5 ms·

I’m confused about how strongly Nat Friedman and Miguel de Icaza appear to disagree on this one, given that they ran the company together. Does it mean Nat thi

I’m confused about how strongly Nat Friedman and Miguel de Icaza appear to disagree on this one, given that they ran the company together. Does it mean Nat thinks that not having crunch time at Xamarin was a mistake?

pyb 4y ago
A possible interpretation is that Nat was going home early like everybody else. If so, Miguel, is pointing at his hypocrisy.
angled 4y ago
It’s probably stronger because it’s in public - if Nat and Miguel had hashed it out on #linux, like they used to do, no one would notice. (Maybe they each need to resurrect the apology cards!)
canucklady 4y ago
Nat is an "investor" now since he's rich. So of course he wants the ICs in companies he invests in to work themselves to death for him. "If you work 26 hours a day like I did, you can be a VC who never needs to work again".
- skrebbel 4y ago
  Not everybody with money is a cynical asshole like that. Everything’s I’ve seen written/said by Friedman so far suggests he’s not an asshole at all so I feel like there might be more going on than “poor people good, rich people bad”.
  - skinnymuch 4y ago
    No one said anything about poor people being good. That’s almost never an argument.
LtWorf 4y ago
Isn't he the guy who said "Use MIT, the GPL is too long" at a keynote? I doubt he can offer rational and impartial arguments.
thenerdhead 4y ago
I worked here and never got the impression they disagreed. It never had an impact on me. Rather I have fond memories that Xamarin did remote work right before it became a widespread thing overnight. The times I worked past my hours were for team dinners/events, problems that piqued my curiosity, and large launches/conferences. All which had me in a bed at a reasonable time. https://jondouglas.dev/remote-first/ https://jondouglas.dev/remote-first/

5 ms·

I’m confused about how strongly Nat Friedman and Miguel de Icaza appear to disagree on this one, given that they ran the company together. Does it mean Nat thi

by skrebbel 4y ago

pyb 4y ago
A possible interpretation is that Nat was going home early like everybody else. If so, Miguel, is pointing at his hypocrisy.
angled 4y ago
It’s probably stronger because it’s in public - if Nat and Miguel had hashed it out on #linux, like they used to do, no one would notice. (Maybe they each need to resurrect the apology cards!)
canucklady 4y ago
Nat is an "investor" now since he's rich. So of course he wants the ICs in companies he invests in to work themselves to death for him. "If you work 26 hours a day like I did, you can be a VC who never needs to work again".
- skrebbel 4y ago
  Not everybody with money is a cynical asshole like that. Everything’s I’ve seen written/said by Friedman so far suggests he’s not an asshole at all so I feel like there might be more going on than “poor people good, rich people bad”.
  - skinnymuch 4y ago
    No one said anything about poor people being good. That’s almost never an argument.
LtWorf 4y ago
Isn't he the guy who said "Use MIT, the GPL is too long" at a keynote? I doubt he can offer rational and impartial arguments.
thenerdhead 4y ago
I worked here and never got the impression they disagreed. It never had an impact on me. Rather I have fond memories that Xamarin did remote work right before it became a widespread thing overnight. The times I worked past my hours were for team dinners/events, problems that piqued my curiosity, and large launches/conferences. All which had me in a bed at a reasonable time. https://jondouglas.dev/remote-first/ https://jondouglas.dev/remote-first/