3 ms·
> Got bad news for you. ... > I just think you're being a little idealistic and naive. In reading your initial reply to me and this subsequent comment of you
by eganist 8y ago
> Got bad news for you.
...
> I just think you're being a little idealistic and naive.
In reading your initial reply to me and this subsequent comment of yours, it seems you're more focused on scratching an itch for a debate. I have no interest:
My initial reply to you was entirely fantastic; it had absolutely no basis in reality. I can assure you that my personal pipe dream of dispersing rational and grounded ideologies for the sake of making more states purple during elections was not intended to be confused with a legitimate argument.
I do hope someone else gives you the debate you're seeking. I'm just informing you that that wasn't the intent of my initial reply to you. I still stand by the idea that it's in everyone's best interests for Amazon to plant large satellite offices in locations that aren't thought-centers because they're more likely to get the tax breaks that they need and they won't have any issues attracting the necessary talent (it's Amazon), but I won't entangle that argument with my dreams.
Cheers
- bilbo0s 8y agoNot looking for a debate at all. (There's not really one to be had.) >My initial reply to you was entirely fantastic; it had absolutely no basis in reality... As long as you realize this, it's good. But there have been so many comments on HN the past week or so putting forth ideas of the sort you, rightly, see as more fantasy based that it's become difficult to ascertain exactly when someone is being serious. Such people have to be "sobered up" if we're going to effectively concert in seeking a solution to the larger problem: The "winner take all" nature of the tech economy.