firehose

Prada is dominating the fashion media lately. The label’s fall 2015 collection—a candy-colored take on artifice and exaggerated femininity—has been all over fashion magazines, apparently to the point that it’s put some editors in a huff.

An important convention of fashion magazines is that you don’t want to feature the same dress on your cover as another magazine has. It’s like two celebrities showing up to a big event in the same outfit. Editors can ask for exclusive use of a garment, but apparently Prada didn’t pay this courtesy much attention when it was lending out clothes, because the same dress—albeit in different colors—turned up on the cover of two major magazines, not to mention a few other places.

Katy Perry covered Vogue Japan in a pale pink Prada frock embellished with jewels and bows, while model Rosie Huntington-Whitely appeared on the cover of Harper’s Bazaar UK in its baby-blue twin (see photos above). Meanwhile, Gigi Hadid, another major model who took the cover of W Magazine this month, appeared inside the magazine wearing the pink version. Page Six of the New York Post reports that she was supposed to appear on the cover in the dress, but once the other covers hit newsstands, the magazine changed course. W Magazine denies this, however.

In any case, it seems like a lot of vexation for a dress some have called ugly, though clearly many people feel otherwise. According to Page Six, fashion editors haven’t been happy to learn they didn’t have an exclusive on the dress. Any touchiness on part of the editors might be forgiven when you consider that these are their September issues, which kick off the fall fashion season and are generally considered the most important for many fashion magazines. You may remember there was even a documentary about the making of Vogue’s September 2007 issue.

While it isn’t yet ubiquitous enough to be known as the dress, the Prada design also can be seen this month on Cara Delevingne, who wears it in Vogue proper, while Willow Hand, a model who walked in Prada’s fall 2015 show, turns up in the look in Teen Vogue.

Other dresses from the same collection are all over, too. In July, Marie Claire put singer Rita Ora on its cover wearing one. A month later, the same garment adorned model Lily Donaldson on the cover of Elle UK. As Yahoo! Style reported, the September covers of Glamour Russia, Allure, and even Town & Country all went with Prada fall-winter 2015.

Clearly if there’s one label fashion editors love for fall, it’s Prada. And Prada has been happy to satisfy their needs.

But the relationship hasn’t been mutually exclusive.

Sounds super fun!

Via SmithsonianMag.

A flashy new exhibition at the National Air and Space Museum not only replicates an elevator to space or a flight to Mars, it may also show how future museum shows may look.

“We’ve never had as tech heavy an exhibition here as this one is,” says curator Roger Launius of what he calls the “strikingly different” new “Above and Beyond: The Ultimate Interactive Flight Exhibition” that just opened a five-month run in Washington, D.C. “Obviously we do interactives, and some of them are electronic and some of them are mechanical,” Launius says of the other galleries and displays in the popular Air and Space Museum on the National Mall. “But this is the one that has the most electronics we’ve ever had. In fact almost everything in the exhibition has a touch screen, or a video screen or something to do.”

Read more.

Each Tuesday is EducationTuesday here at Adafruit! Be sure to check out our posts about educators and all things STEM. Adafruit supports our educators and loves to spread the good word about educational STEM innovations!

by @racecore

Startup founders are just like us. They may know how to negotiate term sheets and build unicorns, but when it comes to their own personal finances, billion-dollar valuations be damned—they’re just as lost as we are.

An unscientific survey of 133 tech founders show most have nothing stashed away for retirement—one entrepreneur even reported a negative balance in his savings and checking accounts.

These numbers come from The Hustle, a blog from the tech conference Hustle Con, from a survey it circulated among its investors and past speakers asking about salaries, bank account balances, retirement savings, salaries, debt—basically the questions “you’ve always wanted to ask but were too afraid to,” says Sam Parr, who created the Hustle brand.

