81–90 of 109 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people find corporations more democratic than an aristocracy. I’d rather have AMZN on NASDAQ than have Lord Bezos become a trillionaire.
Your second sentence, what's the difference? Isn't he likely going to be the next trillionaire anyway, with or without the title of Lord?
Uzi Nissan just died of COVID19. It will be interesting to see if his relatives stick to his principals, and hold onto the web site in memory of him, or make millions and sell to Nissan. I hope they hold on. I predict someone will eventually sell, though. Principled people are few and far between. https://www.autonews.com/automakers-suppliers/uzi-nissan-who...
It kind of paints a dark picture. The family unit used to be like a person who never died. Wealth, ideas, skills, values all would be passed down and developed over time. Now the corporations can outlive us, they can wait. Our families are weaker than the corporations. That scares me.
In my corner of the culture, I suspect a lot of this has to with - to be blunt, and harsh - intergenerational bigotry. There are so, so many that I know who have had to cut out their blood family because of shit treatment and behavior.
Definitely not the only thing tho. I get along great with my family, and we don't have much like this going on - some ideas and values, but it's not like I was raised with a family motto or anything like that.
I don't know enough of the wealthy / super wealthy, and those that I do know I don't think I know well enough, but I get the impression that their families DO actually still do this. The family itself is some form of legal entity, and parents actively invest in their kids in a way that's... different. AFAIK that's mostly just because they actually can - independently wealthy AND independently successful means you don't lose much if you go "unemployed" in order to raise kids.
I say all this not to disparage anything, but to brainstorm things to aim for in my own life...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same reason Tesla bought tesla.com for $11m. Same reason not owning steam.com gives Valve grief.
They also don't even own valve.com
I love how crappy this website is. :D . No, not minimalistic, or old school. Just crappy, with terrible usability. :D
It's ironic given that one of the services they apparently offer is website development
In the 90s, I worked for a web firm that did the Nissan Motors USA customer-facing web sites. The management at Nissan USA were always sure we'd be switching to the nissan.com domain "any day now." It was impressive how much firepower they expended on Uzi Nissan, and how he was able to fight and hold on by a thread. I secretly sympathized with him, although professionally I had to pretend that the "nissanusa.com" dom…
The 90s and the days of running websites on Silicon Graphics. There seemingly was some sort of lessen learned since Z.com was acquired more easily before the relaunch of the Z. Though the domain seems to have since been sold to another company.
Turns out that a few single letter domains were grandfathered in. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-letter_second-level_dom...
I'm glad to be one of the lucky 10,000 today!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, they are, but they're drowned out by "look at this create-react-app hackathon project I made! VCs pls give me a series A thx". Alas, the web is now a profit engine first.
A create-react-app hackathon project is absolutely a valid instance of "putting up websites for fun."
This story represents everything that’s wrong with domains. On one hand, you have someone with absolutely no use for the the name holding out against an entity that everyone in the world would assume has ownership of it. On the other hand, you have a company that tried to strong arm the small domain owner in court.
It was registered in 1994. Trying to re-do 26 years of configurations and email addresses sounds like a pain in the ass. I'm sure he (or his family) still gets email there.
Just because someone wants something more doesn't mean they should automatically get it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your second sentence, what's the difference? Isn't he likely going to be the next trillionaire anyway, with or without the title of Lord?
Also is there some magical step once you’re a trillionaire? Surely at this point it doesn’t make a difference anymore exactly how rich the guy is.