silviot

I can. It is indeed satire.

Not offensive, but much more often wrong than person.

> ...and to be clear, Hacker News is not a representative sample of their customers.

I am a customer and I learned about Kagi here. I assume many people are on the same boat, so I wouldn't be so sure about that.

> Upper management are just average people with better networking and less empathy

Very concise and to the point. I might print and hang this!

Excellent game. Excellent attitude towards feedback. Keep up with the good stuff!

> But anyway, even if it were all true, the only reason we are talking about diffusers, and the only reason we are paying attention to this author's work Fairly Trained, is because of someone training on data that was not expressly licensed.

Thanks for putting this into words. I'm of the same opinion and this is the best articulation I have so far.

This is very different from my experience. Whenever someone I was in a conversation with brought up GEB, it was always a great pleasure of mine. I'd get the chance to discuss the main ideas of the book, and the way I assimilated them. I tend to not even engage in conversations with people who do it mostly to show off the extent of their knowledge. I believe this second point is the important one. GEB is completely orthogonal to the problem you describe.

Because otherwise you spend too much time arguing about not-so-important matters (in a word: bikeshed - you end up bikeshedding less).

I'm trying to read and reread this over and over again to make sense of this but to me it sounds like in the comments people speak as if Greg brockman resigned while in the article he is not amongst the three names who resigned. What am I missing here?

> It's pretty simple actually

That's true. You just need to exploit your fellow humans! Make them work for you but never pay them for the full value they bring. Always pay them the least they will still accept. So you get a piece of their pie. Your position of power will allow you to do so, and people will see your position of power as "natural" and will see no problem in the exploitation.

I think you misspelled his name. It also doesn't sound like you listened to what he had to say about the license. I suggest you do.

> Two, it seems he is trash talking open source software and using that to justify his own proprietary monopoly software.

I'm sorry, but I really don't see this in any possible way. Can you help me understand? What did he say that you consider "trash talking open source software"?

The reason I like him is that he's been fighting Apple anti-repair policies for years.

It is now public, but slow. Probably hugged to death.