don't think the reason they wouldn't vote for Haley is because she's a woman, more just because she's not Trump, and is pretty openly hostile to him.

The only chance she has as the nominee is if Trump is literally dead. Any scenario where she's the nominee and Trump is alive has him splitting the vote too much to give her any shot at all.

Honestly I'm not even sure if his core voters would go for her even if he were dead.

Expanding a bit more on what everyone else says: This strategy works, as long as you never lose n times in a row, where n is the number of bets it takes to bet ALL of the money you currently have.

So the more money you bring with you, the longer you can make this strategy work - but the more devastating it'll be once you inevitably lose.

If you go with a doubling strategy instead of a tripling strategy, that means you have to lose floor(log₂(x+1)) times to realize an unrecoverable loss (you don't have enough to make your next bet), or one more than that to lose absolutely everything. With your tripling strategy the calculation is floor(log₃(2*x+1)). x is the amount of money you had after the last "reset".

So if you go to the casino with $100,000, your strategy will work as long as you don't lose 11 times in a row - once you do, you've suffered your devastating unrecoverable loss. Every time your money triples you can last one more loss. Tripling your money is very difficult with this strategy, as most of the time when you win, it's a small amount relative to what you're holding - you need large losing streaks to make a real difference, and large losing streaks make reaching the threshold of an unrecoverable loss easier, obviously.

Others have said it already, but - you can use this to win in the short term if you have a lot of money and only want to win a little bit more. If you use this strategy in the long term you will lose everything.

If you remove "Undetermined" as a language on your profile, then all the unlabeled foreign language content should stop showing up for you. The problem is that all the unlabeled English content would also stop showing up for you, then. That's why having "Undetermined" be the default option is not good - it only makes the problem worse.

One that's gotten me a few times is if you're typing a reply to someone, either in the comments or a PM, then mid-typing you upvote (or downvote) them (or anyone else), it deletes your comment-in-progress. I've lost a few comments that way, one of which took about 20 minutes to write which I just gave up on and didn't post afterward.

I also really don't like that the default language option is "Undetermined". It makes not labeling the correct language the default behavior, which makes a lot of foreign language material show up in my feed. Your own post and 2 of the 4 comments at the time of me posting are unlabeled.

I wasn't trying to say any restrictions on who can appear on the ballot are undemocratic - nor was I necessarily saying any state currently has undemocratic rules regarding ballot eligibility. It was more about hypotheticals, like what I said about Texas - in theory, does the constitution and body of federal laws allow for states to create undemocratic eligibility criteria that would withstand legal scrutiny?

It came from "the constitution empowers state legislatures to enact the rules for their own elections, including determining who should appear on ballots", with the implicit assumption that the states could then determine this in undemocratic ways if they so wanted.

Your second point makes me think that you think we're arguing or something. I really don't think we are.

The third point touches on what I was asking about. When that determination is subjected to judicial review - which laws is it subject to? If Texas were to simply amend their constitution to say Democrats can't appear on presidential ballots, would there actually be a federal law that would prevent them from enforcing that?

So taking your last paragraph at face value, you're of the opinion that states could legally (in theory) remove Biden from their ballots for pretty much any arbitrary reason, as long as that reason was enshrined in state law by the state legislature or state constitution?

TIL "fascism" means "enforcing the 14th amendment against someone who literally attempted to end the peaceful transfer of power away from themself".

Projection at its finest.

I didn't read either link the person you replied to posted, and I have no opinion on the issue itself (whether it's actually likely or just a conspiracy theory) - but I think the implication here is that they'll be able to do it whether a real crime happened or not, if Trump's removal stands. While Trump's crime is undoubtedly real, he hasn't been convicted for it - and that's what sets the precedent they could use here against Biden. I have my doubts those attempts would survive in most courts. Additionally, I doubt "enemies" is a term that's defined in any federal statute, which leaves the phrase "...or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof" extremely open to interpretation.

Some things that made me happy this year:

• My best friend has some issues that occasionally make interacting with them difficult. This year I got a lot better at handling those moments in a more graceful way, which has led to less stress for (hopefully) both of us.
• I got a lot better at handling my time in a productive way this year.
• I made a lot of big steps toward significantly changing my work situation in a way that I'm hopeful will turn out for the better.

And some games I enjoyed playing this year include Hogwarts Legacy, Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom, Pico Park with my niece, New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe, Crash Bandicoot 2 (From the trilogy game), Super Mario Wonder, Stray, and Manifold. I 100%'d all of those except Zelda and Manifold (Which I'm still playing).

Hard call for me between Horizon Zero Dawn and either Spider-Man game since I've had both on my radar for a while, but I'll go in for Spider-Man Remastered 🕷🕸 Happy Holidays ♡

Merry Christmas!

The second line should be r²y on the left, not ry² 😉

While some people do fake it or some people may actually be too lazy, on the whole attributing homelessness to personality flaws or moral failings is just a coping strategy for lots of people - lies they tell themselves to make the situation be despicable instead of pitiful. Most homeless people aren't faking it, and most homeless people wouldn't be homeless if they had any choice in the matter. Many of them are homeless due to poor or temporary circumstances, many others due to mental health issues combined with lacking a support system.

Kids these days are so spoiled

I opened amazon in incognito then clicked on a random item from their front page, which was advertising their cyber monday deals at the time. In that case would it just be letting amazon know that that's how I ended up on that page, without serving any other real purpose?