Though the data is anonymized, it’s possible to deduce who the respondents might be based on the conference’s past speakers and other information provided. One founder, for example, said his startup was worth $8 billion, dramatically narrowing down the list of companies that fit such a criterion. (We’ll leave the speculation to you; the raw data is available here.)

When it comes to retirement, the vast majority of respondents have nothing stashed away for their nest eggs. (In contrast, just one-third of Americans in general haven’t saved for retirement.) One founder explains his reason for not saving: “Don’t save for retirement. That’s like betting you’ll fail.”

And their bank account balances are surprisingly not outrageous. Just seven have a cool million dollars or more lying around, and the median amount of cash founders have in their accounts was $25,550. The mantra of one founder: “You can’t save your way to being wealthy.”

Another, who has “6k to [his] name,” laments that he “should have saved more money,” but says a “liquidity event coming up soon” (it could be an IPO, acquisition, stock buyback, or something else) will give him the opportunity to cash out on about $1 million in shares. Fittingly enough, another offered this piece of advice: “C.R.E.A.M.: cash out a significant amount on liquidity events whenever you get them.”

Forty founders say they have no other assets, liquid or illiquid. One 33-year-old founder—who has $15.4 million in cash and assets, $425,000 in retirement, and a 38% stake in his $40 million company—has this piece of advice: “Bet on yourself rather than on external investments (housing, stock market, etc.).” Uh huh.

Another 45 had $1 million in illiquid assets. It’s likely most of that value tied up in real estate, given the large representation of founders in the Bay Area, where home prices are skyrocketing. But “renting should not be frowned upon especially in high overvalued markets,” advises a founder. “It’s a lot harder to take risks when you have a $400,000 mortgage.”

At the same time, most report no credit card or other type of debt. Two say they owed $1 million or more (again, likely a mortgage).

And what do startup founders actually pay themselves? Following the lead of many CEOs whose salaries are entirely based on performance, 28 startup founders say they take zero salary, and two earn $1 annually. (This, of course, leaves out stock-based compensation; see next chart.) But most founders make less than six figures, probably less than the engineers working for them. Twenty report a salary of $200,000 or more.

Three founders say they own none of their company—these founders all have salaries between $100,000 and $200,000. In contrast, 40 retain 100% ownership, but most have between 20% and 39%.

And among founders who report zero in salary, most hold at least half their company—16 of them own 100% of it.

And here’s a bird’s eye view of the data.

When Twitter user Vicky Rogers compared Amy Schumer to the woman in the classic painting American Gothic by Grant Wood, the comedian responded with a photo of herself recreating the famous pose in the painting with actor J.K. Simmons.

.@vickytweetsnow pic.twitter.com/39g7FE9zkq

— Amy Schumer (@amyschumer) August 25, 2015

image via Amy Schumer

The Tebbit (Applications Software Specialities - ZX Spectrum) 

retrocgads:

UK 1984

Obamacare has survived computer glitches, the Supreme Court (twice), and Republican’s best efforts to destroy it. Now, it might face a threat from an unexpected place: a little noticed accounting standard for state and municipal pensions.

Earlier this summer the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) released new recommendations urging states and municipalities to include retiree health care when they calculate their liabilities. When private sector firms had to do the same thing in 1990, they ditched the health benefits for retired workers altogether. If state and local governments do the same, it could have serious consequences for Obamacare.

A key feature of the Affordable Care Act are the exchanges where people can buy health care directly from insurers and comparison shop. Insurance markets inherently face an adverse selection problem: The only people who want to buy lots of insurance are the ones most likely to need it. That’s why it was so important that the “young invincibles”—young, healthy people—buy insurance on the exchanges to balance out the high cost of older, sicker people. So far, the population appears sufficiently diverse. The government claims 11.7 million people enrolled through the exchanges and 4.1 million are under 35.

