asdffdsa

Don't trust any numbers here blindly sir.

Without verification you don't know if any of them are marking $2k+

The only indication we need to know about the ethics of OpenAI is the fact that it's a private for-profit company that claims the name "OpenAI", where "open" has very clear meaning in its sphere of relevance (technology, computing, and software).

It's a private company founded by Elon Musk; what did people expect?

I am willing to pay a decent markup (2x the cost)

This is nothing new under the sun; Apple's been doing this for the better part of the last decade.

I think this is mistaken; there was a lot of pressure in the 10s for AP classes

ChatGPT is what SWEs came up with to understand literature lol

Exactly, more code isn't better

Also vitamin D and testosterone production

I used Flask a long time ago, and never had any complaints. It was, and still is apparently, a great framework

I always figured that the reason why I make as much money as possible is so that I can pay for medical expenses when things go wrong.

The one idea I don't like surrounding 10x engineers is the rhetoric by startups or companies around hiring is "we're only looking for rockstars and 10x engineers", which naturally denigrates the majority of (1x) engineers. This launches a broader discussion of whether success in business manifests by scaling up or scaling out, and I tend to be a proponent of Locke than Hobbes.

So the controversial nature comes from the implication that most of the workforce (1x engineers like myself) are worthless and not worth hiring, and also the hubris of thinking a 1x company can hire and retain a/only 10x engineers (these same startups/companies usually offer a 1x or less compensation package). If you think I'm wrong, then fire 90% of your engineers and see where that gets you; that would be an interesting result if productivity increased!

I think this is separate from mere jealousy or denial; 10x engineers definitely do exist and I look up to them for inspiration and example.

This is a stock grant that vests over 10 years, so averaged out it's 21 million a years. Saying that his salary is 212 million is straight misinformation

The logical construction of this piece is poorly formulated.

The title is “why does x happen”.

The content is:

I believe foo. Evidence behind why author believes foo.

Here is an arbitrary list of 6 behavioral responses to foo: [a b c d e x]. X happens which is a bad thing.

There is no critical analysis or evidence substantiating the 6 responses, nor how/why response x happens. In other words, there’s no intellectual rigor behind the title’s claim, nor do I have any inclination to believe the author’s claim as true after reading it.