#the revolution will not be funded but they do have funding right now and theyre using some to educate you. use the tool provided

[bilbobagginsomebabez]

for city-based USians, UIHC orgs operate on a holistic definition of health that will usually offer a variety of programming, from education directed at settlers to food and housing programs to health clinics.

seriously all sorts of shit. for example, i worked with my local urban indian org on a community supported agriculture (CSA) program with a FINI grant off the 2018 farm bill. basically a CSA org will get a bunch of local farmers on contract and the farmer will deliver what they're harvesting as the growing season progresses. you get a box of whatever it is every week. we used the FINI grant and another one to get all the boxes for the uihc free. we also ran our community gardens together

a LOT of these orgs have a community garden, and community gardens literally always need volunteers. you the ally need consistent contact with the community you want to support in order to support them on issues as they come up and to see where your skills fit. so i recommend starting with a nonprofit that is trying on purpose to educate you and put you to work. you'll learn about other spaces as you're invited or directed to them.

once you've built trust and understanding, you will be able to offer your more complex skills. for me, it usually looks like arguing with public employees in various settings. it's a constant uphill battle to maintain the health of the community against the weight of a genocide state, so there's literally always something fucked up on a docket somewhere that needs fought. administrative rule changes and policy proposals across city councils, school boards, state senates, power/water/utilities districts, fucking DOT if they're trying to pull eminent domain bullshit, etc etc etc. there is always a shitty meeting that someone has to attend to repeat the same thing over and over and over in as many ways as it takes until you've wasted all their time or they've accepted your answer.

you too have a skill that can be utilized in support of your community members once they've seen it and they understand it. be not afraid to send the weird email. and then show up

just wanna say as someone who's Aboriginal that I think First Nations peoples have every right to be a little angry at white leftists (NOT Palestinians, people blaming Palestinians stfu) who ignored our anti-colonial movements for years but are now supporting the Free Palestine movement. If you, someone living in the US, Canada or Australia or Aotearoa, are serious about the liberation of Palestine then you NEED to be just as serious about justice and liberation for the First Nations peoples' who's stolen and colonised land YOU live on. If you're not serious about where YOU fit in the paradigm of anti-colonial work, fix it. Here's a good place to start: if you're a person living on occupied Indigenous lands, learn who's land it really is, and how you can help them as an ally.

[smarmykemetic]

"to do everything in their power to sabotage socialist projects". Read a history book. Nothing you've said here is correct to the anon. None of it is correct, you are terribly confused.

If the USSR was not a Communist state, what do you say of China? Cuba? Vietnam? North Korea? A Communist state is one that is led by a single party that aims to become stateless. They become totalitarian because a stateless, classless society is IMPOSSIBLE. Then you have duplicitous despots like Stalin and Pol Pot take control. Communism is evil, and if you read a fucking history book you would realize that! You’re fucking disgusting.

And we’ve reached the part of the conversation where conservatives who think that their high school history teacher repeating capitalist red scare propaganda makes them ~truly educated~ about communism and tell leftists who’ve studied this far more than they ever will to “read a book” and furiously type nonsense statements in a fit of knee-jerk rage and ignorance.

I’m just gonna quote @egowave​ for most of the first ask, referring to me being wrong about capitalist states sabotaging socialist states and capitalism causing more deaths than communism. Ahem:

list of us involvement in regime changes and heres a notable one when the cia helped overthrow the democratically elected socialist president of chile and replaced him with a fascist dictator who was responsible for thousands of deaths

oh here, 35 countries where the us supported fascists drug lords and terrorists

that time when reagan supported and funded islamic extremists because they were “fighting communists”, now go forward a decade or so and the us thinks islamic extremism is a huge threat

a timeline of atrocities committed by the cia- did you know the cia took in a bunch of nazis spies right after ww2 so they could help the us once again fight communists?

when reagan illegally sold weapons to iran and used the money to fund a right wing militia in nicaragua called the contras, who were fighting the left wing socialist sandinistas. oh heres all the human rights violations the contras committed while illegally getting money from the us, home of the free and land of the brave am i right

torture under the bush administration and by the cia

us war crimes and the casualties of the iraq war

btw the us has most likely been lying about the amount of civilian deaths caused by drone strikes and the actual number is way higher than theyre officially saying and this is just from the obama administration

that time coca cola used right wing death squads to murder and terrorize workers and stop them from unionzing

nestle using slave labour

how cointelpro targeted civil rights movements, black power movements, and radical leftists and murdered leaders of the movements

when the us outlawed the communist party and being involved in communist actions

and if you didnt know the us uses prison labour where prisoners get payed sometimes only a few dollars a week all for the profit of the prisons

list of people killed by police by year

if you want to tell leftists they need to study history but you dont want to look at any of the crimes of capital, or the crimes committed in upholding capitalism then you dont give a shit about studying history. if you can recognize that gulags were fucked up and horrible, as you should, you cant turn a blind eye on the american prison system where people are being forced to work for almost no pay. so the question is do you actually care about studying history or do you just want to deflect off every critique of capitalism.”

