https://t.co/kZwv4TlmRB
1/12 @HathorNetwork offers a unique set of features for both builders and users. Some well known ones, others not so much. Let’s look at why you might want to consider Hathor as the layer 1 solution for your project. $HTR @HTRFDT #BuildOnHathor
https://t.co/kZwv4TlmRB


More from Tech
The 12 most important pieces of information and concepts I wish I knew about equity, as a software engineer.
A thread.
1. Equity is something Big Tech and high-growth companies award to software engineers at all levels. The more senior you are, the bigger the ratio can be:
2. Vesting, cliffs, refreshers, and sign-on clawbacks.
If you get awarded equity, you'll want to understand vesting and cliffs. A 1-year cliff is pretty common in most places that award equity.
Read more in this blog post I wrote: https://t.co/WxQ9pQh2mY
3. Stock options / ESOPs.
The most common form of equity compensation at early-stage startups that are high-growth.
And there are *so* many pitfalls you'll want to be aware of. You need to do your research on this: I can't do justice in a tweet.
https://t.co/cudLn3ngqi
4. RSUs (Restricted Stock Units)
A common form of equity compensation for publicly traded companies and Big Tech. One of the easier types of equity to understand: https://t.co/a5xU1H9IHP
5. Double-trigger RSUs. Typically RSUs for pre-IPO companies. I got these at Uber.
6. ESPP: a (typically) amazing employee perk at publicly traded companies. There's always risk, but this plan can typically offer good upsides.
7. Phantom shares. An interesting setup similar to RSUs... but you don't own stocks. Not frequent, but e.g. Adyen goes with this plan.
A thread.
1. Equity is something Big Tech and high-growth companies award to software engineers at all levels. The more senior you are, the bigger the ratio can be:

2. Vesting, cliffs, refreshers, and sign-on clawbacks.
If you get awarded equity, you'll want to understand vesting and cliffs. A 1-year cliff is pretty common in most places that award equity.
Read more in this blog post I wrote: https://t.co/WxQ9pQh2mY

3. Stock options / ESOPs.
The most common form of equity compensation at early-stage startups that are high-growth.
And there are *so* many pitfalls you'll want to be aware of. You need to do your research on this: I can't do justice in a tweet.
https://t.co/cudLn3ngqi

4. RSUs (Restricted Stock Units)
A common form of equity compensation for publicly traded companies and Big Tech. One of the easier types of equity to understand: https://t.co/a5xU1H9IHP
5. Double-trigger RSUs. Typically RSUs for pre-IPO companies. I got these at Uber.

6. ESPP: a (typically) amazing employee perk at publicly traded companies. There's always risk, but this plan can typically offer good upsides.
7. Phantom shares. An interesting setup similar to RSUs... but you don't own stocks. Not frequent, but e.g. Adyen goes with this plan.

You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?