But the new accounting rules might change the group’s composition. Many state and municipal workers retire under the age of 65, when they qualify for Medicare. Since minimum retirement ages for these workers are below age 60, this can leave a significant coverage gap to fill. In addition, some pensions offer health care that subsidizes or supplements Medicare after retirees turn 65. All these benefits are extremely expensive—the total liabilities are estimated to total $1 trillion. State and local governments have almost no money put aside to pay for retiree health care. The average funding ratio—how much money is put aside relative to how much is owed—is only 6%. Compare that to state pensions, which are allegedly about 70% funded.

It’s unclear how states will react if they’re forced to recognize retiree health-care costs. Economists Josh Rauh and Robert Pozen think local governments will respond by putting money aside. But that would run counter to how private firms behaved when they had to record such costs in 1990. States could possibly follow suit because of a ruling by the Supreme Court earlier this year that said retiree health benefits can be modified or taken way. The case involved a private sector corporation, but Frances Rogers, a lawyer who specializes in municipal pensions at California law firm Liebert, Cassidy and Whitmore, believes the ruling applies to any agreement made under collective bargaining, which most public sector benefits are.

The creation of ACA health exchanges may be the final nail in the coffin for retiree health-care benefits. The exchanges make it easier for states to phase out health-care plans because pre-Medicare retirees now have other, affordable options. Paul Frostin of the Employee Research Benefits institute anticipates this will open the door to more plan terminations; he’s even found some evidence it’s already happening.

There are no precise numbers available on the number of public pension retirees who get health care and don’t qualify for Medicare yet (the potential population who will go on the exchange). There are 9.5 million public pension beneficiaries and their average age is about 70. About 70% of governments offer health benefits to retirees. That suggests it’s likely the state retiree population could be large enough—even 1 million could make a significant difference—to skew the exchange population older (and likely sicker) and increase premiums.

At this point, what will happen is speculation. Uniform health-care coverage is a laudable policy objective. But what makes good policy isn’t just intent, it’s robustness. From that view, the Affordable Care Act is less than great because it appears so fragile.

The Patels have a reputation that extends far beyond their home in the western Indian state of Gujarat.

From motel chains across the US to corner stores in the UK, from diamond business in Europe to trading in Africa, this pioneering Gujarati clan has often been at the forefront of the Indian diaspora’s expansion.

Despite this global fame and wealth, about a million Patels—a mainly Hindu community, also known as the Patidars—are rallying in Gujarat’s commercial capital of Ahmedabad demanding a “other backward class” status for their community.

For long, India has attempted at counteracting the impact of its ancient caste system through quota-based affirmative action for economically weaker communities. The “other backward class” (OBC) is a term coined by the Indian government to refer to groups that have historically been disadvantaged.

The status would make it easier for the Patels—who account for between 15% and 20% of Gujarat’s population of more than 63 million—to access education, government jobs and other facilities, thanks to India’s reservation system.

Hardik Patel, a 22-year-old graduate, is leading the movement and is on an indefinite hunger strike until the state government relents. So far, Gujarat chief minister Anandiben Patel—also a member of the community—has declined the demand.

“We want reservation to preserve our dignity and our heritage. We have the right to reservation, and so do our children,” Hardik Patel said at the rally on Aug. 25.

India’s reservation system allows for 15% reservation for scheduled castes, 7.5 % for scheduled tribes and 27% for OBC across government institutions. As many as 146 communities fall under the OBC category now.

“It’s laughable,” Aakar Patel, a political commentator and head of Amnesty International’s India office, told the LA Times. “They have had access to modernity and capital for a century and a half. Almost every person in central Gujarat, where Patels dominate, has family members in the US and UK.”

The Patels have a history of mounting large agitations. In the 1980s, ironically, they protested vociferously against reservations for other communities. But things have changed, as NDTV’s Shika Trivedi writes:

One reason the Patels want to be OBCs, believes social scientist Achyut Yagnik, who is based in Ahmedabad, is to get their children into medical and engineering colleges or institutions providing technical education which could make it easier for them to migrate abroad, as well as find jobs locally. The fact that they are poorly represented in these sectors is because the Patels have traditionally chosen to go into business at a young age, instead of pursuing higher studies. Now they are looking for a change. Because somewhere the Vibrant Gujarat story has disappointed even the most ardent BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) fans in the community, particularly amongst the youth.

