"Total Revenue of approximately $1.8 billion Net Income of approximately $730 million to $800 million"

These are insane profit margins.

I remember the days when people were saying LiDAR will never be cheap enough for regular cars.

Now it's on smartphones.

And even fewer realize that a 2.1% growth rate is itself exponentially faster than a 2% growth rate.

If something grows by 2% per day, vs 2.1% per day, after a year the second one is >20x bigger.

What you say is true in principle, but your numbers are wrong. I got a rather less dramatic 50% difference after a year:

  >>> 1.02**365
  1377.4082919660768
  >>> 1.021**365
  1969.6808462403098
  >>>

Thanks for the correction, I didn't actually do the math for that, just remembered something I've read a while back, but the numbers where different 20% vs 21%.

Apparently I don't understand exponential growth either cause I assumed a 5% difference scales linearly (as in the difference between 20% vs 21% growth rates for a given period should be the same as between 2% and 2.1%).

Silly me.

But a good exmple showing why numbers are so important. A 50% difference is an order of magnitude away from a factor 20. Thing is, once out there the wrong factor 20 is impossible to correct.

GeForce GTX 1080 Ti works fine with a 4k display.

Pretty sure he means gaming, even my 2080 ti struggles with 4k gaming (well imagine wanting the highest setting of every game in 4k, most gpus can handle that in fullhd n 2k, but 4k every gpu is jsut to weak)

Even a 1080 does fine pushing a 4k display. Mine stutters a bit when I stick two 4k displays on it, but it's fine pushing one.

At least they don't have to pay for it if they can't find a job.

Nice visualization.

I would gladly accept lower pay at a startup than working at a megacorp. In my view, the fact the megacorps offer better job security and still have to pay a premium for employees, just show that the jobs aren't that attractive/enjoyable etc.

If we don't maintain the replacement rate of 2.1 children per woman, the worlds population will eventually shrink exponentially. If that doesn't scare you, I don't know what will.

> If we don't maintain the replacement rate of 2.1 children per woman, the worlds population will eventually shrink exponentially. If that doesn't scare you, I don't know what will.

Why should that be scary?

Why is that scary? Human civilization might be much more sustainable with a billion people, rather than currently-predicted peak of 10 billion.

I'm much more worried about climate change leading to war and famine than I am about women voluntarily choosing to have fewer children. As far as I can see, population decline is only a problem because our current economic system assumes endless growth.

If women consistently have < 2 children the population won't stabilize at 1 billion.

Ok, get back to me when world population < 750 million. Then we can worry about depopulation.

In the meantime, our species has much more urgently pressing issues.

Our species really doesn't have more pressing issues.

Fucking the environment is very unlikely to destroy humanity, and that is really the only concern of any species.

As conscientious pieces of a greater whole, however, there are definitely more pressing issues.

Why don't you start a European subsidiary? That would be a really good way to scale without compromising on quality. The need is great for something like that.