So people who claimed less than 24h ago it was at lest partially a way of creating cheap layoffs, were proven right pretty swiftly.
The man has bought Twitter for the purposes of distracting and manipulating the public.
To be fair, twitter ownership is not required to use twitter for this purpose.
I understood that remark as a reference to the way Musk's bid to buy Twitter with no intention to follow-through, in light of other shameless PR ploys like the absurd political persecution claim, looks like a shameless attempt to distract people from other problems affecting Musk, such as Tesla's tanking stock price.
Business insider gave him a heads up because they asked him for comment before publishing the story.
How would you tell?
The world is really complicated, and figuring out the truth from subtle signals is really hard. At best it's a game of probabilities, and I don't think we're often seeing the best in short-form comments on the internet.
A lot of commentary I see regarding the most successful entrepeneurs really triggers my suspicion for fallacious thinking, most often confirmation bias for a worldview where "the rich" are out to get everyone else and therefore are expected to lie all the time. I think that generally, the most correct explanations for the comments and behavior or entrepeneurs like Elon Musk are much more complex than that.
One thing though; I've become quite jaded towards this after seeing the firehose of lies and distortions regarding the Model 3 production ramp-up in 2017-18. It's hard to take any direct skeptical claim at face value after seeing that; the best I can do it noting that someone said this and concluding "not enough information yet to be certain".
Occasionally, there really is a conspiracy, in the sense that a lot of people have a vested interest in having things perceived a certain way. Don't dismiss the idea just because it has the word "conspiracy" in it.
This whole attitude of expect political attacks on me is disingenuous at best. Anybody with power should always expect their personal faults to be reported, whatever their political colour.
Additionally, the existence of the settlement would likely make any suit for defamation fun afoul of the anti-SLAPP laws.
Seemed to work out well for them.
I don't think it was a good decision, but Yahoo had/has way more issues with its business than whether or not it allows employees to WFH.
Even for IT workers, I guess that sometimes you need to test on the actual hardware, and the factory is where most things happen.
I am not saying that working from home is impossible, or that banning it is a good thing, but you can't really compare Yahoo and Tesla.
For me personally, the train has left the station and I would not expect to ever consider a non-WFH job again in my career.
But that's a completely different question than asking whether companies that require physical attendance can in some cases out-compete those that don't. I think we have a tendency to project our wishes onto this debate, and not make an honest attempt at figuring out the truth.
But a company shouldn't have to mandate in-office work permanentely and for all. It should be obvious from the job profile and the working conditions, when it is advantageous to be in the office rather than at home.
Maybe a software company should have 1/5 days in office (for meetings/dicussions/onboarding/...) while a manufacturing company might need 4/5 days for desk workers to be on site. But to say 40h of 40h should be at a desk doesn't seem like a sensible treshold.
Right now my time is 6PM and I'm at my office desk. Because I'm home. Granted, I'm writing on HN waiting for some tests, but if I had been at my office, I would have taken a 2h lunch and left at 2 or 3 this afternoon ...
So some of it is recognized as profits right away because the car drives into a tree autonomously in a parking lot, or grinds the wheels against a curb when asked to self park, or when it slams on the brakes randomly when going under an overpass while the lane keeping cruise control is enabled. Each new feature allows them to claim more of that $10k as profits, but they still haven't gotten their FSD delivered out of beta so they don't get all of it.
I really like my tesla, BTW. It doesn't quite live up to the promises but it is quite lovely for everything I use it for.
This is exactly why gross profit margin typically excludes R&D, because the measure is usually used to see “is this business profitable on a per-unit basis”. That is, would you make profit if you decided to stop the long term investment.
If someone in software dev is in an office at a different address from the factory I don't see how Tesla having a factory is relevant.
Whatever Yahoo's issues were they were going on for a LONG time. Even when they HAD WFH...