> Better the nanny state than Nanny Zuck.

This is a huge self own. I can't believe I'm reading this on a website called "hacker news".

while i'm sympathetic to your position, the truth is that /that/ is where this site is now.

Why? Hackers need something to hack.

But you're right, 'twas a bit much.

there used to be rules that companies must be public if they have other 1000 investors. is this no longer the case?

it's still the case, but there are never 1,000 investors, there's a couple dozen VC firms, SPVs, and individuals

if you're smart.

I don't think this is an SEC problem, they are fully aware that people subject to their jurisdiction can jump through many hoops to circumvent them. This shows consent on the investor's part well enough, and capital formation regulations do not burden the investor at all, they are only constitutional because they burden the organization raising capital, who simply needs to do a cursory check - not an in-depth one. (level of depth is based on which regulatory exemption is chosen)

So as long as you separate concerns the SEC is satisfied.

If employees get stock options and decide to exercise on exit, they count against the 500 unaccredited investor limit that would trigger reporting requirements. So companies that issue stock options do have an outside risk that enough employees will exit, exercise their stock options, and trigger a reporting requirement.

yeah, that's why those companies tend to offer liquidity strategically to lower their employee investor count

if an employee exercise options (but stays at the company) does that still count as one of 1000?

yes, the company has to manage it and hope certain things happen if they want to stay private

tbh that 1000 investors limit sounds like it was trying to address a similar problem? i.e. if a company is big enough it is important to reel it in a bit or else shenanigans happen. And just like all rules, the people at the top can easily work around it.

sort of... the 1000 investor limit was actually doubling the prior limit

the friction that the whole industry and the SEC pushes and pulls on is that nobody wants to go public because it's needlessly expensive to be a public company, companies would otherwise go public

basically, one publicly traded company does something egregiously bad, the SEC mandates a new expensive disclosure that requires a completely new operating style, less companies go public

the SEC's mission statement is a dual mandate: provide for fairer securities markets (via transparency mandates), and the second one is facilitate capital formation

so when the goal of providing for fairer markets is hampering people raising and accessing capital at all, then they help on that front

in this case, as people avoided going public, they would run into the number of investor limits and do suboptimal things because they couldn't raise more capital. so the limit went up to what it is

now, with that foundation in mind, your main point isn't close to what's happening "if a company is big enough it is important to reel it in a bit or else shenanigans happen", the SEC doesn't "reel in big companies". it mandates transparency in public companies, number of investors in private companies, and regulates details of certain transactions, that's it. you can be any size. they don't judge the merit of an investment (outside of some ETFs, since they also regulate fund advisors and ETFs just happen to be publicly traded funds), the SEC's focus is that there's enough information for an investor to judge the merit of a publicly traded investment

no. this role is for running ads campaigns at scale (on google, meta, etc) to grow openai users. its at a large enough scale it's called "platform" but it would be internal use only.

> Your role will include projects such as developing campaign management tools, integrating with major ad platforms, building real-time attribution and reporting pipelines, and enabling experimentation frameworks to optimize our objectives.

that is actually surprising. surely they use location at some point in the ID process. its possible they have a secondary location based model to do sorting/ranking after the initial detection?

Merlin's bird detection system is almost non-functional without location.

if you're willing it's totally fine to share your work with the model itself removed

I would pay for this

> Drug Offenses are nearly half the prison population

this is not true. your data is federal only. most prisoners are at state prisons. drug offense is about 1/5 of total.

source https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2023.html

A reduction of 20% is most certainly significant.

What proportion of them are in prison for possession of small/personal amounts?

And is imprisoning people who are smuggling/distributing hard and potentially very dangerous drugs really that controversial?

I have no idea, I don't live there. I'm responding to the assertion that 1/5 is not significant.

no one asserted 1/5 is not significant. you misread this.

i was just stating the fact that the initial number posted was wrong/incomplete.

you're right that in any funding round (private or public ipo) there is dilution. your ownership in % will go down.

however no company will be able to predict future dilution so this is not really something they can tell you with confidence.

the only thing you can do is gauge current state of the company (funding, readiness for ipo) and try to estimate future dilution but even this is non trivial for early stage companies.

in case you really didn't know, "they" can also be singular

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/they

Yeah, yeah, I know. And language evolves. Is the best way to address the lack of a gender-neutral singular pronoun in English really to lazily adopt a word which is ambiguous in the vernacular? Be creative - make a new word!

your understanding of ads industry is decades out of date. this is not how digital ad is bought or sold today for small content creators