The black book of communism, where the “communists killed more people than nazis!” lie comes from, is thoroughly-debunked bullshit. “Some of the major criticisms against the Black Book of Communism includes the fact that it counts the following as “victims of communism”: some nazis and their collaborators who were killed by the Soviet Union during World War II, people who died in the 1921 Russian famine (which was caused by drought, the whites stealing food, war, etc), other hunger-related deaths caused by the nazi war against the Soviet Union, and many other incidents that were dishonestly attributed. The book contains deaths dishonestly attributed to communism by completely ignoring external factors such as sanctions, foreign military intervention, etc. It also includes inaccuracies of historical events such as when Werth credits the Austro-Hungarian army, not the German army, for the occupation of Poland in 1915, making the ridiculous claim that the bolsheviks only had 2,000 members in October 1917 when they actually had around 200,000 members, or claiming that the infamous U.S.-backed dictator Batista “fiercely opposed” the U.S., and in some instances, pulls numbers straight out of thin air.”

“a stateless, classless society is IMPOSSIBLE” A. that’s how human beings existed for the majority of our time as a species dumbshit and B. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Catalonia Like many revolutionary projects, Revolutionary Catalonia was crushed by imperialist states, but it didn’t just dissolve from the inside because it lacked capital and state power. Instances like this are why most lefists agree that communism can’t exist without global revolution, because you can’t really have a stateless society in world with states.

Finally, I wanna restate that most of the “communist states” you’re talking about weren’t communist, were actually socialist states, because communism by definition is stateless and classless. Also, a lot of the legitimate crimes of socialist states are things that as an anarchist, I don’t support; there are different kinds of communists who believe in different theories and methods, and within commie spaces, there is a lot of discourse criticizing so-called “communist states”. If you’re gonna insist on defining communism not by what communists describe as their goals, but why what their political enemies describe communism as in order to convince people it’s “evil” because it’s contrary to capitalist interests, you’re going to continue to not know what the fuck you’re talking about. 

I’m by no means an expert in this though, if you have questions or are curious about how anyone could be commies, this is a good place to start reading (and a couple of youtube videos for those who prefer it: Contrapoints: x x Philosophy Tube: x x x x) to understand what commies actually say and think, rather than just buying into “communism is evil because everyone else says so” bullshit.

[ranty9000]

A chronicle of me watching the film "white chicks"

okay so It started with two black fbi agents disguised as racist Mexican stereotypes. They failed a bust regarding ice cream bent code for cocaine and busting actual Ice cream guys

Why do comedies with little to no white characters think they can be even more racist than the white people they accuse of doing so

It’s like “the nutshack” all over again.

Here’s the “chief getting mad at the cop hero’s incompetence” trope. He’s Gonna put them on assignment in Iraq cuz their fuck up. Another duo consisting of a white dude and an ambiguously light Brown guy make fun of them with bad ice cream incompetence.

The girlfriend the one of them (I don’t know which one because I barely know either of them or even their names and so far their both bland as unflavored oatmeal) is upset because he was two minutes late to getting home and thinks she’s cheating on him.

“What could I possibly do anything so fast in those two minutes?”

She gives him a stare implying that’s how fast he is in bed with her, and no sound of laughter passes my lips.

This overbearing girlfriend and beaten down boyfriend cliche isn’t done to death At all. Oh and this ones name is Marcus

More ice cream jokes from the antagonist duo, our “heroes” make a “joke” about holding each others balls when they pee (what? That’s not what you hold when you go pee) and which one wipes (wouldn’t it be the other guy while one is on the John? This joke is bad in premise and execution)

The antagonist duo is working on the “Socialite kidnapping” case where someone has threatened to kidnap the daughters of the head of a local college. The “hero’s” are volunteered to pick them to set up a trap

Why is this a comedy again?

Oh Marcus called other one who’s name they haven’t said yet “blackie-chan” (WHAT-)

Oh Marcus is lactose intolerant, that totally isn’t a checkovs gun

So the girls arrive and despite being in their early 20s they greet the agents by saying “we already gave to the United negro fund”. I’ve never heard a rich young white chick call a black man a “negro” in the 21st century. I get they’re trying to make them shallow and shit but that’s unrealistic- oh now they gave the dudes the bags after they said they were going to the girls to the car.

Girls like this aren’t THIS kind of racist!

They can’t be from silicone valley and have the values of a stereotypical Texan yokel! They don’t fit!

Oh good… they have a Pomeranian…..

I’m only 15 minutes in? Oh good Lord. I’ll keep to highlights now.

