Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | romafirst3's commentslogin

Nonprofits in the USA are basically failings in government.

Non profits at their best provide services that any half decent government should provide but do it at a fraction of the efficiency that the government could.

At their worst they are private individuals spending tax payers money (that’s what tax breaks actually are) on personal causes and self enrichment.

That’s why it’s interesting seeing a right wing publication advocating for fewer non profits, I’m all for it. Cut tax breaks for non profits, reduce funding of non profits and fund government to provide the services.


Delivery is what happens if it’s not spam or abuse.


They sold their real estate for 1.5 billion and then red lobster paid 200 million a year in rent. That’s insane. In 7.5 years they would pay back the purchase price.

That just seems like a massively bad deal for red lobster, I wonder was there another way the private equity firm made out on that deal ?


What’s most weird to me is that the PE firm owns Red Lobster. So if a deal is bad for Red Lobster, the deal is also bad for the PE firm.

I guess the reason that isn’t true is differing time horizons. If the consequences of the deal only become apparent years later, then the PE firm can sell the business before the chickens come home to roost.

But how do they sell Red Lobster without the buyer realizing what is going to happen? Who would be dumb enough to buy from a company that has a history of crippling companies it owns then selling them to suckers?


The hit from above-market leases vs. owning the land might be clearly visible in hindsight, but that's not necessarily true looking into the future. A buyer could have focused on the economies of scale from being in the seafood business and actually thought "we're not a real estate companye, and rentals are preferable in this inflated market". The got all that current debt off the books in exchange for future liabilities; that could also have looked good.

>> PE firm can sell the business before the chickens come home to roost.

It's really no different from pump and dump. Founders love it because it unlocks a huge pay-out without the hassle, costs and reporting obligations from going public, but if you've worked at a company before and then after a major PE investment it's universally worse IME.


… who’d PE sell the land to?

Was it… themselves, in some roundabout way?


That’s what I’m wondering, or if they got some other compensation that isn’t mentioned.


It’s not insane.

Holding a ton of a cash locked up in assets is highly inefficient.

Google did this - sell a building they own and lease it back. Do something else with the money.

The nice thing about the lease is that it’s a tax deductible expense for the business, and if you no longer need it, just don’t renew the lease.


No I don’t mean the strategy, I mean selling the real estate for 7.5 years of rent. Usually the multiple is closer to 20x


You dont understand, the PE firm IS red lobster. The old owners were paid 2.1 billion for the company and retired.


I do understand


I’m using the terms correctly it’s just that while red lobster is owned by the PE firm, the PE firm is more than red lobster.


Hilarious to think that everyone is worried about AI becoming sentient and murdering us all - it's more likely it will just give bad advice to enough humans that we all lazily murder ourselves attempting something stupid like a real life version of idiocracy.


Are you working for Big Sprout? I seem to remember seeing that exact phrase on here in the last couple of months.

"Not your parents sprouts anymore"

For the record I loved them 30 years ago and still love em.

My recipe is very different to the modern fashion, boiled until mushy with a slice of smokey bacon, drain and eat with butter. They literally melt like butter - delicious.


A couple of months ago there was a discussion on HN about this exact topic :D

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39517463


But “goals” is doing an insane amount of heavy lifting here.

In order to have goals you need to have a model of the world. LLMs do not have a model of the world.

Your goal then is changing this world somehow so you need actuators.

So you need a model and actuators.

All we have is a stream of words appended in a probabilistic manner.


If only there were some examples of streams of words being used to enlist people to build (or become) actuators for evil purposes…


This. Llms aren’t very good and are just predictive text. And I say that as someone who has a lot of experience using them. We don’t have anything to fear from AI for quite some time.

As an aside, the AI generated search snippets in google are messing me up. They seem good for random things I don’t know about but are awful for programming things where I’m looking for a specific solution to a specific problem. They always just give me the “right” way no matter how much it doesn’t really work like that.

An example would be trying to figure out how to solve a weird edge case or error, something that stack overflow is amazing at and it just feeds me generic instructions - which honestly fooled me for a while before I learned to ignore.


Building physical things in the real world takes more than a couple of years. Think how long it takes to plan and build a regular building and these are buildings with insanely high energy requirements.

This seems to be just partisan point scoring.

