221–230 of 372 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have never understood why North American bathroom stalls don’t just go to the floor. Jesus Christ how much would it really cost to enable some damn privacy.
I always assumed it was to make it easier to mop/clean.
I've had a tremendous amount of respect for Mark Zuckerberg as a leader, and have gone out of my way to defend him in the past ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17128369 ). I always envisioned whatsapp as a defensive purchase that would stay true to its initial vision (perhaps being used to prop up their other products in an unintrusive manner). But this article makes me realize Mark is s a one-trick advertising…
Isn't it it equivalent of every road having ads, which is basically the case in the US (billboards)? A tollbooth is an access fee, which is the opposite model of ad revenue.
Billboards are illegal in some cities and along some roads in the United States.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Giving up $400 mil for 3 months? I mean I know they're loaded either way but come on...
At some point don't you think you just have enough? What's another $400 million in the bank at that point? I mean maybe you could put that towards causes you believe in, but that's kind of the only argument I see for staying. The definition of being rich in my mind is the very concept of being able to walk away from that kind of money for your own sanity.
They left and now Facebook is gonna do it anyways and is gonna cost them 400 million less.
^^ coupled with a photo of outrageously poor open-plan office space.
This is just insane. Like, executives should be ashamed of themselves if they think developing a company culture means micromanagement of desk space and bathroom size.
I have to agree with Joel Spolsky that, when you think of things like this, it makes you start to realize that Facebook has to offer outsized salaries and RSU grants to its employees, because the culture and workspace is so poor and surveillance / micro-management oriented that in order to let yourself be embedded into a hellish workplace like that, you would require greater-than-market salary.
And frankly, the salaries aren't high enough to offset this, compared with other companies that don't turn your work life into a micromanagement panopticon, yet still pay well.
I've had a tremendous amount of respect for Mark Zuckerberg as a leader, and have gone out of my way to defend him in the past ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17128369 ). I always envisioned whatsapp as a defensive purchase that would stay true to its initial vision (perhaps being used to prop up their other products in an unintrusive manner). But this article makes me realize Mark is s a one-trick advertising…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's partly practical and partly cost savings. Shorter walls are cheaper, but it also makes it easier to clean, easier to help someone in case of an emergency, and easier to tell if the stall is occupied.
They're a $500bn company. I think that can afford an extra foot of door.
Someone needs to ask for long doors in order to have them built in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not a fan of his, but is the situation going change unless people are willing to pay for these services? Most people wouldn't even pay for something as useful/important as email, let alone social networking (I can never understand the need for something like Facebook)
People pay for internet access. They can hang something at the end of their internet access pipe which supplies them with these services at their own cost (electricity and hardware, mostly when using free software). So yes, it is possible to envision a future where this situation has changed for the better.
Isn't it like saying "I paid for the car, why do I have to pay for gas"? Somebody has to pay for engineers, infrastructure etc. If not the end users, then the advertisers.
I guess it is the mindset/understanding. The same person who won't pay $1 for email (for example) will pay for Netflix, because somehow in their mind, it takes money to make movies but it doesn't take money to write software or run servers.
http://archive.is/pPWAE
[flagged]
I've had a tremendous amount of respect for Mark Zuckerberg as a leader, and have gone out of my way to defend him in the past ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17128369 ). I always envisioned whatsapp as a defensive purchase that would stay true to its initial vision (perhaps being used to prop up their other products in an unintrusive manner). But this article makes me realize Mark is s a one-trick advertising…
I've had a tremendous amount of respect for Mark Zuckerberg as a leader, and have gone out of my way to defend him in the past ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17128369 ). I always envisioned whatsapp as a defensive purchase that would stay true to its initial vision (perhaps being used to prop up their other products in an unintrusive manner). But this article makes me realize Mark is s a one-trick advertising…
To be honest all of the Silicon Valley innovators have this cult of personality that once you look behind the curtain they act in their own self interest (which isn't a bad thing). For example Elon Musk has his "Iron Man" persona that puts himself on a pedestal and projects an ideal that his companies will solve the worlds problems. Once you look behind the curtain you see that he uses this to justify long hours by h…
I think he is more self aware in general than other execs. He found away to mix self-interest with solving worlds problems. I mean there is still potential for things to go awry.
But at least he is not Facebook. He is not a casino owner or something similar.
With him I don't think you can separate the right reasons and the business reasons