2 ms·

I was mostly pointing out that the parent's comment woefully ignored over half of Google's workforce in their calculation. The fact that that over half doesn't

I was mostly pointing out that the parent's comment woefully ignored over half of Google's workforce in their calculation. The fact that that over half doesn't get stable employment, health care, or any other benefits associated with Google is also particularly relevant to their profitability on a per head basis. I will try to keep it down, there's a lot of Googlers in today's thread, and it's obvious I upset a few.

dang 6y ago
> there's a lot of Googlers in today's thread, and it's obvious I upset a few. Potshots like that make things worse, and make me fear that you don't want to use HN as intended. If you keep that up we're going to end up having to rate-limit your account again. It's not clear how you'd know how many Googlers there are in threads, and in any case taking swipes at people is against the site guidelines. Please stick to your substantive points. There's also something about conducting a campaign against any $thing (including any $BigCo), finding fault with literally every aspect of everything they do, which is in the spirit of battle rather than curiosity, and so is against the intended use of this site. Please don't use HN for such agendas. It's tedious, and it evokes worse from others. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html