vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"I write software myself and was involved in a couple of start ups.  One failed, another was wildly successful, but I did not receive much in compensation. The former I received stock, but since it failed, it was worthless anyway.  There should be compensation for your time in addition to equity in a company.   Any agreement needs be in writing.  In the later situation I was told to expect about a 17%/year bonus, but nothing could be guaranteed.  Translation:  ""It will never happen.""  It didn't, but I meet my lovely wife there so I have that for a bonus. Agreements need to address the bad things can happen.  What happens if one of you is no longer interested in continuing?  What happens if one of you die, or addicted to something?  What happens if one of you gets thrown in jail or disabled?  Right now you are full of optimism and hope, but bad things happen.  Cover those things while you still like each other. It might be enough to have a good salary, and some stock options.  You man not be interested in running the day to day business. Most of all good luck, I wish you all the best!"
So could someone working at your bank directly.  Of at your HR department at work.  Most of the wait staff at the restaurant I ate at technically had access to my credit card and could steal money.  While you are at work, someone could break into your house and steal your stuff too. The point is, Mint and everything else is a matter of the evaluating the risk.  Since you already understand the vulnerability (they have your accounts) and you know the risk (they could steal your money) what are the chances it happens? 1.)  Mint will make lots more money if it doesn't happen, so it benefits Intuit to pay their employees well and put in safeguards to prevent theft.  Mint.com is on your side even if a specific employee isn't. 2.)  You have statements and such, so you can independently evaluate mint.  I do not just trust mint with my stuff, I check info in Quicken and at the bank sites themselves.  I don't do them all equally, but I will catch problems. 3.)  Laws mean that if theft happens, you will have the opportunity to be made whole. If you are worried about theft, don't trust other people or generally get a bad feeling, don't do it.  If you check your accounts online with the same computer you log into Facebook with, them I would suggest it doesn't bother you.  You might have legal or business reasons to be more adverse to risk then me. However, just because somebody could steal your money, I personally don't consider it an acceptable risk compared to the reward. I will also be one of the first people to be robbed, I am not unrealistic.
Founder makes available 100% equity, but uses a reasonable amount of the proceeds to pay him/herself a salary (or wage) and from that salary invests in the same initial offering to acquire shares for him/herself. I see several problems. What is a reasonable salary? Also, this leaves the door open to the following scam: Founders say that they are going to follow this plan. However, instead of buying shares, they simply quit after being paid the salary. They use knowledge gained from this business to start a competitor. Investors are left holding an empty company. Tax consequences. The founder would pay income tax on the salary. By contrast, if the founder instead sells shares, that would be capital gains tax, which is lower in many countries (e.g. the United States). Why would I want to invest in a business where the founders don't believe in it enough to take a significant equity stake? Consider the Amazon.com example. Jeff Bezos makes a minimal salary, around $80,000 a year, less than many of his employees. But he has a substantial ownership position. If the company doesn't make money, he won't. Would investors really value the stocks with a P/E of 232.10 in 2016 if they didn't trust him to make the right long term decisions? It's also worth noting that most initial public offerings (IPOs) are not made when the founder is the only employee. A single employee company instead looks for private investors, often called angel investors. Companies generally don't go public until they are established in some way, often making money. Negotiating with angel investors is different from negotiating with the public. They can personally review the books and once invested tend to have input on how the money is spent. In other words, this is mostly solving the wrong problem if you talk about IPOs. This might make more sense with a crowdfunded venture, as that replaces a few angel investors with many individuals. But most crowdfunded ventures tend to approach things from the opposite direction. Instead of looking for investors, they look for customers. If they offer a useful product, they will get customers. If not, they never get the money.
Not at all. From personal experience, talking about work culture is a safe bet. A smart question to ask is _what backgrounds do the people working in (position) have_. Shows you're interested and willing to to fit into the role. Plus it gives you an idea of what you need to work towards to get the position.  You can also talk about the job description and how it matches your background / skills / interests (i.e: I'm interested in financial modelling because I took XXX class / read up about it through YYY book). Don't expect them to answer very industry-specific questions because in most cases they won't be able to. You can also ask them about rotational / full-time programs.
