Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

jlericson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 298 posts

Re: Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

#171

Post by refurb »

orwin wrote: post #104
janalsncm wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Between 2009 and today, the US doubled GDP while life expectancies fell. In the EU, GDP is stagnant but life expectancy went up. Those who say Europe’s economy is a failure should at least consider what the purpose of an economy should even be.

Consider a city, paying two gardeners 25k each per year, and an extra 5k for two month. Spending is 55k+oil+chemicals+tool maintenance (that the gardeners usually do). Let's say the annualized cost is 75k. So this service contributions to GDP is 75k. Now, the city wants to show GDP/capita growth. Simple : let's pay a company X that will pay the gardeners. It'll cost 95k. Now the GDP is 95k+ 55k (let's say the gardene…

Where does the extra money come from? Out of thin air?

Re: Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

#172

Post by chasd00 »

diegoperini wrote: post #168
nottheengineer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, stack overflow is the place where we stop to find an answer to a question. They should stay focused on that instead of adding useless features. But I don't entirely agree on LLMs being useless. An LLM could help with avoiding duplicate questions. It could analyze the content of the question and point out stuff like missing logs before the question is submitted to guide beginners through the basics. If someone…

Try phind.com, it's pretty much what you described. It's an AI search engine for programmers which is able to annotate its results with SO links for every paragraph it generates in case you don't trust the generated text.

Done and bookmarked. I forget how cool these things are. Now I just want it read to me in Trump’s voice with a very indignant tone and some cuss words mixed in like the presidents discuss anime videos.

Re: Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

#173

Post by cfiggers »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #97
janalsncm wrote: post #3

> In May I wrote about Stack Overflow's business, which lost $42 million over 6 months and had just laid off 10% of its employees. Since then, the company's fiscal year-end results came out. Despite growing revenue, it lost $84 million over the year ending on March 31, 2023. Thank god Wikipedia isn’t run like Stack Overflow. As an end user, they have pretty much the same value proposition: user generated answers to m…

> meanwhile it seems SO is constantly being driven off a cliff by bimbos in management A bimbo is a woman who makes up for a lack of intelligence or competence by having sex appeal. Don't take my word for it: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bimbo Did you mean to use a different word?

It's 2023! There's no reason we can't assume gender-neutrality of previously-gendered terms. Maybe the parent commenter finds Prashanth Chandrasekar absolutely smoking hot (despite his seeming incompetence).

Re: Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

#174

Post by mrtksn »

pragmatic wrote: post #163
mrtksn wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think that actions of these huge institutions are not impactful to the life quality of the Americans? Also, why do you think that the European live longer thanks to the medicine developed in the USA? Maybe the USA develops medicine thanks to the free and equal opportunity education culture in the Europe? If you look closely to the researchers, you will see that lot's of the people who develop these things…

I would love for this to be true. Europeans do seem to enjoy a higher quality of life among several axis. However the US subsidizes European defense (refer to current events) allowing European countries to spend less GDP on their military. Talent comes to the US from all over the world. That's how it works and has since almost the beginning of the country. Easier access to capital (and easy bankruptcy, etc), entrepre…

Maybe the US is spending so much in defence in it's own interests? Maybe that's how US can enforce business benefits like copyrights to the American corporations and business decisions on what other countries can invest into? Maybe that's why US can print USD at will but other countries have to earn it?

But I like the Linus argument, however this complicates things further: Are tech becoming European when the tech CEO's are having a vacation in the French riviera?

Re: Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

#175

Post by kcb »

imglorp wrote: post #112
mrtksn wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/eur/europe/life-expect... USA: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life... I'm sure there are nuances but according to this particular source European life expectancy went from 75 to 79, US life expectancy went from 78 to 79 with a period of a decline between 2013 and 2018.

What's the biggest impact on life expectancy in the first world that shows up at this level? Healthcare, walking culture, food options, other?

Young people dying of drug overdose.

Re: Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

#177

Post by refurb »

mrweasel wrote: post #6
janalsncm wrote: post #3

> In May I wrote about Stack Overflow's business, which lost $42 million over 6 months and had just laid off 10% of its employees. Since then, the company's fiscal year-end results came out. Despite growing revenue, it lost $84 million over the year ending on March 31, 2023. Thank god Wikipedia isn’t run like Stack Overflow. As an end user, they have pretty much the same value proposition: user generated answers to m…

> Not everything needs to be a damn unicorn. More people needs to understand this. It's fine being a small(ish) business that turns a profit and provides a service that's beneficial to society. You don't need to be a billion dollar company to be important or do great work. DHH talked about this 15 years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CDXJ6bMkMY

You shouldn’t take VC money if you’re not going to try and be a unicorn.

VC’s aren’t interested in your “smallish business that turns a profit” and neither are the LPs that invest in the fund.

Re: Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

#178

Post by scarface_74 »

mrweasel wrote: post #6
janalsncm wrote: post #3

> In May I wrote about Stack Overflow's business, which lost $42 million over 6 months and had just laid off 10% of its employees. Since then, the company's fiscal year-end results came out. Despite growing revenue, it lost $84 million over the year ending on March 31, 2023. Thank god Wikipedia isn’t run like Stack Overflow. As an end user, they have pretty much the same value proposition: user generated answers to m…

> Not everything needs to be a damn unicorn. More people needs to understand this. It's fine being a small(ish) business that turns a profit and provides a service that's beneficial to society. You don't need to be a billion dollar company to be important or do great work. DHH talked about this 15 years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CDXJ6bMkMY

Once you take VC money, you don’t really have a choice but to grow large. That’s their entire business model.

I can’t find it now. But Spolsky himself wrote about how Fogs Creek Software could be what we now call a “lifestyle company” that could grow slowly. But he felt he needed outside investment so Stack Exchange could grow fast since it was only useful if it had network effects.

Re: Stack Overflow's CEO Doesn't Understand Stack Overflow

#180

Post by danaris »

agentgumshoe wrote: post #156
palata wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't need to be a billion dollar company to be important or do great work. And importantly: because you are a billion dollar company doesn't mean you bring good to the world. At all.

I think the simplest way to measure that is by asking 'what would we truly lose if this company disappeared tomorrow?'. With one follow-up question of 'how easily could the important bits actually be replaced?'

No; that kind of thought experiment heavily biases in favor of large organizations.

It's much more helpful to ask, "What would we lose if this company were broken up tomorrow into parts no larger than (say) the median company size?"

Post reply on HN