The dog is out the window now oh no

Oh no they didn’t die from being hit by a truck

They just narrowly survived a horrible accident let’s make it humerous

She’s going to a self proclaimed bitch fit

They keep the girls in a room by saying they wouldn’t want anyone to see their “scars” (a light scratch on ones nose and the others lip), but they cant get them to the area where the trap is

Marcus says he is going to hang himself before the chief gets to him, sadly he doesn’t follow through.

The one that isn’t Marcus is lying to the chief over the phone coz one more screw up and it’s off to Iraq. The one that isn’t Marcus grabs marcus’ balls to stop him from admitting the truth

No laughs here

Okay so the disguise team (i think? They don’t say is gonna make them look like the girls now

I’m glad it’s more than sticking paint on their face and melons in their shirt but the guy freaked out when he felt the fake tits being put on him for some reason

“He’s right, make em bigger” says the head guy as i slowly die inside.

Oh Wait no it IS painting them white okay

The make up is somewhat decent, but here is where the “real humor” starts. So put on your hazmat suits.

The antagonist duo has to watch over the “girls” disguised as hotel staff and they take advantage of this by “mistaking” the ambiguously light brown guy for Mexican. Are they just racist to mexicans?

Haha their boobs are so big and knocking over things ha ha ha

They use plastic surgery to excuse their masculine facial features as well as make excuses for fake crabiness, actually decent writing here.

This is fleeting as guys are already planning to tap dat ass

Is that the chick who played lindsay in arrested development?

Are we doing a “your mother” competition right now. This film is sucking the humor out of me.

Another groin shot and mexican bashing.

Oh no one is getting attracted to the black publicist.

Oh good toilet humor and fart humor thanks chekovs gun

Lactose intolerance doesn’t work like that my family has two that are

Terry crews why are you here no….

“That’s what I’m talking about, a skinny white girl with a black ass”

Terry please no

Terry please god no

TERRY PLEASE NO

Did they do a “king king/ gorilla” joke to Terry and think since it’s really a black dude it’s okay.

Oh no

“Making my way downtown, walking past, and I’m home bound BENNA BA BENNA BA BENNA”

OBLIGATORY N-WORD AND RAP JOKE I REPEAT IT’S A CODE 19 EVERYONE GET DOWN.

Oh good dressing up tiiime and sex jokes greeeeaaat.

What is happening right now

I have no words, i think the Movie is having a stroke?

Oh no wait i think it’s me?

The antagonist duo is talking about what which older celebrity they’d bang as they keep an eye before they come back

And now not marcus Is trying to get her purse back coz it has the badge and gun, she ran fast and got it cuz I guess chicks like that can’t run fast???

There’s a subplot involving the guys that wanna tap that a girl looking like a she’s on cocaine coz Nose powder that’s all you need to know.

I wanna die

They’re doin the auction girl for charity thing and TERRY IS BACK OH GOD WHY

Oh wait it’s marcus wife and not girlfriend? Wtf

Oh good a sleepover

The black guy as a white girl is giving one girl corn rows OH NOOOO TUMBLR ALEERRRT

Oh good sex humour with dildos

I’m dead inside, like there’s nothing left… and there’s still another HOUR?! Children I’m not gonna make it…..

Oh good back to the dudes and banging celebs that have yeast infections- OH GOOD THE KIDNAPPING FROM BALD LACKIES oh they’re just strippers acting like kidnappers

“It’s part of their act”

Sadly it’s statistically a common kink of women for some reason

Beach scene now

Haha he’s actually black and throws football’s hard

Terry is too oiled up I’m scared OH GOD THAT’S HIS BULGE

“Swartzinegro”, that is all

Romance subplot with the publicist or whoever she is again no one cares and nothing super horrible or unfunny

AND ANOTHER SUBPLOT WITH THE WIFE THAT’S THE NAGGY BLACK GIRL TROPE AGAIN THAT’S GREAT

TERRY CREWS BEING ROMANTIC TO MARCUS WITH SAXOPHONE

TERRY LIKES THE SONG! MAKINH MY WAY DOWNTOWN, WALKING FAST, FACES PAST AND I’M HOME BOUND BADA BA BADA BA VXAGBCSG

STOP SINGING I’M THE DAD OF THE SWAMP CASTLE NOW

Oh good he did

I’m going to cry silently while this foot fetish shit is going on

Oyster is metaphor for pussy

More bland romance with not Marcus with awkward humor that’s just awkward

Same for Terry and marcus

Oh no mean doggo. Doggo mad. Doggo bite. Doggo please kill

Terry please stop I’m eating a carrot I’m gonna vomit

Oh he’s a basketball player OF COURSE HE IS

AND MORE FART HUMOR THANK YOU FOR THAT I STILL HAD A SHRED OF SANITY LEFT

More bland romance with not Marcus.