A startup is a great place to work if it looks like it's going to have a future and YOU ARE ONE OF THE FOUNDERS.  Otherwise? A startup is a good way to spend a good chunk of a decade working very long weeks, only to get shoved into a back room or laid off once they reach a certain size. Maybe if you're lucky you'll manage to stick around and have a bigger paycheck than most of your newly-hired peers. Maybe you'll even make most of what your new boss(es) that have been there a fifth as long as you and never pulled those 110 hour workweeks make. Of course, it's quite possible that simply working a second job during the time you were pulling mad hours and not getting OT for it would've made you just as much.  On the other hand, if you're talking about your own startup? Sure, go for it. If it all works out, those extra hours will be well compensated in the future.
Could well be a good work enviroment. The story widely reported back in Nov '11 before the IPO was that workers who had been given shares and options in lieu of salaries in the start-up days were then being pressured prior to the IPO to give up their shares or face possible job loss. Maybe just a few senior people were affected, but it didnt sound good.
Recruiters in HR generally know nothing about in-depth about the role. Trust me. I wouldn't really worry about it. Feel free to talk with them about your interest in financial markets, etc. However, if you're taking to an analyst within the firm then I'd be careful. Don't come across as a know-it-all. The best method to bypass this is to ask genuine questions you have about the field.   If you want to go buyside, then do you want to go into equities or fixed income? For instance, if you strike up a conversation with someone in fixed income you can ask them why they ended up in fixed income over equities. How do they think the fixed income landscape will play out given today's low yield environment? How are they dealing with the current macropolitical uncertainty?
I am concerned that you are asking for help with questions regarding NPV. Sure you can regurgitate answers you found online for some of these questions, but if you legitimately don't understand such a basic financial concept like NPV while interviewing for a job in the financial sector, you're probably out of your league.
It depends on a lot of different factors. The basic factors are: how much money is it, are you doing a lot of business normally, and how well does the bank know you. If you refuse to answer the bank's questions to their satisfaction, it is a 100% chance that they will close your account. They can also file higher level reports that flag your activity as ""highly suspicious"" as opposed to just the normal ""suspicious"". As long as it is a bank employee, you should have no serious concerns unless the guy seems strange and asks really pointed questions. If you have any question whether the ""employee"" is legitimate, just verify that he/she is a bank employee. Obviously if the feds visit you, you should say nothing. The chance of this happening is 1 in a million."
Yeah it's not that uncommon to work at least in large part for stock options for start ups. They literally have people who invest large sums of money in them just for stocks (very frequently they use venture capitalists or angel investors for capital), same line of reasoning can apply to writing some code. The OP dude reacted (and acted) really poorly and the programmer acted pretty reasonably though.
This is great. I have a question though. What happens if I have all of the plans for finance mapped out and ready to meet a potential investor, but the idea that I bring with me is not patentable? I certainly would like to get financing and let the investor know what I want to accomplish, but I don't want to give away my idea and have the investor take my idea and run his own company with it. How is this dealt with?
Everything in life is a combination of luck and skill.  Startups are no different.  The risks are higher and most sensible people know and understand that.  You know why we worship the successes?  Because against all odds, those startups stood up to your salaried buddies who work for faceless large corporations and have tons of people and kicked their asses.  At some point, they deserve it.  You see startups as gambling, others see it as betting on yourself.  Especially founding or joining an early stage startup.  It's also taking on huge responsibility.  In a mega-corp your failures and shortcomings will be covered and almost certainly won't tank the company.  Your creativity probably won't flourish and their is an incentive to do just well enough.  Why should you work your ass off for a company that you're not invested in other than a paycheck?  Startups aren't for everyone.  Hell, startups probably aren't for most people.  But there are some people, those select few, who simply can't imagine not working for themselves, creating things, tinkering, trying to change the world.  It's not even gambling to them, it's a way of life.
