201–210 of 402 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hypothetically, we could base it on revenue.
So if we take the top 10 companies by revenue, we get Apple, Google, Amazon, but also Walmart, CVS Health, UnitedHealth Group, Exon Mobil, Berkshire, McKesson, AmerisourceBergen. It still feels pretty random to me.
I don't think their dirty tricks and legal consequences are the main point here. The question is poorly political: Do we want a functioning market economy or not? I take only the mobile phone operating system. We have a high end walled garden segment. By its price point it will always have limited market share. And we have a all-the-rest market segment. Competition between these market segments exists but it is by na…
> The monopoly is unprecedented in history, so the solution needs to be so, too. What makes you think the Android monopoly is any worse than the Windows monopoly of the 90ties?
You could live perfectly without a PC in the 1990s, everything was available using paper, phone or personal service.
Yeah, but you have some point.
At Google in 2006, the SVP of Engineering was presenting to the entire engineering org during an all hands meeting. A question came up as regards retaining emails related to a pending lawsuit. He told everybody: "Do NOT delete any emails. . Let me say that again to make sure everyone has understood me correctly: do NOT delete any emails!" The way it was said, the chuckle, and the way it was repeated with the extra em…
Where are you getting this from? Is this from the complaint? Or a personal anecdote? I worked there in 2006. The SVP of Eng was Alan Eustace. He's a jolly guy, he chuckles a lot. I don't remember this specific exchange but I can hear his chuckle in my head. Knowing him, the chuckle would almost certainly be laughing at what an obviously terrible idea it would be to delete the emails. Alan Eustace certainly would not…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a 100-person company full of T-shirt wearers, ~4 random men walking around the trading floor in the middle of the day (a big no-no for any sort of guest) in suits is strange.
When I was in a bank we were asked to dress up in times when BaFin (German SEC) was expected in the campus.
The guy who handled the regulators wore button-down shirts when they were around, and any traders/engineers who had to talk to them often were told to wear a button-down, but that was it.
People from "real Wall Street" who joined usually had a phase of dressing up before they adopted full casual dress. One person lasted months before showing up in a t-shirt. I kind of assumed that they were all buying new wardrobes during that period, but there may have been a culture shock of sorts.
At Google in 2006, the SVP of Engineering was presenting to the entire engineering org during an all hands meeting. A question came up as regards retaining emails related to a pending lawsuit. He told everybody: "Do NOT delete any emails. . Let me say that again to make sure everyone has understood me correctly: do NOT delete any emails!" The way it was said, the chuckle, and the way it was repeated with the extra em…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m far from a Google fan and find most of the products tacky - including Google search without an ad blocker. But I wouldn’t even go that far.
I think we are far too afraid of upsetting tech employees to admit that it's exactly what it is. They apply somewhere near a double-digit-percentage tax to most businesses globally. They are under investigation for illegal practices in nearly every jurisdiction that has laws against certain business practices, and now their CEO has literally been caught specifically requesting to take business conversations off the r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, FAANG gang has no idea the level of surveillance and record keeping that bank/fund/wall st tech is under. I worked at one shop that if you said "call my cell" in a slack to someone, you'd get a call from compliance within days ask to explain why you did this, what the conversation was about, why it wasn't on a work phone.. and to never, ever, ever do it again... because you know we are watching, so we will find…
The lack of any kind of effective legal standards in the tech industry is batshit crazy considering the the primary business model and what they are investing in. Its an actual tragedy and by far the thing the scares me the most about living in the US.
Not sure if it matters, but all chats at Google default to history off (deleted after 24hrs). Turning on history only keeps messages for 30days and you have to do this for every single group chat, private chat, etc. There is no archive or long held messages like Slack.
Yes, these settings were chosen specifically to destroy evidence, and the courts are increasingly unhappy with that. All conversations involving people on legal holds (such as the CEO!) should be retained indefinitely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. You are allowed to communicate by voice and it isn’t recorded and compliance will allow it. However it depends what you are doing. If you are trading, it better be on a recorded line. See FINRA Regulatory Notice 20-16 for reference. In fact, many Zoom conversations are expressly forbidden from being recorded at many financial firms. Again, that’s because no one is using zoom to make trades so there isn’t a requir…
That makes no sense. Why is trading via Zoom impossible, voice maybe, and text mandatory?
Because trading conversations have to be recorded (legally). It's easy for corporate policy to say "we don't record Zooms, (therefore) you cannot trade over Zoom". It's also easy to say "we record all text communications, (therefore) you can trade over text". Meanwhile, the phone rules predated any other modern form of communication so they have the complexity of "sometimes record and trade, sometimes don't" grandfathered in.