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

If your revenue pattern grows quickly, money will be held for longer in expectation of chargebacks. If none happen during this period, and all checks pass it will be released. This happens because if they release the funds they will be on the hook for the 100k + charback fees, which depending on the size/number of your transactions, could be higher than your entire 100k.

Their docs explain this.


> account payout is frozen

Frozen payouts are different than money being held for longer.


You are correct, stripe will do one or the other depending on how loud their alarms were. Being frozen though might just mean they took action rather then letting the usual timer run. Not defending stripe here, but it seemed like a 3 day freeze on a sudden revenue jump was to be expected.

If/when they get through this, they should start pushing for an account manager.


If that’s the reason, why don’t stripe say so when they block the account?

> To be clear, pacing does not mean halting model training or technical progress, but ensuring companies take adequate time to align and safeguard their models

I have seen this before, first hand, on lower stakes for the world, but high stakes for the org. Self imposed safety goals do not last a quarter, but the clawback is not transparent. little things start snapping back internally, new, seemingly unlrelated initiatives are funded that take resources away from this, people are let go for different reasons, until 1y later you are right back where you started. I am hopeful though, that this becomes systemic and not something any one company can easily reverse course on.


"greatly accelerate economic growth rates" - I always wonder about this goal. I understand increasing economic efficiency. But what do we as a species gain from global economy growth.

When we say the world's GDP grew by X%, what is the point of that growth? Inflation? If the economy grows as a direct effect of humanity growing, I get that. If the economy becomes more efficient and we can not get more with less, I also get that.

But what is the point of just growth, if not simply to show others that I am growing faster than you? At which point this is a meaningless number. What am I missing?


GDP growth and inflation are different things. If inflation-adjusted GDP goes up, that means the average person is able to buy more things they want. Compare living in the US vs India today for the median citizen

Yes they are, inflation-adjusted GDP is efficency. My point exactly, bc I don't think when people say the economy is growing they are ajusting for inflation at all.

Low growth means young people are miserable and have worse standards of living than their parents, as we're seeing in most of western Europe, where GDP per capita hasn't meaningfully increased for decades.

That's due to inflation though no? Prices are increasing, sometimes due to more than just demand?

Exactly. Low growth is a problem, but the primary reason young people feel so miserable is on the cost of living side of the equation.

Is it perhaps time to ackowledge that boards where everyone is buddies can't actually do their jobs, yet they get paid obscene amounts of money?

No different than how the Cabinet of the United States operates.

Is it perhaps time to ackowledge that cabinets where everyone is buddies can't actually do their jobs, yet they get given obscene amounts of power?

This is mostly AI companies needing a large investment (maybe larger than YC's standard 500k) to get off the ground, and so YC now starts acting as market maker (more than it already is), by literally getting people that are primed to buy (filling out the form where minimum amount is 500k, talking about their last funded pilot, company size, etc), so YC can now say this is the size of validated opportunities, so their (potentially higher) seed is now derisked, but also they don't have to wait for their startups to 10x in 3 years, they can 20x in 12 months.

The startup however, will do the thing they advised them not to do, which is tailor their roadmap to a large customer.

But yes, this is early exit/rugpull planning. If it weren't, it would not be AI exclusive and I don't think companies are that excited to know the latest and brightest AI companies. They can simply wait for the market. But they create FOMO, and now they open a small window, make calls to know how much you'll commit and all the FOMO execs will fly in. I'll be fun.


"early exit/rugpull planning" nope.

It is actually no correct. A record by definition is an unsurpassed accomplishment or statistic. It needs to be an accomplishment before it can be called a record. The passage of time does not qualify as a record. Also, a statistical certainty cannot be called a record.

The year 2025 progressed to 2026. Never in the history of the Gregorian calendar have we EVER made it to 2026. That is an accomplishment. That is a record.

We do consider the oldest person alive and the oldest recorded person ever, to be records of a sort. So if that counts, why wouldn't a personal best count?

I certainly celebrate mine every time.


It's not an accomplishment. It's obviously been recorded and is therefore a record.

There is a semantic difference between capturing data (recording) and putting somethng on record (capturing/recording an achievement). One is the process of documenting and the other is the documented result that acts as a benchmark.

When you record an achievement, there is no need to record another one until you surpass it. You can record attempts, but they are now just data that makes the actual record more meaningful the longer it exists without being surpassed.


When that happens, OpenAI will own 100% of your life. I’d rather they keep spinning their wheels long enough for these problems to be solved elsewhere.

I would actually like to see them solve these problems, I don't care who comes up with solutions to curing cancer, etc

I think people very much should care about who ends up owning these solutions. The person or entity that controls things like that just has more power, which isn’t necessarily a good thing

It is a good thing when it didn't exist before and it does exist now and wouldn't have existed without them.

