News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Russian Nobleman paradox. 100 million is still a lot though. Company was AppNexus, name rings a bell. Sold to AT&T.
Even still, $100m is more than enough to live a very comfortable life and secure your family's future. No one needs $1b.
What about $300b though?
That’s like, occasionally order off the value menu rich
To be fair, the article does mention that he's considering using that as a way to fund his current startup if it ever needs a cash injection, rather than turning straight to more VCs, which is probably good in the long run in terms of reducing how much the company could have to cater toward predatory investors over customers, so I'd consider at least part of his remaining wealth just a means to fund a separate venture from his private life, but still, he probably does have more than enough even after that.
Also, I'd never heard of the Russian Nobleman paradox before, but I looked it up and it seems interesting. Thanks for sharing it.
I'm not criticizing him for keeping enough to keep him and his family comfortable for a few generations. Giving away a comma is a big request that he did without needing to be asked.
TIL
If the old nobleman is considered a different person than his younger self - then the entire concept of promises is voided.
Obviously as she promised, it doesn't matter what happens after that. Promises are made to be kept, don't make them unless you keep them. Only good reasons I can think of for breaking a promise would be something like if you were lied to when making that promise, or saving lives or maybe prevent nature destruction etc. Old dude changing his mind isn't a proper reason; if he feels like he was young and stupid back then, that's his problem
Maybe I'm missing something, seems like an easy "paradox" to solve:
The legal regime recognizes the person as the same person, proven by the very premise of the question, that the older nobleman retains ownership over the funds. The wife should honor the promise because she made the promise with a person continuous with the younger nobleman in the relevant aspect (it is legal document). The fact that the older nobleman has different beliefs is irrelevant because the question already concedes primacy to the law, implicit in the law protecting the older gentleman's right to dictate disposition of the funds. Someone enlighten me if I'm missing the point?
Now... if the younger nobleman disclaimed his old self and all prior inheritance (or had amnesia and lost all connection to his prior self), and built a new fortune somehow covered by the earlier promise, that would be a more interesting question. Then the person may not be continuous for ethical/duty purposes yet still continuous for legal purposes.
Count Theseuski
AppNexus is a cloud-based software platform that enables and optimizes programmatic online advertising. It was founded in 2007...
I felt like this guy was doing the right thing but the amount of visual pollution he must have enabled in his career is wild. I hope it keeps him up at night.
Yeah, I would feel bad keeping all of the money from that, too.