Make it end

She called the dog “nigga” as it’s funny coz it’s a black chick

Antagonist duo being creeps and finding out they’re dudes.

Drinks named after sex.

Terry putting drugs that arent roofies in the drink and my psychotic break is now complete

She switched them and pulled a “princess bride” tho

Eye candy skank sexy dance off I’m going to die this suddenly turned into a those dance movies with the cheerleaders and is just to fill time and the smut quot

Lol all black dudes can break dance you guys and it’s totally not stunt doubles

It’s 1 am right now and terry is high and ready to rape

Girl is spilling her guts litteraly and figuratively

High dog fucker and high Terry crews, wait wasn’t that shot from “it’s always sunny” with the glow sticks

Terry and high guy fucked

Marcus wife Subplot is back oh no.

Koolaid joke hahaha kill me

Why are the wives of black couples in comedies always so mean? I feel like that’s a stereotype that no one has acknowledged and is it’s just as bad as other tropes

The antagonists thought the real sisters were the fake and they were stripped and they were punched and it’s funny and the cheif knows and fired them and marcus is rightly leaving cuz is friend is an ass but he’s apologizing so let’s do the stupid plan and the identity of the bad guys is shown but I don’t remember who they are supposed to be.

The “heroes” are bringing the antagonist duo in cuz they were fired too and the “who’d you rather fuck” thing ISN’T FUNNY

TOKEN FLAMBOYANT GAY GUY RUNNING FASHION SHOW WHO IS CONFIRMED GAY HAHAHAHAHAHA THAT WASN’T OLD EVEN BEFORE THE GAY REVOLUTION NOT AT ALL

FAUX MEANINGFUL MUSHY GIRL SHIT

THE WIFE OF MARCUS AND HER FRIEND WITH NO NAME ARE STILL HERE.

TERRY GO AWAY

SWITCHAROO HUMOR HAHA

IT’S THE SWAN DRESS BOIIIIII

PRATFALLS AHAHAHAHA

The two bad mean got red paint splattered on them and it’s seen as visionary while they are embarrassed.

Oh good china is in the mix of racial insensitivity

Oh boy theyre fighting the bad guys now and she said you hit like bitch

The wifes friend calls backup their names are keisha, nay-nay, and laquonda

Yes really

Oh the dad of the mean girls is the bad guy okay

Is terry dead

No

Terry only cared that marcus wasn’t white and he goes “negro please”. Did they use up their n-bombs?

The romance plot wraps up (“this some jerry springer shit”) and both duos get their job back cuz it’s a cop movie trope.

Why does Marcus want this chick again.

“And they all stayed friends the end”

It’s been a two hour movie and i lost all sanity but the late time is also a factor

Let this be a warning not to let history repeat itself

[fmservers]

Nyca Partners’ Hans Morris hunts for great fintech investments amid volatility

Hans Morris is a name to know in fintech, and as finance and tech sectors prepare for tougher time next year, he has some incisive thoughts to share about the kinds of companies that will succeed (or not) in a financial downturn. The managing partner of investment firm Nyca Partners, Morris also serves as the chairman of the board of Lending Club and is a director of other start-ups including AvidXchange, Boomtown, Payoneer and SigFig. At Nyca, which is on its third fund, Morris spends much of his time meeting with entrepreneurs focused on payments, credit models, digital advice and financial infrastructure.

But unlike many successful fintech VCs, Morris doesn’t have to read about how Wall Street’s history influenced the trajectory of those sectors. He played an active role in shaping them. His experiences — heading Smith Barney’s FIG effort (at 29 years old), overseeing Citigroup’s institutional businesses, serving as president of Visa and advising companies at General Atlantic — have also provided him with an unparalleled financial services rolodex. And for those who believe that financial history rhymes, Morris’ opinions are now especially welcome. Fintech may be entering a new, post-financial crisis phase in which the low-hanging fruit has been picked and macro headwinds outweigh tailwinds. In the discussion below, Morris talks candidly about how he’s approaching investing next year and how he’s viewing fintech M&A possibilities. He was also eager to share his thoughts on ethics in financial services (a favorite topic), the prospects for challenger banks, why he’s branched out into real estate tech, the future of blockchain and some of his favorite bank CEOs.

Gregg Schoenberg: Hans, it’s always good to see you, but I’m especially glad to be sitting down with you now, given that the financial world is convulsing at the moment. Before we get into that, though, I want to kick off with something else: Do you buy into the idea of techfin vs. fintech?

Hans Morris: I don’t. My basic organizing principle, which you and I have discussed before, is around declining information costs. As these costs decline, it disrupts the traditional profit pools in financial services. It’s always been like that. What I would say is that in recent times, some tech companies have done a very good job at building a trusted relationship with consumers, and in some cases with businesses. That trusted relationship obviously provides a significant competitive advantage of information. But that advantage lessens later on. There are so many examples we could point to of companies that were ‘it.’ Then, suddenly, they say, ‘Oh no, our tech is expensive, creates a bad experience and will cost a lot to fix.’

