mandevil
Joined 10 years ago
Joined 10 years ago
Now with LLM's that business model is in shambles and the finance side of it is less attractive with interest rates so high. I suspect that this is actually driving the software engineer hiring slow-down, because these companies were actually doing most of the employing of software engineers, much more than the big tech companies.
After the acquisition, advertising revenue dramatically dropped (to a low of about 1/3 in 2025 though it has apparently recovered up to only down about 50%!), because all of those functions were gutted. This is why Twitter tried to switch to "buying a blue-check" and other premium features (e.g. access to Grok), because they had fired all of the people necessary to run a real advertising business and they needed revenue.
And I know that you don't need that many employees to support Twitter's customer facing business because Bluesky does basically the same thing (message storage/search backend+web app+two mobile apps) and they worked for over a year on just 20 million in total raises (and no advertising or any other revenue)- they did a Series B in 2025 that raised over 100 million, but they were operational for over a year on just 20 million in raise. So yeah, it doesn't take that many people to just present the messages of users to other users, but what Twitter did was to cut back on what they did for their customers and accept the big drop in revenue that came with it, and that's not really proof of anything.
https://theonion.com/anthem-developers-assure-players-whiteb...
'“We know the thousands of customers who pre-ordered Anthem have some concerns, but we are confident this collection of words scrawled on a conference room board will be a revolutionary third-person shooter experience when released at the end of the week,” said director Jonathan Warner, who shared a progress update with players by sending out a screenshot of an email chain that ended with an agreement to call the game Anthem.'
https://theonion.com/people-criticizing-anthem-don-t-underst...
"Stop complaining and attacking studios just because a game isn’t everything you want. Developers put too much stock in making games enjoyable and playable as it is. Planning to make something as profitable as Anthem was supposed to be and is a huge undertaking, so at least give them credit for trying. BioWare had 18 months to build a game that would sell millions of copies based on the goodwill they built up, and they hit it out of the park. You may not understand Q4 projections, but they do. Anthem is a game that exists and is funding [EA] CEO bonuses, and by that measure, it’s been a huge success."
In this case it looks like the price-setting market was the spot market for excess eggs but that market was a small percentage of the overall egg market: the majority of eggs are sold in private, years long contracts that are negotiated to adjust to the prices in that small excess egg market. The vulnerability of this kind of market to manipulation is obvious.
There was also some spoofing which apparently also affected the actual prices because the egg market index was not as sophisticated as stock market indexes are.
6.0002 is now 6.100B (the B is deconflict) but most everything else went to four digits, with the last digit a 0 for undergrad and a 2 for graduate school taking the same class. e.g. 6.6830 is the undergraduate Computer Vision class and 6.6832 is the graduate Computer Vision class.
The first digit is the school that offers it, then after the decimal point they have their number of classes. (EECS is unusual in that it has four digits after the decimal point, most every other course has just three.) In general, classes that are required start with 001 and increment up, such that 001 is the intro course, 002 follows from that, etc. Then electives start around 015 or so.
Course 1 is Civil Engineering, Course 2 is Mechanical engineering, Course 3 is materials science, etc. 6 is Electrical and Computer engineering.
So 2.009 is a mechanical engineering course, in this case one for students towards the end of their time. It's called Product Engineering Processes, where you create a new product from beginning to production.
No matter what other thought experiment you create, you do not have a right to drive a car in the US, it can be revoked quite easily.
I don't think it is possible to beat the fab construction delays. This isn't about things being slow in the US: TSMC took four years to go from site selection to some production at their Fab 22 plant in Taiwan (it is currently only 60% built out, is my understanding). And TSMC is best in the world at getting frontier (logic) semiconductor fabs built, it took them slightly longer (five years) for Fab 21 in Arizona. Logic fabs are not the same as memory fabs, but they are close enough to be a good comparison for timeline.
Basically, unless you started fab construction (specifically to make memory chips) in 2023 you cannot change production for 2027 and 2028. The only thing that will affect prices between now and 2028 is demand, production can't go up because the fabs to make those chips don't exist. If you started now you might get memory chips in 2031, and can you bet 40 billion dollars that the demand will still be there? (A current generation logic fab costs about 20 billion. By 2031 a new frontier logic fab will cost about 40 billion). I don't have prices for a current memory fab, but as I understand it they are comparable.)
