It's talking to the author of the article, who rather ludicrously diagnosed the problem with the Messenger as it being not biased and ideological enough.
Yeah, good point. I guess you'd have to rethink almost every algorithm from scratch. I'm not even sure what a cache-friendly A* would look like and that's basic.
It's common to start constructing buildings before the design is even complete. And there can be huge "tech debt" disasters in civil engineering. Berlin Airport is one famous example.
What platform did FTX create? Were there apps you could install into FTX?
FTX was just an ordinary financial company, AFAICT. It had a bit of software to run the order book, but wasn't run by technical people, had no R&D effort and no obvious reason to develop one, and so on.
WeWork was just a company like any other, I can't see a single factor that could make this be a tech company.
To me, at heart, a tech company must develop some new kind of tech and do so in-house.
Why would he bother looking for a job with income over the limit? What would stop him immediately starting another scam? Who would even hire such a guy to begin with?
To what extent were SBF and Ellison tech though? This trend of labelling more or less any new company that attracts VC funding as tech is bothersome. It's the mental loophole that allowed Adam Neumann to embezzle huge amounts of investor money too (but he did it "right" so gets away with it), by claiming that WeWork wasn't just an office leasing company but a tech platform. None of these people are engineers of any kind, none of them have developed any kind of new tech. They are just ordinary business types who run a business that happens to employ a few coders.
No won because the yes campaign was manipulative and deceptive, doing things like hiding the full content of the statement from the heart where it discussed reparation payments then getting Facebook to censor anyone who asked if it was being hidden.
But it sounds like you don't actually understand anyone's views, at is often the case for young people. There's just your initial reaction (correct) and "fear" (incorrect). Emotional politics at its greatest.
A number of years back I had an email from a bloke called Elon Musk. I was vaguely aware of who he was but not very.
At the time I was the global expert in a very weird alloy (the market for it was perhaps 5 or 10 tonnes a year. A very weird and minority interest alloy). It was aluminium scandium, which the Russians had developed to compete with Nasa’s use of aluminium lithium. In many ways a better alloy too. And, obviously, there were possible uses in rockets and so on (rather more in something like a Shuttle than in simple rockets though).
OK, so I get this email and it asks me whether this aluminium scandium is worth it, will it make my rockets lighter, asks Musk. No, not really, it’ll make them easier to weld but not lighter particularly. Which was pretty much the end of the exchange.
So, when people ask me whether Musk does tech stuff I would have to say yes. Because he tracked down a one man company that knew the straight answer to the question he needed answering. OK, you might not think that is engineering, preferring to think of it as people using a slide rule to work it all out themselves. But finding the bloke who knows the answer and asking them is engineering to me - it’s still getting to the right answer, isn’t it?