This is hacker news dude. Just edit your /etc/hosts file.
439 karma · joined July 27, 2011
with mad respect to dmor, this doesn't fit. even at 1.5m ARR, with 21 employees, office space, AWS bills and the 'etc', you aren't "massively profitable". i don't feel the need to go through the math since it's obvious. maybe there'd have been a few bucks to spare, but there are no "massive profits" there.
maybe you've done it and your team is still tight like family. if so, good on you. in my experience, when that happens people realize that work is business, not personal. in a family, you can't terminate someone.
there may be a bug - i searched for "change management" and it returned the same course twice with different titles.
https://www.accredible.com/courses/9692 https://www.accredible.com/courses/10113
thanks!
Another value is, when speaking in a group (we call it 'forum'), experiences benefit everyone who listens whereas advice is only applicable to the intended listener.
An illustrative example is "I did X and Y was the outcome" vs. "You should X".
Sometimes we find it limiting however, and ask that people not use the gestalt protocol. That's the exception to the rule.
our customers need to give us money to keep us in business and so that we continue to add value. if i took the least amount of money from them, i'd be doing them a disservice because they'd adopt my products, i'd fail them after a few years due to a lack of innovation, and then they'd be forced to go through a painful switch to a new platform.
so yes, we do want the max amount of revenue. we want it so that we're paid and satisfied, so we can hire more engineers and acquire more customers, and give them the value and innovation they need over they years.
Yale is going to end up on the wrong side of history in this one. And the irony is that the dean is a professor of history.
https://www.cs.uaf.edu/~chappell/misc/freesp.html
i'm a bit busy atm so i haven't had a chance to review the short post but it could provide some insight into his opinion.
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1997/06/09/1997_06_09_110_T...
this list helps you identify a "goldilocks" product company. it's narrowly targeted at a specific subset of product-based companies at a specific growth stage with a very opinionated view of how the company should be organized.
try answering any of these questions from the shoes of microsoft or a no-name early stage startup. you cannot win in either case. i can only see a company like airbnb or dropbox succeeding in answering these questions to his satisfaction.
kudos to the author for knowing what he wants and what makes him happy. i think candidates will most likely need to compromise on more than a couple of these points with most companies they interview with.
edit: i absolutely agree that candidates should interview the employer as much as they are interviewed. and i think this list is very good. what bothers me is that it's hard to answer positively to all these questions, so flexibility on the part of the candidate is probably an important thing :)
I'd definitely bet on this type of product being the future of senior monitoring.
for consumer uses, i hope the future is not glass. people should interact with people. today our phones can go in our pockets and we can talk face to face. with glass, we'll talk in this order: face -> glass -> glass -> face.
i do want important info to be surfaced when i need it, but i don't need it as a HUD. a voice in my ear, or perhaps even something as futuristic as just "knowing" that i need to make a left at the next light since the computer has informed the right part of my brain of that.
but please, i don't want to have to compete with glass for your attention.
unfortunately, i think his points are spot on. being a ceo is harder than being an engineer. period.
but if we didn't have engineers turning into ceo's, how many companies can you think of that would never have happened? HP? Tesla, SpaceX, PayPal? Google?
so even though he's right - being a ceo is fucking hard - don't let that stop you, engineer. you CAN be a ceo if you're willing to put in the work.
or whatever phrasing you like.
i can imagine many of the animations you made making their way into apps that use css for navigation, subtly grabbing user attention, etc.
great work :)
Some of these we probably should do.
Either way, I'd spend most of your energy building something that'll produce revenue or users. Who cares about your vacation policy/employees handbook if you've got no money?
I'll look into the 83b. Thanks for the list!