In 1970 retail clerk is a medium-skill medium prestige job. There were lots of stories of people who started as a retail clerk and end up as CEO, and even people who aren't that ambitious could still carve out a comfortable middle class lifestyle as a retail clerk. But that's because there was a reward for experience. Before the laser/UPC/DB system rolled out, you needed at a glance to be able to know the price of an orange, or the difference between the expensive and the cheap mushroom. Because there would be a paper tag on every cheap mushroom that said "10 cents", but what if someone swapped that paper tag onto the expensive mushrooms that were supposed to cost 30 cents? You needed to know the difference, and have the real prices memorized to be able to be fast enough to keep the customers happy.
This also meant that you couldn't have a large retail store (something at the scale of the modern Walmart or Target), because you couldn't get enough clerks who could remember all the necessary prices and so inevitably you would lose money to tag switching. Department stores solved this by forcing you to buy each good separately in each department- you would pay for your housewares in the housewares section and your clothes in the clothes section, and they had another whole army of clerks in the basement managing store credit to keep it low-friction enough. But that's very high-touch, demanding a lot of workers, and those people still have the rewards of experience so they are all comfortable careers.
But then the laser/upc/database system came out. And suddenly you would get a natural language description of the item (or even a picture in the modern systems) from scanning the UPC. And you could scale the store up as much as you wanted, just needed to buy a bigger hard disk for the database, so the stores tilted more towards capital and less towards labor. And that eviscerated the career path of most retail stores, because store owners no longer believed that keeping retail clerks around benefited them.
This is machines hallowing out a job and alienating workers from their labor for the benefit of capital- exactly what Marx had described a century earlier for factory workers in Das Kapital. But for reasons of class and gender we mostly ignore retail clerks so it doesn't seem to have attracted near as much attention.
The difference is that Costco pays their employees well enough to keep them around (notice that Costco prints the start year on each employee badge- average retail length of service is 1 year, Costco keeps people around for decades) and so they can learn to use this older software and master it. Most retail operations optimize their inventory management for new people, because they don't expect someone to stick around long enough to master it.
My wife worked at a small regional chain of pharmacies that had an ancient MS-DOS based EHR system. And she mastered that system to the point where people would call her when she was home with me and ask her how to do something, and she would walk them through "okay, hit tab three times then shift-F12 then enter the frabble and then alt-F3 to go to the next screen and enter the drabble." It was difficult to learn it, but if you mastered it you could do everything you needed to do from just muscle memory while you were on the phone arguing with the doctor's office that their prescription was not correct and needed to be changed.
Then the small chain got bought by a national player and their brand new GUI system was brought in. It was a lot easier to learn- discoverability was a lot higher with menus and drop-downs and all of that. But if you stuck around to master it, you could never be as fast as you could with the older system. And that emphasis on quickly integrating new employees- but lower payoff for experience in employees- was clear in every choice that national chain made. They wanted their employees to be completely interchangeable, which meant that they didn't care if you had six months of experience or four years of experience or three decades of experience.
Private Equity firms on the other hand do generally take on a lot of debt- they have their own money but they borrow even more (2) and use that amount of money to buy out the current owners of a company. Basically they borrow to turn a steady stream of revenue into the future (an existing software company that is profitable) into a big pile of cash today for the current owners. And then they need to pay off that borrowing over time, from the steady stream of revenue that the software company generates. And if they are wrong about the size of the steady stream of revenue, they basically declare bankruptcy and the people who loaned the money (banks but also pension firms etc.) now run the company.
1: The way that VC changes is that the rising interest rates mean that the returns to safe investments are higher, so in order to attract new capital VC firms have to promise even higher returns as well.
2: They borrow money to get higher returns- if you have 5 dollars in a stock and it goes up 20% you have 6 dollars. If you have 5 dollars and borrow 5 dollars and invest it in a stock that goes up 20% you have 7 dollars after you pay back the loan. The catch is, if the stock instead goes down by 20%, after you pay back the loan you only have 3 dollars. (And if the stock goes down 50% you are wiped out.) But PE firms are confident that their investments will always be winners, so they take out loans like that.