GS: Let’s talk about the present. As you know, the Fed has been tightening, equities are hemorrhaging, the yield curve is getting spooky and talk of a recession is intensifying. To me, Lending Club, right or wrong, was one of the original poster children of the post-crisis fintech boom. But now, I think we’re in a regime change and that the next crop of successful financial innovators will look a lot different. What’s in store for an area like credit delivery?

HM: In credit delivery, I think it’s now pretty well-realized by investors, and certainly realized by capital markets investors, that credit delivery requires capital. So today, I feel that anyone who’s going to be successful in credit intermediation needs to have a very good understanding of balance sheet risk, liquidity risk, and capital requirements. I pay a lot of attention to capital requirements, and the ability to fund something in the teeth of a crisis.

GS: Let’s say we enter a recession next year and see continued volatility across the capital markets. I understand that each recession and bear market is different, but with the fresh capital you’ve closed on, where are you looking to go on offense?

HM: Among the thousands of fintech companies that have gotten some funding, there are companies that are really struggling to get their Series B or Series C done.

GS: Names that have lost their momentum?

HM: Yes. They’ve lost their momentum, and they’ve lost the perception of momentum among venture investors. But in some cases, these companies still possess some very good fundamentals, yet the valuations are a lot more attractive. If that dynamic becomes even more extreme, I think there could be some good opportunities.

GS: Isn’t it also true that the fintech names that suck up a lot of the venture money aren’t always the best underlying businesses?

So when you talk about high-valuation companies, I think it’s unrealistic for banks to be acquirers.

HM: It’s an interesting dynamic. Generally, as long as companies can continue to raise capital, they will keep going even if that isn’t necessarily a rational thing to do. But in some cases, where you see a bunch of companies pursuing a similar strategy, it would be better to pursue a merger because we don’t need tons of companies doing personal financial management, etc…

GS: Do you see the big banks with strong balance sheets, the JP Morgans of the world, getting the green light from regulators to be more aggressive in M&A?

HM: Regulators have clearly been one reason there hasn’t been more activity. The second thing is goodwill. Keep in mind that for a bank, goodwill is a 100% reduction to tangible Tier One capital. So even for JP Morgan to say, ‘We’ll take a billion dollars of our Tier One capital and invest it in a company with no income and maybe positive EBITDA, but maybe not—

GS: —That would take a ton of capital or a ton of conviction.

HM: Well, that company would have to be a very powerful growth engine or solution. So when you talk about high-valuation companies, I think it’s unrealistic for banks to be acquirers. Where banks can be acquirers, and this is what we’ve seen, is where you have a company valued at $60 million, maybe a $100 million, etc…

GS: A Clarity Money.

HM: Yes, a company where the acquisition moves a bank much further along in a development cycle. Where the the bank can say, “Instead of us taking two years to get our real product out, we can get out a state-of-the-art product right now, and it comes with a great team and DNA. That’s appealing.

GS: Appealing, but realistic?

HM: It’s hard to pull off. Often, the team leaves, everything dissipates, and the acquirer ends up writing off the whole thing.

GS: Moving forward, who do you think is poised to make M&A work?

HM: There’s a couple of examples where it’s worked. One is PayPal, which in recent times has done an excellent job of acquiring things and integrating talent into the company. I’m quite impressed in terms of how Bill Ready, who is now COO, Dan Shulman and the management team have changed the tech profile of PayPal.

GS: Well, they’re not a 200-year-old financial institution founded on a winding alley in downtown New York.

HM: Yes, but it was very old-school Silicon Valley, and they had a lot of technical debt. Of course, they had this great mafia 20 years ago, but all those people are gone. I don’t think there’s a single person in the top 100 at PayPal that was there 15 years ago.

GS: Let’s talk specific themes. You’ve already mentioned personal financial management, which I share your skepticism about. What’s your take on the prospects for challenger banks?

HM: I think we’re likely to have a war for deposits with too many different types of firms competing for deposits. Just look at the United States last year. All of the deposit growth we saw was explained by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and JP Morgan Chase. Everyone else shrank. But if you have Monzo and Revolut come to the US and you look at Acorns, MoneyLion, Chime and fifteen other prepaid models or fully chartered bank models, they’re all going to have a pretty slick interface, and they’re all going to be out there competing for deposits.  

GS: How about the robos and free trading platforms?  As you know, a lot of the younger customers on these platforms haven’t experienced a sustained period of tumultuous equity market conditions.  

I pay a lot of attention to capital requirements, and the ability to fund something in the teeth of a crisis.

HM: I think a great majority of American households should be using a roboadvisor. However, the question is around the relationship between the customer acquisition and the revenue opportunity. In fact, a big part of our thesis with SigFig was to really help drive the pivot over to enterprise-based customers. But generally, and without knowing the details, my sense is that Betterment, Wealthfront and maybe Personal Capital have enough brand to get to the scale necessary to be self-sufficient. I think most of the others are not in that position.

GS: Turning to the mortgage and broader real estate sector, is your view that even if we have a deepening downdraft in housing, the real estate start-ups backed by you and others can do well anyway? Because they are essentially taking an industry stuck in the 1980s and ’90s and dragging it into the modern era.

HM: There’s a lot of room for tech improvement in real estate, and that includes residential real estate as well as institutional real estate. The problem with real estate, and mortgage-related models, is that the capital needs are also significant. So if you end up owning property, the bill adds up very quickly.

GS: I guess it depends on where a company buys them.

HM: True. Look, we remain bullish on them, but I share your concern that if activity stops or if you start having real decreases in property values in certain sectors, some of these companies may end up holding the bag.  

GS: When I saw the Ribbon deal, I was wondering how you and other backers looked at the opportunity at this point in the cycle.

HM: Well, for one thing, you can estimate the likelihood of someone getting a mortgage pretty efficiently. You can be right 99 percent of the time, but even if you’re only right 90 percent of the time, you’re going to be fine. That’s because the certainty that the company offers to the customer is worth it. They also have a great management team and a CEO who is really smart. They’re not naive.

GS: So given all the hype and ups and downs we’ve seen in blockchain, I’m wondering if you remain a long-term blockchain guy.

HM: Here’s the simple fact: The whole financial services industry is composed of ledgers. The reconciliation between entities of that information is a significant expense, particularly in the capital markets businesses. But I don’t buy into the view that it’s going to work better in all cases. The evidence so far is that it works well in some cases.

GS: Where can it work well?

HM: Distributed ledgers can work well when having synchronous data is an essential attribute, and when speed is not necessarily a central attribute.

GS: So, even if the implementation takes longer than the the hype machine suggested it would, financial institutions will get there?

Because money attracts crooks.

HM: They will get there. The cost of change is very, very high. The benefit of it is real. The question is, ‘How’s that cost of change compare to the ongoing benefit?’ In enterprise applications, the ones that will succeed are not ones where you say, ‘Lets rebuild everything within the core functions,’ because the cost and complexity are too great. The much better way is to start at the edge of an enterprise delivering immediate value, and then become an architecture for more things to move over to that.

GS: It’s easier said than done…

HM: If you take the capital markets area, I think it often requires an individual who has a bigger-than-life personality and the leadership skills to match it.

GS: Speaking of leadership, let’s talk about that within the context of fintech, where, as you know, we’ve seen mixed outcomes. You and I have talked a fair bit about how fintech isn’t like other tech sectors, because you’re dealing with money and livelihoods.

HM: Yes, and the activities are regulated, for a very good reason.

GS: When you look at a deal, does the character of the leader trump everything else?

HM: I’d say that the character and capabilities of a leader make a big difference. And to me, in financial services, the errors made, whether it’s 10 years ago or today, are similar. I mean, you have to tell the truth. You have to.

GS: Why is it so important to you?

HM: Because money attracts crooks.

GS: On that note, when I look at some of those who subscribe to the whole blitzscaling ethos, I see it as incompatible with our current climate and especially problematic to financial services. Blitzscaling doesn’t endorse breaking the law, of course, but this whole idea of consciously letting fires burn is a recipe for disaster in today’s financial services sector, right?

HM: Yes, I think so. I’d add that we have a rule in our firm: Don’t invest in any business model where you’re tricking the customer into a profitable relationship. But unfortunately, I feel that there are many business models that do just that.

GS: That’s a bold rule given that terms of services agreements remain dark dens of iniquity.

HM: Well, it’s more than just that. Look at Robinhood. I think it’s a remarkable company made up of unbelievable entrepreneurs. But I do feel that if you say, ‘Payment for order flow is the business model,’ or ‘Margin lending is the business model,’ you’ve got to spell that out. I mean, ‘payment for order flow?’ Most people would be like, ‘What does that mean?’

GS: You might as well be speaking in Ancient Greek.

A VC once said to me that we have too much knowledge about some things. I think there’s some truth to that.

HM: Exactly. I feel, in financial services, the best companies, the most successful long-run stories, will do the right thing for their customers, always. That also means not making a high-profile release of a new product, like a high-interest checking and savings account yielding way above anyone else, before you’ve actually checked with the regulators.

GS: On that latter reference, how accountable is Robinhood’s board for the company’s recent blunder?

HM: I honestly don’t know in what way the board was involved in this, but I think it’s a good example of where a board should put the brakes on an idea until the risks are clear. Sometimes management teams, and investors, don’t want to hear that, but it’s an essential role for financial services companies.

GS: In your career, you have seen your fair share of financial icons rise and fall. Have you ever passed on a deal that wound up being a huge success because something didn’t smell right?

HM: Yes, we have passed on things that turned out to be really good investments, but that’s part of our equation.

GS: In 1997, Howard Marks—

HM: —He’s fantastic, isn’t he?

GS: He’s phenomenal. In one of his famous memos, he asked ‘Are you an investor? Or are you a speculator?’ Given that there are quite a few VCs who have come to fintech in recent years, I’m wondering if you see a lot of speculators.

HM: Most of the folks that I interact with are investors, not speculators. The crypto stuff is pure speculation by almost everybody.

GS: Yes. I wasn’t implying that we discuss crypto.

HM: To the core of your question, I’ll tell you this: There’s this very, very successful VC investor I had a debate with over a deal. My point was that the company in question would need to raise a lot of capital to scale. But that long-term consideration wasn’t especially relevant to him, because he felt the company would have options down the road. We passed on the deal, but now, I look back and regret that decision.

GS: Are you suggesting that you could benefit from having a little more of a speculative instinct?

HM: A VC once said to me that we have too much knowledge about some things. I think there’s some truth to that.

GS: I’m sure that your institutional knowledge has been an important asset on many other occasions. I’ll move on to our last topic, Hans, because I know you have a fund to manage. You know all of the big bank CEOs, right?

HM: Yes.

GS: There’s Jamie Dimon, who defies easy description. At Goldman, you’ve got a banker as CEO. At Morgan Stanley, you’ve got an ex-management consultant. At Citibank, you’ve got—

HM: —You’ve got Corbat. Michael is just an excellent manager who gets things fixed. It’s interesting: Jamie is a fantastic manager of people too, but Jamie brings in his team. Corbat is very good at taking on an existing team and just making them better. Brian [Moynihan] is also really good. I mean he was a lawyer, and when he got the job, I had no idea what he was like. But I’ve noticed that the people who have worked for him are really loyal.

GS: I think the CEOs of the big banks tend to be a reflection of the times in which they operate, right? We went through the period of the trader CEO, which is now gone. As you look down the road, what are the heads of the big banks going to look like?

HM: I’ll answer that question by turning you to Microsoft. What explains the turnaround there? Is it because Satya [Nadella] is such an amazing engineer? No; he’s a great people person. He’s a fantastic manager who put in place a high-quality decision process, which is key to managing a complex organization.

GS: Implicit in my question is whether or not these organizations are going to be as big and complex as they are now. Specifically, I’m referring to the supermarket model that you were involved in helping to construct. Does that remain in place?

HM: Keep in mind that liquidity is a very, very important aspect of a financial marketplace, and having access to core liquidity that doesn’t change frequently is very important. The professional money obviously switches very quickly. But things like core deposits, pension flows and corporate cash tend to have the longest time-frames to build access to. But when a bank has access to deposits that don’t move much, it enables it to fund the liquid financial assets. That’s so important for when you hit a liquidity crisis.  

GS: So the big bank model is here to stay?

HM: Yes, I think it’s going to be around for a long time.

GS: Well on that note, Hans, I wish you luck in navigating whatever the future brings. Thanks for sitting down with me and sharing your wisdom.

HM: It’s always a pleasure speaking to you, Gregg. Thank you as well.

This interview has been edited for content, length and clarity.

Via Gregg Schoenberg https://techcrunch.com

[tuthillscopes-blog]

Russias Space Program Is Blowing Up. So Are Its Rockets

check it out @ https://tuthillscopes.com/russias-space-program-is-blowing-up-so-are-its-rockets/

Russias Space Program Is Blowing Up. So Are Its Rockets

A week ago, a Russian Progress cargo ship carrying supplies towards the Worldwide Space Station burned in the climate once the Soyuz rocket transporting it unsuccessful only a couple of seconds after lift off. Surprising, since the Soyuz is a spacefaring standard because the 1960s. But additionally not, because 15 Russian rockets have unsuccessful since 2011, and five of these happen to be Soyuz.

Russian rockets provide the US space program a substantial lift. Orbital ATK uses Russian RD-181s within their Antares rockets, and right now, Soyuz would be the only rockets able to transporting astronauts towards the ISS. Even though the Soyuz problem may be dependent on a couple of basics, it reflects Roscosmos&#8217 withering workforce, dwindling funds, and systemic corruption&#8212all which have remaining the main one-time space superpower inside a precarious position.