Besides half the Republican Party is still advocating for coal and oil extraction, it’s a bit hypocritical to be complaining that EVs aren’t happening fast enough.


Don’t blame the messenger. Of course when a democratic president fails to execute on a policy, his political opponents are going to be the ones that point it out. That’s irrelevant. The point is that it should not take years to build out some goddamn EV chargers with $7.5 billion in funding. If it does, then we shouldn’t spending that money because there’s a more fundamental problem with the government’s ability to execute that needs to be fixed first.

The reaction you expressed is exactly the wrong one for anyone who wants to see government build infrastructure, or do more in general. It would be a disaster for republicans if democrat-run governments could actually deliver on their promises and deliver cost-effective, efficient public services in transit, education, healthcare, etc. The defensive reflex that seeks to insulate government failures from accountability only helps republicans.


It doesn’t take years as a rule. Many, many complex physical builds are completed in far less time than “years.”


> It doesn’t take years as a rule

Specially when you're investing BILLIONS on a project. Moreso id the changers are already standardized.


Are they permitted, funded and planned and built in less time than years? Not very many are. This a good thing, we don't want people cutting corners and building wherever they want. The downside is that we need to wait a little before we get what we want. I'm actually impressed that 7 have been fully constructed and opened in 2 years.


In fact, many building projects take years to just purchase the real estate to build on.


Well, we can compare it with Tesla rollout of their supercharger network.

2012 - 7

2013 - 63

2014 - 380

(based on Wikipedia with cited sources there)

So second year is +56, third +317.

So a comparable rate should be possible.


How many years did it take to get to 7?


Tesla was founded in 2003.

So only 9 years.


They didn't start with the Supercharger network right away. First they had to build the car and survive which wasn't 100% certain.


Still took 9 years to get to 7 chargers. So this article is complaining about a 450% increase in rate of charger building.


Ok. I'll bite. And ask this: What does Tesla know that everyone else doesn't? Their charging stations are decently common in high population density areas. I presume their ability to GTD wouldn't change if they ventured into less dense areas. So what do they know?


It just takes time to build physical buildings. Tesla doesn't have any secret sauce they just started years ago.


Tesla has been doing it for over a decade.


Tesla was founded in 2003.

Obviously they didn’t start building charging stations straight away but this doesn’t really feel like we are all having an honest discussion :/

That said they’ve had a long time to plan those chargers.


Yes. But just like the 4 minute mile, once possible is manifested those that follow know it can be done. Or is the gov buying million dollar screwdrivers to build a 2 mill charging station?


Until a few months ago, the government was convincing the car manufacturers to adopt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Charging_Standa....

As well as obtaining thousands of bits of real estate, permitting, etc.


The Federal gov has plenty of land, plenty of office space with parking lots, etc. It could easily find partners, etc. Instead it feels like ground up wheel reinventing with million dollar screwdrivers.


That’s because the plan is to do it largely along major highways, not BLM land in the desert or on military bases.

As with those highways themselves, the money goes to states, who run the thing.


Diesel generators ;)


> insanely high energy requirements

That is just for small personal cars, not even SUV or trucks. And requires a few megawatts... Very good argument to cancel this whole insanity.

> coal and oil extraction

EV charging stations are still using oil and coal. Some are even build with diesel generators, as a "backup" (like at night).


Petrol pumps also have insanely high energy requirements and take a long time to permit and build. And for good reason. They just get their energy via tanker.

The fact that something needs energy doesn't mean we shouldn't build it.

You keep talking about diesel generators. So what if these chargers have diesel generators for backup. People in EVs are probably ok with a fall back to diesel generators - they probably all used to drive petrol cars. It's not this smoking gun you think it is.

The point is that we are moving from oil to not-oil and EVs make this a reality even if occasionally they fall back to the way things are done at the moment (i.e. using oil)


1 megawatt connection is not question of some paperwork and permits, but massive underlying infrastructure. And that infrastructure is simply not there.

If EVs use diesel generators and coal, they are not zero emmisions. In fact ICEs produce less CO2 emmisions, if you count energy losses from charging, battery production etc...

It is another Enron waiting to happen!


That’s why it takes time to build the infrastructure, that’s my point.

It’s taken time to build all the other infrastructure, why do we think that a whole new transport infrastructure across all the states should just magically appear in 2 years.


Hot water is fine.


Huge difference between burr and blade.


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

Search: