If the rate drivers get paid is based off the price paid by riders, yeah, it is illegal what they are doing. If they only say it's a % of it, then you are correct
Yes. ROFR (right of first refusal) are almost always at the price of the shares purchased. This prevents people from just selling their shares on secondary markets without company permission. I don't love it but you are correct, that is how it works
Yeah, definitely a possible CLM here. I still am glad that things like this exist because I was part of a great startup with an awesome culture that became toxic. If it can help others not go that route, all the better for it.
I used to track DynamoDB issues and holy crap, AWS East had a 1-2 hour outage at least every 2 weeks. Never in any of the other regions. AWS East is THA WURST
They did use standard channels. For years. And Uber execs kept being fuckwads about it. At some point, enough is enough. If you don't stand up against injustice, I don't want you within 8 million feet of a company I work for.
Literal interpretation. I would give him/her the benefit of the doubt and say meaning they keep flubbing like a bunch of fuckwads every chance they get
If someone misbehaves, you talk to them quietly first. If that doesn't work, you need to look at taking more drastic measures. Uber investors have been MUCH too quiet. I'd push LPs in VC funds who sit on their board to put pressure on the VCs to fix it. If 5-10 major pensions/endowments threatened to pull out of future funds for a VC, they would stand up and take notice.
I wouldn't want to work with an investor who doesn't stand up for what they believe in. If you aren't fighting for building successful companies that also do it the right way, why would I take your money? I want to take money from someone I trust, not someone who will toe the company line. This attitude is what caused Zenefits to explode: no one questioned their tactics or culture because they were growing. Same with Theranos. I want to work with good people and good people stand up for things when they feel they have a need to. If it was for a first (maybe 3rd or 4th) offense, I would agree, but for a 40th? Call those MFs out.
Are they implying correlation or causation? It seems like you would need a control group with a psychological issue that doesn't do psychotherapy compared to one who does. If someone is in psychotherapy, presumably, they could be in a deteriorating mental state. It's like saying a cancer patient that does chemo feels worse. That's how cancer works. An assumption of steady-state psychology of a person just doesn't make sense to me. Not gonna pay $40 to read and see if I'm right tho...
I work as a technical recruiter and have done tech related work since college (covering tech stocks, VC, working at a big data startup in ~6 different roles, and now). I think HN provides good and interesting articles about tech and the world beyond. I don't really ever muck about in the comments because I don't know enough to really make a contribution but I try to check it a few times a day, see if there is anything really stimulating.