The Soyuz rocket now has wrinkles-school Soviet space engineering at its zenith. &#8220Soyuz are very reliable,&#8221 states Asif Siddiqi, an area historian at Fordham College. But recently Russian engineers happen to be trying out the look. The majority of the Soyuz failures within the last couple of yearsbeen tracked to funkiness inthe rocket&#8217s revamped upper stages. &#8220Theyre kind of fudging using the fundamental technology,&#8221 Siddiqi states. &#8220Any time they alter something, it&#8217s very dangerous.&#8221 Early reports on a week ago&#8217s failure indicate the rocket&#8217s third stage, but they aremurky on specifics.

The foundation from the failure may not be in Russia. &#8220Previous failures have involvedupper stages being substituted forcomponents built-in Ukraine,&#8221 states John Logsdon, founding father of the area Policy Institute at George Washington College. &#8220They might not be Russian problems whatsoever, with the exception of ensuring the machine works correctly.&#8221 (We requested Logsdon if he thought political tensions between Russia and Ukraine may well be a factor, and that he didn&#8217t &#8220even wish to visit.&#8221)

The troubles within the Russian space program&#8217s logistics are signs and symptoms of systemic problems. The Russian space programbarely survived nov the Ussr, and it has been flagging since. That&#8217s showing itself in low quality control and brain-drain. &#8220The Russian program is really suffering exactly the same problem because the US,&#8221 Logsdon states. &#8220Their core engineers are retiring, and also the youthful ones are drawn to more profitable employment, or emigrating.&#8221

Russia&#8217s Soyuz MS-03 spacecraft departs for that Worldwide Space Station (ISS) on November 18, 2016. KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV/AFP/Getty Images

You are able to hardly blame the youthful, would-be spacecraft engineers. Based on Pavel Luzin, an worldwide relations lecturer at Russia&#8217s Perm College, the beginning salary for somebody doing quality checks on producing the Progress cargo spacecraft starts at $200 monthly. Engineers don&#8217t do far better: about $270 monthly. &#8220How can good spacecrafts be created within this type of system?&#8221 Luzin states. Also, he notes the reduced wages smart more because Roscosmos greater ups like Igor Komarov and Dmitry Rogozin bring in millions. Remember, earnings disparity brought to revolution in Russia. It&#8217s not at all something they simply shrug off.

Outsourcing, low quality control, low wages&#8212it all appears like a cash issue. But in writing, Roscosmo&#8217s budget went up during the last couple of years, when rising prices of oil and gas had Russia&#8217s economy around the mend. But oil costs are bottoming out, and also the country just approved a 10-year space budget of just one.4 trillion rubles. Which seems like a great deal, but is really only $20 billion. NASA&#8217s yearly operating finances are around $18 billion. &#8220Their finances are not sufficient to keep a global-class space effort overall,&#8221 Logsdon states.

And lots of the cash will get slurped up by corruption and it is connected money-pit projects. TheVostochny Cosmodrome, a means-over-budget spaceport in Russia&#8217s China, is really a glaring example. &#8220Kickbacks, nepotism, has bred this degree of mismanagement,&#8221 states Siddiqi. &#8220And as a result of many of these problems, Russian space program went via a constant procedure for really disruptivereorganization. It&#8217d end up like breaking NASA up and putting it together again every 3 years.&#8221

That&#8217s not really a recipe for progress wide science or exploration, which are nearly always lengthy-haul projects.&#8220Cronyism, bribes, and general corruption appear is the rule during the day conducting business wide in Putin&#8217s Russia,&#8221 states space expert Ray Klaes. &#8220The managers set up be more effective at politicking and making allies with Putin than being experienced in space technology and physics.&#8221 And mainly in the space program, where government influence looms large, priorities is going to be aligned to complement Putin&#8217s. So,military.

And that’s why space efforts with military applications, like Russia&#8217s form of Gps navigation, Glonass, do relatively better. (Though still not great. Russia&#8217s economic struggles are really the.) And really, that&#8217s virtually the situation with all of Russian science: &#8220In applied science like hacking, they’ve exceptional competency,&#8221 states Siddiqi. &#8220But fundamental science, the type you need to do inside a lab and obtain Nobel prizes for, they don&#8217t do any longer.&#8221 And manned space missions, however nationalistic or esteemed, require robust fundamental science.

All this, the rocket failures, the steady decline, puts Russia inside a bad place to cooperate in multinational space projects such as the ISS, that has been the nation&#8217s most powerful tie to spacefaring relevancy&#8212and towards the West. &#8220A primary reason the united states asked Russia to participate the area station partnership ended up being to funnel sources to aid Russian abilities,&#8221 states Logsdon. &#8220We didnt want Russian engineers emigrating to places like North Korea, and Iran.&#8221 The connection has not been entirely comfortable. And when Russia isn&#8217t transparent concerning the origin of Soyuz problem, it&#8217s not getting much better.

Find out more: https://www.wired.com/2016/12/russias-space-program-blowing-rockets/