thecrazyone

By your logic, banning it through regulation decreases options and hence diversification.

Governments are not angels which seems to be an assumption in your and sibling replies. They're a bully who doesn't want someone else to get power.

I'm not being extreme, humor me. If the govt didn't want a monopoly, isn't it a hypocrisy that they themselves are one?

The proper thing to would've been to get closer to anarcho-capitalism, ie let there be govt currency and FB's libra. Let people decide what they want to use.

Not sure about the website you run but there might be a corelation to Linux users and your site. It could be either due to your network and the way people came to know about the site or it could be the content among other things

Why aren't autonomous or remotely controlled rovers, or turrets ever installed?

Me too, I assumed its the electric blanket one which is right after that paragraph.

This seems awfully contrived.

Issue 1: It's very difficult to tell if your contribution got 50% improvement in performance because there were 10 other devs pushing in features and bug fixes. This is the attribution problem

Issue 2: This happens over time. It's very unlikely that your 50% improvement happens every year or month. Because, think for your self, this is compounding with large rates. It grows quickly. 1.5x improvement in 6 cycles (months or years) is 10x. This essentially is the time problem

Issue 3: even if you deliver the results you did, in a large company there's a large bureaucracy and no one person has the ability to increase your salary by that much. This is the control problem.

I agree, but is it _that_ easy? Not like no one has tried

A good competitor can make a drop in replacement possible by aligning their api with that of google's

and where is this mythical job/ company?

In Silicon Valley, pay is high, so is the cost of living, reverse in other places. If your situation differs, you've got it good (unless you're in a bad job in a high cost of living place)

what's the point of a cvv then? This seems rather odd

I'm a libertarian and I don't know what to say. There will be shitty companies as well I guess, but when they lose customers due to such practices, they will learn? If they don't learn they will go out of business.

You're stuck with a bad govt law, no efficient weeding out process exists.

good catch :)

Haha :D

That's interesting. I was of the understanding that everything at Google office tries to de-stress you/undistract you. I thought that would result in people being calmer/ more empathetic.

What is this? Fightclub? "Rule #1 of fightclub: You never talk about fight club" :D

Seems like a recipe for breeding unfairness. "Don't talk about the system", :sigh:

This seems like a false dichotomy.

"Founders need to be tech" is said often, but you're assuming "Founders need to be tech OR Founders need to have soft skills", which is an unnecessary assumption.

For example, "Founders should be determined" is also expressed often, doesn't mean they're expecting it to be an either-or with the quality of "being tech"