Does this mean they won't IPO this year?

I don't want to make a mess in my yard but I don't care if your yard is a mess and I'll buy it

Why not invest in ways to make these processes more eco friendly?

Consider housing price and state tax as well

And don't forget the strict laws that prevent people from leaving and require them to complain instead.

As someone who moved out of California a few years ago I assure you that it is exceedingly easy to move to a different state, assuming you have the money to move at all.

Good to hear and I hope and I suspect you are doing well. People leaving is good for other states and good for affordability of California.

Sure. A state where housing is dirt cheap and no taxes is great, but if something happens to you, good luck finding a hospital or municipal services. Job prospects are also something to consider.

Just because houses cost more and there's a state tax, doesn't mean it's _bad_.

Everything's public appearance until S1 is filed

As a person working at social media I support this as well. I'm a hypocrite. I admit, but the pay is too good to find alternative.

Terms like "DAU" or "engagement" is common in our field and the primary objective is how to make users spend more time on our platform. We don't take safety or mental health seriously internally but only externally for PR reasons.

CEOs won't change that because the more time user spends on the platform, the more ad revenue it brings.

Only way is to regulate it.

> . I'm a hypocrite. I admit

Great, admission is the first step.

> but the pay is too good to find alternative.

Yet then you immediately undo it!

Try "I'm too greedy". You're the actor with the free will here. The subject of the sentencd shouldn't be "the pay". That is just an amount, a sum, that exists - neither too high nor too low. That is all in the eye of the beholder.

Individual action means absolutely nothing. This person shouldn’t be disparaged for making money for themselves and their family. Every single big corp that pays well is creating the torment nexus. You have to pick your poison. I personally draw the line at missiles and mass surveillance.

> Individual action means absolutely nothing.

You may want to view action and sphere of influence. Does an individual have international or national influence? Probably not. How about within their community, home, or person? Probably, yes.

I want a good society and I think that’s will be made up of good individuals making individual action. So to me, this all starts at home with the individual’s sphere of influence.

I largely agree with you. I should have clarified that I don’t personally believe individual action matters in this specific scenario.

I left the company as of today btw :)

Honestly, the EU is more likely to change the behavior of e.g. Facebook than a single employee would.

(IMO if the US federal government spent more time caring for it's citizens it would consider doing such things more seriously itself).

Give them a break. People want to live a good life. We as a society shouldnt incentivize bad behavior with capital

Engaging in bad and immoral behaviour for capital is still bad and immoral behaviour, particularly when one has other choices.

The point of capitalism is that it incentivizes behavior at a large scale through the allocation of capital. That behavior could be bad or good.

The way to make sure that behavior isnt bad is to regulate the economy to ban it. Not to scold people who follow those incentives but then do nothing about the actual incentive structure

I'm all for banning social media as well as tracking in general, and will also happily work to those effects.

It's also prudent to shame those who allocate and greedily take that capital.

This is so sad to read. Knowing that the people actively making every aspect of life more monetized and addictive are acutely aware of the harm they create, yet are motivated by such base selfishness that they can ignore all that for the paycheck.

Could your observation be any other way though?

It recognise addiction (limited agency vs influence) and monetisation (economic rewards the primary means to influence behaviour) as problematic. It kind made “doing bad for pay” a premise of the system.

Large pay-checks incentivising bad behaviour is exactly another observable outcome of the same systemic issue.

I have yet to find examples of high pay where the pay is not actually to compensate for an immoral job, one way or another.

If you had to choose between two identical jobs and salary at a company but at big tobacco vs a hospital, which would you choose? I think most people would pick the hospital. Hence the only reason people work at big tobacco is either because of a genuine interest in their product (rare IMHO) OR because the pay is higher.

This applies to big tech too.

I am very curious if people here agree with my reasoning.

I worked at Russia's largest social media company as the founding Android developer. I quit as soon as I realized it was only going to get worse from now on after an acquisition and a very noticeable shift in user treatment. But that job was never about the money for me. The salary was just a nice yet optional bonus.

> the pay is too good to find alternative.

You don't sound psychopathic so I'm genuinely curious what you do with your money to keep your conscious clean.

Bevause I think your salary is practically blood money at this point.

Blood of the additional instagram girls with anorexia.

The additional children with severe myopia.

The additional people murdered by persons radicalized by media that had to polarize news to survive the loss in readership or by the false advertising of quality control on hate speech.

The list goes on and on.

Idk man, amongst thousands of layoffs (assuming op is in the USA) I'd take "blood money" over uh... starvation

If it was the choice given, I can understand.

But I don't think people having the skills needed by FAANGS are at risk of starvation, even if not working for a large conglomerate. Do you?

That's why I am genuinely asking OP their reasons.

As a avid user of Tailwind and one who purchased Tailwind CSS Plus, it's very sad to hear.

OSS without founders having it's own managed software company is always a difficult position. (e.g. database vendors open source but also have their own company providing managed service and support allowing sustainable development). Hope of getting strong support from companies is unsustainable.

Curious what should be the business model for a library something like tailwind?

They could add a premium features but entry users not allowed to use certain features is a bad experience

Love it! Where do you get the data?

Ops cost to number of server to manage is logarithmic but cloud cost is linear, so there's an intersection it starts to make less sense for cloud. Also equipment depreciation is tax deductible whereas cloud bill isn't. A year of EC2 instance bill is comparable to buying the equivalent server

Also there are vendors renting out datacenters so you do less of hardware management.

Having worked at two companies spending 250M+ on cloud bills alone, they try hard to decouple from cloud but many things are vendor locked

Hybrid has been the answer to both. It shouldn't be a binary decision. stateless compute workload can fairly easily be offloaded to private cloud.

> Also equipment depreciation is tax deductible whereas cloud bill isn't.

Genuine question out curiosity (I have a master in finance, but never practiced it) -- aren't both the cloud bill and depreciation all tax deductible, eventually? the bill 100% in that year and the depreciation spread over multiple years?

> Hybrid has been the answer to both. It shouldn't be a binary decision. stateless compute workload can fairly easily be offloaded to private cloud.

Can you elaborate on that? I'm studying for saa-c03, and I was shocked by how expensive egress out of aws can be.

> struggles with Japanese

It doesn't mention mistranslating, so it's difficult to know the root of the problem is AI "struggling".

> It doesn't follow our translation guidelines. > It doesn't respect current localization for Japanese users, so they were lost.

I believe this is the root of the problem. There are define processes and guidelines, and LLM isn't following it. Whether these guidelines were prompted or not is unclear but regardless it should've been verified by the community leaders before it's GA'ed

That's not the root of the problem. The root of the problem is that LLMs just can't constitute a punctually Japanese understanding of text like that guideline and speak in Japanese with native fluency no matter what. I just know this from knowing both sides of English-Japanese language pair. And I find that somewhat fascinating in a sense.

I'm surprised by that. I use ChatGPT for communication with Japanese clients and I was mistaken for a native speaker more than once. I make almost no corrections other than changing the punctuation from western to fullwidth, although to be fair it's mostly simple and technical language.

Wow. That's crazy. I would be very interested in a blog post on this subject if you ever wrote one. I wonder how this affects the perception of LLMs in Japan

I took this to mean it's not translating things consistently. Like, a button in Firefox might say "Show all downloads" or "Open previous windows and tabs". These were localized a certain way, but an AI has no ability to check that. It will just translate them anew, which might be the same or it might translate it to something synonymous, but which then confuses users searching for the "Display all downloads" button or whatever.

Curious to know how's the development experience been post-migration? Was there additional friction due to lack of tooling in on-prem that would otherwise available in the cloud env for example?