If they profit immensely from curing cancer, good.


And if they decide they are in charge of determining who gets this cancer cure and who doesn’t? Still good?

Maybe it is, idk, you may be right. But I think it’s something people should care about.


I don't see how it's different from what we have now? Expensive cancer treatments already exist and are rationed by the companies who create them, then over time become more widely available.

If AI companies create better treatments they'll offer them to people who pay for them. So wealthier people will have better cancer treatments. If they can make them inexpensively, then a broader audience also gets treatment.

Eventually they lose IP rights and they become generics and the world gets better cancer treatments.

In all scenarios having them find better treatments benefits humans with cancer more than if they didn't.

I don't like trusting any organization, corporate or governmental, with control over people's lives, but it's obvious that we're not going to get cutting edge medical treatments without these organizations.


I haven’t used desktop Linux in ages, but I’m a Linux server user as I think maybe everyone here. Is the solution to desktop that some well funded company just needs to fork Debian, build the common application deites like word processing, spreadsheets, presentation, messaging apps, etc, and then build a proper App Store?

Or is the underlying system still bad, as in drivers, compatibilities, audio and video codecs, networking, etc. I know on servers when some of these break they take a bit of mucking around. But it seems many companies are trying, why are they failing?


That well funded company already happened 20 years ago. Canonical. Their distribution is called Ubuntu, you might have heard of it.

Yet my mom does not have a Ubuntu desktop. And if I set one up for her, I woudl have to split my time between my job and tech support for her. So well funded, but not sure they are the right company.

My 73yo mom actually runs RHEL 10 on her laptop, uses one of my 16 free developer licenses.

But it would never work without my help. On the other hand, Windows wasn't working too well either and I just couldn't help with that.

RHEL was the most stable alternative I could think of when her Windows computer stopped being reliable.

I have setup rustdesk on it for remote support.


What kind of issue would you expect that the OS she currently uses does not have?

Anything she buys won’t have specific drivers, e.g. Webcams or mice or keyboards or etc.

First, is that so? My neighbors just got their 80-year old parents a Thinkpad. All works. They bought a mouse the week after. Worked right away.

Second, they don't buy this kind of thing every week.


It's actually not really that bad. If you have to split your job likev you said, then you have to do it when she's using Windows too.

Linux has made a lot of progress since 2010.

If low tech ppl in family get phones, I want them to be apple, less work for me (not an Apple user). If they get a PC, I want them to use Ubuntu. Less work for me.

And if there's some work, I'd rather ssh into their PC and fix it using a shell with bash, then get annoyed with Windows and it's quirks.


You're going to have that problem with any kind of change.

Which is basically what Google did with ChromeOS and Android, except that they have little to nothing to do with GNU/Linux experience.

Rather a Java/Kotlin/C/C++ userspace with the Linux kernel as implementation detail, or Web/WebAssembly, equally with Linux kernel as implementation detail (Crostini runs in a VM similar to WSL, and lacks several features).

I bet Googlebooks might achieve more sales on regular consumer shops than any proper GNU/Linux distro, and it is basically Android on laptops as per what we know about them.


I think vendors will do what vendors will do, and you can choose to buy into that or not. Containers fullfilled their promise. You can today host anything yourself easily, with a single command.

The problem comes when developers start building things without this in mind. I see simple site analytics apps in github, where the docker compose file is a web os services and the repo itself is full of init scripts and the sort. You have redis, mongo, an RDBMS container, an analytics db, kafka, all the kafka tooling like bookkeeper, then you have outsourced auth liek clerk or supabase (when the whole thing is not just some supabase chimera with edge functions and whatever else supabase is supposed to run outside your infra).

And the repo description is: simple, anonymous wesbite analytics. The entire thing is more complex than the thin you want to do analytics for. So you bring that into a cloud, and instead of a container, you are now advised, but both AWS and your HN peers that you need to replace each component with it's cloud version, such as elasticache, AKS, cognito, firebase, whatever.

All of these services as you set up, trap you into overprovisioning. Your DB needs to have 3 replicas or you have no guarantees, your auth needs an entire instance of something running somewhere or unicorns start dying.

By the time you come out for sunlight your bill could pay your rent. So you don't self host, you signup for google analytics.

Everytime I find a project on GitHub, the first thing that makes me close it immediately is whether it has a docker-compose.yaml and if it's a single, sane/dumb, low footprint deployment or a chimera.

So self hosting is alive and well, whether your app is easy to self host, and whether you know how to use just what you need from cloud vendors are different questions.


sorry for the typos, I didn't actually come back to grammar check and I'm cringing now

If you could that reliably, you wouldn’t have a job


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

Search: