I was on a small team at an early-stage startup, and felt forced to do 7+ hours of good work every day due to pace and visibility.
As a self-proclaimed productive dev, it was pretty obvious who was slacking or incompetent, and I definitely had some dislike of them for that. It felt unfair that others could coast, or create buggy code and then spend time fixing it, while my higher quality output wasn't rewarded in a way I cared about ($$$). Knowing this was going on did also contribute in some way to demotivating me and maybe deciding to leave.
In the end, we are victims or volunteers. I volunteered for the position, I volunteered to stay to earn equity.
If we don't like something, we can always volunteer to fix our current situation, whether by negotiating or finding a better-suited role etc.
1. Leap of faith is risky, while science is based on repeatable experiments. Kind of like when you're building a house, instead of hoping and praying the foundation is stable, test it to be certain.
2. Who knows who made these stories up? Could have been some guy high on mushrooms. I'd rather decide what's right for myself than blindly follow some unknown-source, unchanging-with-the-world and unexplained statements some dude probably made up.
I do agree with most of the ethics and morals of Christianity and similar religions. Society would probably be better if everyone abided by it.
But if they abide through religion then people would also be a little crazy because they're willing to believe things without proper supporting evidence.
What if the leader of the church says, "Yo God hit me up and said if we drown all non-believers in the holy pool tonight, we'll be chilling in heaven by this time tomorrow." I would want to know that my friends would act rationally and not do crazy things.
Playing a game like LoL is like being in a battle or war.
Would you watch anime and shoot your gun with 'muscle memory' while fighting 5 ruthless, intelligent opponents?
A fight requires constant reevaluation of the situation and planning to win the game. If you play by "muscle memory" and win, you are playing against weak unthinking opponents or getting carried by your team.
If you played against good players, trust me you won't win thinking about anime and chilling. And it's very stressful because you're constantly on guard.
Faangs always seem to be hiring, not sure but having a LinkedIn seems to get inbound Faang recruiters, at least for me as a US dev. And startups, YC who's hiring has worked for friends, I'm sure grinding applications on aggregators like indeed, stackoverflow, angelist etc has some chance of working.
I think there are many straightforward answers.
Try to get the $500k jobs. If that doesn't work and you don't want to grind LC for 6 months, go for $150-200k jobs like startups. If you are as good as you say you are, you could probably study/talk your way into a job or at least figure out what you need after applying to 100 startups.
As an author of the book that's summarized, how do you feel about in-depth summaries of your book in terms of it affecting sales and providing publicity? I've always wondered how authors feel about it.
TurboTax recently tricked me using some dark UI patterns into spending 30+ minutes painstakingly filling out my tax forms in a way that made it seem like it was for the free filing.
Only at the very end, did they reveal that it was in fact for the paid version, with no way to change it to the free version and also keep the work. Essentially holding my work hostage.
So I had to redo it again in the hard-to-find free version. I am now anti-TurboTax for life.
The thought experiment is meant to take the situtation to the logical extreme, something that is unlikely to happen yet still realistically possible, in order to more clearly understand the effects of the behavior.
E.g. one guy littering isn't so big a deal, but it's clearer that littering is bad if everyone does it because the planet will get filthy fast.
It just seems like addressing the symptom, rather than the cause - that you shouldn't instantly whip out your big $20m legal stick to threaten someone.
Using a PR firm might result in him just having some nice sounding text, instead of understanding the error of his ways and fixing it.
That legal threat was not a good response. I think both sides messed up here.
It seems like the ex-intern made an honest mistake especially given his age. This isn't exactly the same but Helen Keller messed up and plagiarised when she was young before. People do dumb things, especially when they're young.
There is a small (to your point, pretty small) risk that it could be used in place of repl.it or inspire other competitors. If this was done by an outsider, this would be totally fine and healthy for consumers.
However, this is someone that the business helped out. One would hope that the person would reciprocate with positive value for the business, rather than negative value in the form of risk.
Rather than looking at it from the view of an employee or founder with power, I am attempting to view it through the lens of a good relationship between two people, with this being mainly defined through the golden rule - treating others as one wants to be treated.
It would seem to me that if I hadn't chosen to train and work with this person, he probably wouldn't have chosen this exact product to release out of all the possibilities in the world.
Let's say that he had an innate inclination for this exact product and would have done it even if he hadn't worked for me. Even then, he wouldn't have been privvy to the various and more detailed information that you are exposed to as an insider.
Going forward, I would be wary of any information I share with this person, given that it could work against me. This would definitely harm our relationship, and I would wish that this person would not do this to me.
If this were a fishing village, and the main thing to do around here was fishing, I would understand. There's not much choice there. But given that there are many different things this person could have worked on besides my exact product, my reaction would be, 'really man?'
As a self-proclaimed productive dev, it was pretty obvious who was slacking or incompetent, and I definitely had some dislike of them for that. It felt unfair that others could coast, or create buggy code and then spend time fixing it, while my higher quality output wasn't rewarded in a way I cared about ($$$). Knowing this was going on did also contribute in some way to demotivating me and maybe deciding to leave.
In the end, we are victims or volunteers. I volunteered for the position, I volunteered to stay to earn equity.
If we don't like something, we can always volunteer to fix our current situation, whether by negotiating or finding a better-suited role etc.