|
what’s the exchange rate for a BS CS (top 50) to figgies?
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 17:07 |
|
|
how much pleasure does each level of figgies bring?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
creationist believer posted:what’s the exchange rate for a BS CS (top 50) to figgies? at least half a figgie on top of your base
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
PleasureKevin posted:it’s 2017 those don’t exist that’s some small figgie talk right there. almost as if you were a poor person
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
obstipator posted:how much pleasure does each level of figgies bring? in intro to figgies you learn about the diminishing pleasure return curve where it starts to level off at p dece six and a half but it's actually more complicated than that. if you move on to advanced fig theory you start to understand the idiot hellfucker models which make it significantly (heh) more complicated
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
6.66 figgies is the sweet spot hth op
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
more figgies equals better than
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
https://youtube.com/watch?v=gbU4VRs2rro
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
6.5 figgies post-tax >= 6.5 figgies pre-tax.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
The Management posted:more figgies equals better than go figgie
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
kevin is a zero figgie fucktard
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
the figgie value doubles as a pleasure value because they are the same thing
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
PleasureKevin posted:it’s 2017 those don’t exist
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
pram posted:kevin is a zero figgie fucktard he makes ten cents a year?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
The Management posted:he makes ten cents a year? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
wait a minute, are negative figgies still a positive amount of money?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
*sighs as i draw my log table*
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
oh god im so bad at math please probe me (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
Unless you live like a moron I literally don't know how you spend anywhere close to 250k/year as an individual.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 14:35
|
|
|
you can go full-bore hedonism but I hope no one who does that believes it’s normal
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
power botton posted:Unless you live like a moron I literally don't know how you spend anywhere close to 250k/year as an individual. 250k pre tax is about $180k take home. mortgage + taxes on $2 million Bay Area house = $10k per month. that’s 120k post tax dollars per year. subtract retirement savings and that doesn’t give you much to work with.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
yeah *only* $5k in spending money after the mortgage is taken into account. *imagines a caveman beating two rocks together like a simpleton* Jesus how horrifying
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
id rather live in the google parking lot than spend 2/3 of my salary (regardless of how high it is) paying interest on a mortgage
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
Rex-Goliath posted:yeah *only* $5k in spending money after the mortgage is taken into account. *imagines a caveman beating two rocks together like a simpleton* Jesus how horrifying $3400, that’s if you contribute nothing to savings. if you’re maxing out your 401k, it’s more like $2500. $1000 of that is food, utilities, insurance. now $1500. not poverty level living, but also not the kind of money where you make big purchases anytime you feel like it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
maybe don't live in extremely gentrified, overvalued cities where the cost of living is astronomical
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
if you're taking home more than 10 grand a month you can live pretty happily anywhere in the world unless you've decided you need a 1/4 acre lot in monaco or something
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
The Management posted:250k pre tax is about $180k take home. mo figgies mo problems
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
RISCy Business posted:maybe don't live in extremely gentrified, overvalued cities where the cost of living is astronomical
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
The Management posted:250k pre tax is about $180k take home. it depends a lot on the state. in ca/ny where that's more common it'll be more like 160k. which is still plenty ofc also a techie is probably getting 80k or so of that in rsus (if i remember the poverty-tier income structure right), maybe 50k after taxes. speaking descriptively, some people have mental blocks about selling that straight off because it feels disloyal, which is the point at which 401k + big mortgage/rent + high-col area starts actually feeling tight. of course that's stupid, that 50k isn't just disappearing, it means they're saving a pretty good chunk of change a year, just in a hilariously over-exposed-to-one-company sort of way The Management posted:$3400, that’s if you contribute nothing to savings. if you’re maxing out your 401k, it’s more like $2500. $1000 of that is food, utilities, insurance. now $1500. not poverty level living, but also not the kind of money where you make big purchases anytime you feel like it. i assume you're quoting 1k a month in food as some sort of reasonable, comfortable baseline for normal people, because ime people in this bracket tend to spend waaaay more than 30 bucks a day on restuarants + booze
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
I should buy a tiny 1 bedroom in Chelsea or soho and pray to god I'm never unemployed for any length in time otherwise I'm not really in technology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
European style studio with combined kitchen/shower.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
The highest paying jobs are in the highest priced cities. This is why we must incorporate the indirect utility function into any figgie calculation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Roosevelt posted:mo figgies mo problems henry sentence: death by guillotine
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
YouTube is being hopeful in its viewership figgies
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:YouTube is being hopeful in its viewership figgies Just Google lying to advertisers as per usual.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
Fiedler posted:Just Google lying to advertisers as per usual. problem: advertisers want to advertise to people with money, not ones that are broke as gently caress sub problem 1: our viewers are mostly poor sub problem 2: people will click on the first entry in a list regardless
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
The Management posted:problem: advertisers want to advertise to people with money, not ones that are broke as gently caress When viewed with an open mind, problems practically solve themselves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
hey advertisers are selling aspiration, aren't they?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
are those strayan
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 17:07 |
|
|
Rex-Goliath posted:in intro to figgies you learn about the diminishing pleasure return curve where it starts to level off at p dece six and a half but it's actually more complicated than that. if you move on to advanced fig theory you start to understand the idiot hellfucker models which make it significantly (heh) more complicated figgienometry
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2017 05:37
|
|