The protest by the Patel community is a threat to the ruling BJP and India’s prime minister Narendra Modi who, as the chief minister of Gujarat, ruled the state for 13 years with the staunch backing of the influential group.

Made in the USA

Traditionally a farming community, the Patels have found great success as entrepreneurs and are involved in lucrative businesses than span everything from diamonds and textiles. A large number of them have also emigrated to the US, the UK and Kenya among others.

In the mid-1970s, the community began migrating from Africa and Asia to North America. Today, the US alone is home to as many as 145,000 Patels, who have come to dominate the country’s motel business.

In his 2012 book Life Behind The Lobby, Pawan Dhingra reckons that one out of two motels in the US is now owned by Indian Americans. Of this, 70% are owned by Gujaratis—and among them, three-fourths share the last name Patel. There are some 22,000 hotels and motels owned by Indians across the US, together valued at $128 billion.

A decade-and-a-half ago, the New York Times described the first generation of Indian hotel owners as businessmen who “scrimped, went without, darned old socks and never took a holiday.”

In Ahmedabad on Aug. 25, however, thousands upon thousands of Patels left work to come out in protest.

Mediamaker Tara Conley has been interviewing Kellen Smith,  a 33-year-old New Orleanian displaced by Hurricane Katrina, since she met him in Houston in September 2006. The resulting short film, "Kellen and Katrina," takes you through Smith's decade-long journey full of anger, anxiety, rebuilding—and healing. 

git-remote-dropbox is a transparent bidirectional bridge between Git and Dropbox. It lets you use a Dropbox folder or a shared folder as a Git remote!

This Git remote helper makes Dropbox act like a true Git remote. It maintains all guarantees that are provided by a traditional Git remote while using Dropbox as a backing store. This means that it works correctly even when there are multiple people operating on the repository at once, making it possible to use a Dropbox shared folder as a Git remote for collaboration.

Read 5 remaining paragraphs | Comments

All of a sudden my Mac is telling me whose birthday is tomorrow. People I don't even know that well. How did that happen.

I don't like my computer randomly and unpredictably getting all "social" on me. It's a tool.

Try to imagine a carpenter's hammer starting to nag about an upcoming bar mitzvah.

A baseball player's bat starting to warn you about overdue bills.

Who asked for this shit!

PS: Here's the Facebook thread that inspired this post. Interesting comments.

prokopetz:

Sometimes an artist just finds a niche and runs with it.

Take Eduard von Grützner, for example. German painter back in the early 1900s. He tried a whole bunch of stuff over the course of his career, but eventually he settled into doing paintings of fat, sassy monks drinking booze.

Just tubby old priests getting plastered.

He did dozens of these things.

Today it’s literally all he’s known for.

You do your thing, Eddie. You do your thing.

sashathewarrior:

Amazing. Buy it.

u-irl:

you, irl

Universal hit the $5.53 billion mark in early August 2015. That number was significant because it topped the all-time record for most money made in one year, set in 2014 by 20th Century Fox. What's most notable, however, is that Universal topped Fox's figure in August, with roughly a third of the year still to go. (These numbers are not adjusted for inflation.)

Universal's success this year has been built atop six releases. They are (numbers current as of August 20 and movies are listed in order of release date):

• Fifty Shades of Grey ($166 million domestic; $570 million worldwide)
• Furious 7 ($351 million domestic; $1.16 billion worldwide)
• Pitch Perfect 2 ($184 million domestic; $285 million worldwide)
• Jurassic World ($638 million domestic; $1.61 billion worldwide)
• Minions ($315 million domestic; $963 million worldwide)
• Straight Outta Compton ($75 million domestic; no worldwide release to speak of yet)

And that's to say nothing of solid midlevel performers, like the Amy Schumer comedy Trainwreck or the creepy horror film Unfriended.