I think people are glossing over the type of experience you get working at a startup.  Having worked at a huge multi-national corp, and now working in a basement, I would say this:   Multinational corp - everything is a process.  They have a documented process for damn near everything, including taking a shit.  If you don't know how to do something, you have internal support or somebody around you that knows how to do it.  You don't learn anything in this type of environment.  You get hired for one specific job on the assembly line, and you consistently perform a set of pretty specific job functions every day.  The upside is full benefits, job security, and stability.  Startup - Absolute chaos.  Your responsible for sales, design, implementation, production support, and late-night troubleshooting.  You could be out of a job tomorrow if a single customer pulls out.  But the upside is the wealth of experience you get on all aspects of business and you have to see a design from spec to production.  As a young professional, I much prefer the latter.  If I lose my job - so what?  I'll find another one.  The experience i've gotten from the startup in just under a year far exceeds the experience I got in three years at the corporation.
I can bring the business side of things to the table. I have a mastrey in accounting and finance. Also, I know of some key players in the market that I am trying to target, so I can bring contacts to the table.   To answer your question about coding, this is a early stage startup and I would need someone who can code for automated drones and other softwares.
That actually sheds some useful light on the whole matter. As long as $client gets the paperwork in order, all will likely be well.   Had a discussion with $client today about their recurring practices, just to establish a baseline for their understanding of the same. Not because I know there is or is not a concern, but because their business is risk management and that is a risk worth managing. Or at least worth understanding the scope of the risk and potential exposure.
Financial analysis is as much art as science, you need context to give advice on what to show.    If they hired you they believe in you and want you to succeed.  My advice is to take a lot of notes and ask a few questions but not too many, then think about situation and go back to ask a few more thoughtful questions.  Always ask if there's something been done before that may be helpful, as well as who might have done something similar recently.   Sorry if sounds condescending, not remotely intended to be, I've trained a lot of new peeps over the years.    Helpful if you can find someone who has been there a bit longer than You, but that you don't work for.  They tend to like to help bc they just went through what you're going through and know how best to informally help.  Also network with peers from school that have started similar jobs... good to have a few people to call to discuss/learn with.  Good luck.
"I did this a couple of years ago, and boy do I regret it. After many months of delayed, and new faces coming onto the team for a short period before leaving, there wasn't much hope to ever complete the project. I ended up accumulating debt (About 4.5 grand) that I am still paying off because I chased my dream. Unfortunately, anything can happen when you choose to pursue a goal. It can get delayed, stopped, or outright fail. At the bare minimum, you would best be prepared to deal with delays, competing products, and outright failures. If you say ""I have enough money to last me 12 months and I expect to take 7 months"", then you best be prepared to answer: These are just a handful of ideas, and there are plenty more that would need to be addressed. Probably the best thing that I have seen a few friends do is to ask for reduced hours. Working part time allows you more time while reducing, but not eliminating, the pay. Even better is that depending on your company, you could ask to go back to full time if your startup didn't work out. Another option is to do what I'm doing currently: Find a job with lots of downtime. My job is critical and the market here is starved of good techs. Even then, I have a solid 2-4 hours of work each day. The other 4-6 hours I can spend on my personal projects that may eventually lead into a startup. If you plan to do this though, make sure to read your agreements carefully. There may be restrictions on copyright and the likes by working on a personal project on company property. If you do plan to go this route, you might want to consult a lawyer (like I did) to make sure you won't get screwed later."
Most startup community would say don't even bother to secure it unless yours is never done before. If you really done a lot of research and no one has done it before. Maybe you're one of the lucky few in the world with some new idea. Some investors get turned off when you make them sign NDA, especially if you're a first time entrepreneur. But chances are you're probably not.   Instead focus on validating the idea and get market traction.
No, as in just coming up start up. I'm sure that's the case but then again there must be some basic software that can make my life easier right? Like accounting softwares, etc that do not depend on the industry the startup is working in. Any?
