> If I disagree with you, that’s not an issue. Just like the songs Lennon and McCartney wrote together were better than the ones they wrote after, contrasting opinions on a team bring new insights and better decisions.
This is great but please tell people this upfront. Not everyone has an over abundance of confidence - especially candidates that come from traditionally marginalized communities.
> In order to go far enough, to make that feeling strong enough, it went too far. Others are powerfully lovely to us, but so, in a strangely different, strangely similar way, are flowers and sunsets.
I have such little patience for this sort of writing. If you are going to claim there are 13 ways to look at something, then put numbers on them and make it a list so it's easier to consume.
this makes total sense. Tech really does funnel money into a smaller set of society and the way to keep doing that is to raise prices on everyone, even if that means the majority of the people that are making way less a year than their employees.
I'm surprised speeding tickets haven't been privatized yet. Get a device installed in your car that monitors the speeds of cars around you. If someone violates the speed limit your car reports them to the authorities and then you get a "cut" of the ticket. Great way to make some extra cash while ignoring the fact that everyone is getting pitted against each other as a way to stay distracted from all the crap the ruling class does...
"Many members of the general public assume that the cameras are property of the locality in which they are used and that the funds received go back into the community. The truth is that less than 20 percent goes to the municipality while the remaining goes to the service provider." [1]
> Those still involved in Windows desktop, will assert that they are running like headless chickens
I was wondering what was going on there because Windows is so incredibly bad in so many ways. I need my computer for productivity - not consumption - and Windows really seems good at getting in the way a lot of time. If I could jump back to using a Mac for work I would do it in a heartbeat.
There are exceptions right? Stripe isn't public yet I'm pretty sure there are ways to sell the stock that's accrued. I remember something about them opening up a way to sell your shares and since I get pinged on LinkedIn every so often about it I'm assuming it's a thing.
Only at a deep “we buy ugly houses” type of discount and only if the company allows it and if there is a market for it. Like I said earlier, I know the value of my “equity” in a publicly held company:
=GOOGLEFINANCE("AMZN", "price")* (number of shares).
I can log into Fidelity and sell my shares during hours when the market is open and not at a discount.
> Only at a deep “we buy ugly houses” type of discount and only if the company allows it and if there is a market for it.
This is incorrect. There is often significant unmet demand for private successful companies. Employees can often sell at close to what investors end up paying for it.
I tried twice to start software companies with people I knew. Both times the other party didn't invest nearly as much time as I was putting in. And in both cases I figured this out fairly early and started to match their drive and investment into what we were building. As you'd expect, the companies folded within a few months.
What's interesting to me is that one of the guys I'm still friends with and the story he tells for why it folded is very different from my view. To him, it was me backing away and causing it fail and from my experience, it was I switched from working on it 7 days a week to working on it two weekends a month. I don't think he's being mean spirited here - I think he is just that clueless about what was going on.
My current start-up was founded differently. My partner and I did multiple smaller projects together to see if we could work together. We also went through a deep dive on "past traumas" (key life defining moments for us) along with exercises on what sorts of values we want to inject into the company (ranging from how we handle feedback, to how we respond to failure, to what our employees would say about us and the company 2 years in the future, etc.). This allowed us to understand where we are coming from, figure out if our values aligned, and help lean on each other when things got hard/stressful. It really does make navigating building something together. Basically "wtf?!" reactions can easily be replaced with "uh oh, is everything okay?"
I've found that people live in their own delusions. You have to learn how about how a person perceives the world around them and realise that there is no objective truth but simply what they believe.
Then you can still work with them as long as their incentives are aligned with what you need them to do. That is the intended behaviour fits within their perception.
It sounds to me like the two perceptions of your previous startup are pretty well aligned. You felt your partner was coasting so you checked out. They felt that you checked out. Maybe they were doing more than you realised, or maybe they were just freeloading.
> You felt your partner was coasting so you checked out. They felt that you checked out.
Yes that's basically what happened. I get that this is their perception, but find it funny how much self-awareness is lacking as to what they contributed. I'm still friends with them and still like them, but they are firmly in the camp of "nope" moving forward.
> Maybe they were doing more than you realised, or maybe they were just freeloading.
I'd love for it to be the case where they were doing more than I realized, but considering we're all engineers and I'm the only one working on designs and implementing code...and driving all the discussions...you get the idea.
I recently had a similar experience. There was no bad blood in the departure, but what I thought would be more of two people with supplementary experiences coming together ended up feeling more like an employer/employee type of relationship. Like many co-partnerships that end up splitting, one person felt like they were doing all the heavy lifting for too long and that engenders a bit of resentment.
I do think that there are always going to be people that fall in line with that they are told while a select few "decision makers" call most of the shots. The takeaway from your comment is that we need decision makers that are going to lead things to be more healthy instead just benefitting one side.
The word he is looking for is resentment. It's well understood in relationship psychology. But it's good to have someone outside of that field be able to untangle these topics and word them in ways that resonate with different people.
This is great but please tell people this upfront. Not everyone has an over abundance of confidence - especially candidates that come from traditionally marginalized communities.