See my reply below.
TLDR version: Netflix compensation is all salary. Google, etc, comp is salary + stock + bonus, and I suspect these applications list just salary, not total comp.
If you're a US person, why not... But for someone who needs H1B sponsoring and relocation (probably with a family as well), Netflix is the worst company to work for as your first American employer.
Why, specifically? ... I came to Netflix on a H-1B, and they have been awesome. But if there are specific concerns (eg, no grace period in case of termination? something else?) I'd be interested to know what they were.
Because initially H1B's are tied to your employer. I think for the first 2 years? So if you're let go during that period, I believe you have to move back to your country. You can't directly transfer H1B to another company [during that period].
Disclaimer: I'm not an immigration lawyer... So while employers sponsor H-1Bs, and the employer name is associated with the H-1B, you shouldn't be "tied" to the employer, certainly not these days post AC21 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Competitiveness_in_the...). I've been headhunted while on a first term H-1B, and recruiters didn't blink when I mentioned I was on a H-1B. Transfers are common. (Has an employer given you the impression you were tied to them?)
But you mentioned being "let go" during that period, and needing to move back to your country. (A problem created by the H-1B's lack of a stipulated grace period.) Is Netflix considered a poor choice as it's seen to be quicker to fire, therefore this situation is more likely?
Personally, I was considering Netflix as a poor choice as the first H1B sponsor because I thought you (your H1B) are tied to your employer for some initial time. If that is not the case, I could reconsider Netflix :) Assuming that they give enough termination notification (and also helping with landing new jobs, as they mention in those famous slides). My former boss works at Netflix for a couple of years now and mentioned about good opportunities there, but Netflix was out of the table for me because of this possible initial H1B moment and generally because of that "the culture of fear".
Btw, how do you feel about this? Does this fear really exist?
Is it possible for a good engineer to have a relaxed life and atmosphere and a family friendly situation at Netflix?
It's also because they explicitly prefer to shift as much compensation as possible towards salary as opposed to stock, benefits, perks, etc. They released a long presentation about why they do this, I think it's somewhere on Slideshare.
Netflix engineers are better than the average engineer (even in a given job title), so the prevailing wage calculations don't represent the true economics.
But in any case, H1-B visas can lower the wages of engineers without H1-B holders earning less than Americans. It's just like any import. The import itself doesn't have to be sold for cheaper, it's just that the presence of the import lowers the price via competition, so that both the import and the local good are cheaper than the price before importing started.
Linode has a maximum packet per second limit set by default on all nodes. You'll need to email them to have them remove the limit for this particular box. They're very responsive and will increase it within a few minutes. No matter how big your instance is, there's probably way too many packets hitting it right now.
EDIT: Well, this got more popular than I ever expected. Resizing the linode now. Should be back up soon.
After months of fighting with CableOne about speed and service problems, I decided to finally spice up my website dedicated to their poor service: www.iscableoneshitty.com
Now, instead of just saying "YES," it gives an actual representation of the quality of the connection to my house. The server pings my modem 5 times at the top of every minute. It takes the response times and averages them.
If the average response time is <60ms, it reads "NOT CURRENTLY."
If the average response time is between 60 and 100ms, it reads "MOSTLY."
If the average response time is >100ms and <150ms, it reads "YES."
If the average response time is >150ms, it reads "VERY YES."
I've distributed to friends and neighbors in the area, because almost every one in my town is on CableOne for lack of other choices, so they can check and see if at least someone else is having trouble.
I have thoughts of actually tracking the data and compiling monthly reports of downtime and slowness, I just haven't gotten around to that yet.
This exact thing is now becoming law in Canada for all ISPs.
I work at an ISP.. and ... ah.. they're shitting bricks about it, because now they'll have to live up to the speeds and reliability they've sold to customers :)
Commissions are the same as Kickstarter, IE you pay before it's created. In no way does something like this have any bearing on works by commission, in fact it puts things back on the path of human traditions, which have typically relied on commissions, patronage or performance, rather than ownership.
You usually pay for this sort of thing based on profit, more or less.
In this case, his basis is $0 (his cost to acquire the asset). Were he to sell all of them, his profit is essentially 100%; however, I'm not entirely sure how bitcoin gains are codified. If they're regular capital gains, then it's done around that cost basis ($0 in this case), but if they aren't, then I don't know.
There was a good post on the tax implications of Bitcoin by (what I think was) an actual accountant a while back. The gist is that it's taxable only when converted to real goods. So if he mined some number of coins early on and is just holding them in wallets, then he owes nothing. Any time anybody sells any coins for cash or any other real goods, they owe tax on the difference between the sale price and the original purchase price.
There hasn't been much formal on "purchase price" of mined coins as far as I know/remember. It's probably safest to treat them as a purchase price of zero, thus if you sell mined coins for $100, then you have a $100 income that you owe tax on. A clever accountant might be able to claim that mining hardware, electricity, etc, is the cost of acquisition, and so offset the sale price in that way, but it probably isn't worth the trouble for Satoshi or anyone else mining in the early days.
As I understand it, if you are doing mining as a business then you treat your mining hardware, electricity costs etc as business costs to be subtracted from your income when figuring your profit. If you buy some BTC at $100 and sell at $150 your profit is $50, as you would expect. Similarly if it costs you $100 to mine bitcoins that you then sell at $150 your profit is also $50.
All of you asking for the transaction ID are incorrigible. The man clearly wants privacy. The kind of privacy that you all opine for every time there's some governmental incursion. Or some startup gets hacked or whatever.
Please stop repeating all over HN the ridiculous claim that just because something is visible (with enough work to dig through layers of cloaking) then we conclude that its owner wants it to be seen.
It isn't true for government surveillance of our mail and it isn't true with Bitcoin.