The tl;dr of what was a fifteen minute in-class excoriation of a student who asked what I thought was a reasonable question was ""If you're not signing your own paycheques, you are a huge failure and are contributing nothing of note to society or it's progress."" This particular rant pretty much sealed my withdrawal from the business aspect of my school. If my very goals render me a huge failure in my profs' eyes, I'm not interested in what they have to say or in contributing to their employment at the university. But off that somewhat-personal tangent, the culture of ""glory of the startup"" that Amy Hoy somewhat ineloquently complains about in her article certainly exists. In the form she's complaining about. Your rebuttal makes sense too - it's not that VC are or aren't a risk, it's not that people don't have the right and the opportunity to take that risk if they see it as a valid opportunity to make money, it's not like it's fair to expect a VC to fund you without seeing a profit in the long run. But you're rebutting her thesis with something that doesn't actually address it. The culture that she's complaining about exists, in my experience. The culture glosses over so much of what you rebutted her article with, that risks exist and that failures exist and that there are a lot of harsh realities associated with the startup world. The culture does, indeed, glorify all the best parts of startup-dom and creates a toughness challenge that renders ""no, this may not be a good idea"" unfalsifiable because failure are personal while successes are cultural. Successful startups and people who have done very well by them are held up as everything startups are supposed to be and look at how their hard work paid off - and if yours doesn't work, it is entirely that you didn't work hard enough. Someone who has bought in wholesale holds that there are no ""bad"" startups - any startup can be successful, you just need to bust balls working harder if you fail. Startups are akin to gambling.
Wait. You started a company and contracted it with the company you currently work for? I don’t know why but for some reason this sends up a legal red flag to me. I have no idea, but maybe double check that there isn’t any violations in this arrangement... or just never tell them.
I think this piece would be great with some direction and editing.  The idea of JOINING a start up can be considered a long con. You are not working for yourself nor a cause you created or developed. The pay is very low, the hours are long and the promise of equity might either never be there (Remember Zynga taking back equity?), be poorly constructed (Pay-in options are just like equity right? Right guys?) or worse, might be worthless through no fault of your own.  Where will you be if either happens? The idea that you stuck around with a company for 3-6 years in order to maximize your equity value is not only limiting, it can be career damaging. 20 year olds should be trying different careers and gaining a sea of experience. Go out and build up that all important network isn't going to happen in one place.
I work in consulting and Risk Management. Most of the top IBs in US are our clients.  Risk Management is a very broad field. You need a solid understanding of Statistics, Stochastic Calculus, Pricing, Regulations and some accounting as well.  This area of finance is very quantitative and its becoming more quantitative almost every day. With that being said there are some niche fields in here like model governance, enterprise risk, strategic risk, regulations, process and controls which are not quantitative.  Work load is crazy. I think almost everyone in our group works 10-12 hour days, with some people working 16 hour days on average. This isn't twiddle your thumbs at your desk either, I mean your head buried in your monitor or trying to understand a paper work. At the banks the work load is usually but not always a less.
"I'm not the OP, but I'm happy to give a brief overview.  Basically, pre-JOBS act there were a lot of limits on who could make an equity investment in a non-public company (i.e. a startup or even a hedge fund). There were some loopholes, but basically you had to be an 'accredited investor'. An accredited investor was someone who either has made $200,000+ ($300,000+ for married people) for the past two years and expects to make that much again in the current year. Alternately, they could have a net worth of $1 million, excluding the value of their primary residence. There was also a limit of 500 investors for a non-public company before the company had to become public (they didn't really have to IPO, but they did have to file their financials with the SEC, so the effect was basically the same). Finally, non-public companies were prohibited from seeking investment through advertising basically. They couldn't take out an ad in a paper or event send a mass email and say, ""Hey, we're looking to raise a $1 million funding round, contact us if you're interested!""  Okay, now after the JOBS Act.  The JOBS Act changed a) the number and type of investors who could make equity investments in a non-public company b) the regulation of advertising for investments.  Post-JOBS private companies could have 2,000 shareholders and 500 of those could be unaccredited (e.g. regular people like you and I). The change in the number of shareholders isn't really that important because it's just shareholders of record, but that's another post for another day. There are still some requirements for unaccredited shareholder, which I don't remember off the top of my head. I think you have to have income of at least $40k. They also changed the solicitation ban, so it's possible that you might see an ad in the WSJ someday for a startup company, venture capital fund, hedge fund, etc.  There are some other things it changed, but IMO those are the two most important."
You will probably never see it.  The startup at some point may start issuing dividends to the shareholders (which would be the owners, including you if you are in fact getting equity), but that day may never come.  If they hire others with this method, you'll likely lose even that 5% as more shares are created.  Think of inflation that happens when government just prints more money.  All notes effectively lose value. I wouldn't invest either, most startups fail. Don't work for free on the vague promise of some future compensation; you want a salary and benefits.  Equity doesn't put food on your table.