That list of big six films, though, were so strong that Universal could withstand a few disappointments and misfires. Comedy Ted 2 came and went with $174 million worldwide — not bad, but a pale imitation of the first film's $549 million worldwide total. And January hacker drama Blackhat (though a very good movie) only squeaked its way to $18 million worldwide.

Universal still has a handful of high-profile films to come, including the spooky ghost story Crimson Peak, timed for a Halloween release, and the Oscar hopeful Steve Jobs, also arriving in October.

Universal's success is different from that of other studios

<img alt="So many Minions, so little time." src="https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jA0SAqX9YL-pAxiVGlU1LRyoHEA=/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3859170/manyminions.jpg">

Universal

Universal's big six contains neither superhero movies or young adult novel adaptations, both of which are current Hollywood sensations. To be sure, three are straight sequels, while Minions is a spinoff of the successful Despicable Me series. And neither Fifty Shades nor Compton — a novel adaptation and a biopic, respectively — are going to win awards for cutting-edge originality.

But keep in mind that one of those sequels is to a movie about an all-female a cappella group, while still another is part of perhaps the most racially diverse Hollywood franchise going, and you start to see how Universal's counter-programming is paying dividends. When everybody else in Hollywood is going after white guys in their 20s, Universal is going after everybody else (and, okay, dinosaur fans).

And it worked. That suggests, at the very least, that counter-programming is alive and well as a Hollywood business strategy. And taken with a few other signs, it just might suggest that superhero fatigue is settling in.

Disney was supposed to be 2015's big champion

<img alt="The Millennium Falcon in the new Star Wars." src="https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/gZwycoRnOsgbAW1WMQIoi9iTJ6M=/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2500152/MV5BMjM3NDYxMDkwMl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNjQzMTY1MzE_._V1__SX1305_SY663_.0.jpg">

Lucasfilm

Disney had both a new Avengers movie and a new Star Wars movie arriving in 2015, along with two new Pixar films (Inside Out and the upcoming Good Dinosaur), Marvel's Ant-Man, and the hugely successful Cinderella live-action adaptation.

And to be sure, Disney has had an excellent year. Age of Ultron pulled in north of $1 billion worldwide. Ant-Man is toward the lower end of Marvel releases but still a respectable performer, while Inside Out and Cinderella were both smashes with the family crowd. If Star Wars is as big as it should be, Disney still stands a chance at posting its own best-ever year.

But it'll be tough to catch Universal. Look at how huge it is compared with other studios at this point in time.

<img alt="Universal dominance of 2015 box office graphic" src="https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Lzl6mVXYfiZzdCmsXOQIXpVlUq8=/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3985630/Universal-movies-graphic.jpg">

Javier Zarracina/Vox

All movie studios have overriding business strategies that you can see by looking at their movies. Warner Brothers, for instance, just makes a whole mess of movies at a variety of budgets and lets the public sort them out. Disney, meanwhile, is in the franchise business, building much of its strategy around releases from Marvel, Pixar, Lucasfilm (Star Wars and Indiana Jones), and its own animation studio.

Universal's strategy seems to be finding underserved segments of the marketplace and then aggressively courting them at times in the year when audiences don't have a lot of other options. Certainly Straight Outta Compton appeals to more than just black audiences, but it doesn't hurt that it's been the only major release about black characters in months. Similarly, opening the female-friendly Pitch Perfect 2 at the early height of male-centric summer movie season proved to be a counter-programming masterstroke. Release schedules still matter, and so far, Universal has scheduled its films better than any other studio in 2015.

washingtonpost:

sadguysontradingfloors:

The Dow Jones:

Traffic to this Tumblr:

Sad Guys on Trading Floors, the ultimate recession Tumblr, is posting again.

may:

when you’re trying to confirm time sensitive plans with a friend and they’re not answering