6 ms·

AWS would not be possible without the contribution of hundreds of thousands of people and projects from the inception of the internet. It really is just a softw

by rsoto2 3y ago

AWS would not be possible without the contribution of hundreds of thousands of people and projects from the inception of the internet. It really is just a software on some redundant servers running open source software... it's not that incredible.

vacuity 3y ago
Aside from that, it's not obvious to me why we need a Bezos to achieve this. If people were capped to $5 billion (which seems absurdly high to me), would AWS never come into existence?
- gottorf 3y ago
  > If people were capped to $5 billion Bezos's net worth is basically just the number of shares of Amazon he holds times the price per share that the market arrived at (and continues to arrive at, changing every minute of every day). How would you cap him at $5B? Would you force him to divest his shares as that equation approaches $5B, even though he's not the one setting the price per share? That hardly seems fair, like an old widower whose home's value arbitrarily fluctuates with the real estate market, and who may no longer be able to afford the property taxes at a higher valuation. Would you force the market to not value each share above that which would place his stake at $5B, even though each buyer and seller (neither of which is Bezos) agrees that it's a fair price for them to transact at? That doesn't seem right, either.
  - vacuity 3y ago
    I don't think it's unfair to make him divest some of his shares. I suppose there could be leeway there, but having over $100 billion in shares certainly seems excessive. Hey, if taxes are paid as they should be, working conditions improved, and whatever else, I personally don't care so much about a wealth cap. But a wealth cap is a means to ensure that the government has the money to redistribute the wealth appropriately. In the end, as long as the outcomes are achieved, I'll consider that a win.
Draiken 3y ago
More importantly, Bezos did nothing. Nothing. He used money he hoarded from another venture to allow the thousands of engineers to build it. Anyone can do that. And I'm 100% sure Bezos was not the one that came up with the idea either. He just benefited from being in a position of power with tons of capital at the right time.
- latency-guy2 3y ago
  > He used money he hoarded from another venture to allow the thousands of engineers to build it. Anyone can do that. So why didn't they? > And I'm 100% sure Bezos was not the one that came up with the idea either. He just benefited from being in a position of power with tons of capital at the right time. Same question again. What in your opinion, is a bet that you can make right now, today, that will lead to another Amazon? Or maybe even something bigger? I have a similar amount of capital as Bezos did free and ready to go to when he started Amazon, even inflation adjusted. I probably have a lot more power than he did at the same time since I am actually a manager of a few engineers which he was not. Are you going to make that bet?
  - Draiken 3y ago
    Am I going to be back in those times where that capital was a lot? Where what we have today isn't there? Will I have access to the contacts and his network? Let me guess: no? What an odd request. This is such a lazy argument. > So why didn't they? The truth of the matter is: they couldn't. Bezos, Musk and Bill Gates were perfectly positioned to do what they did. You don't even hear about the hundreds of others that had the same (or better) ideas, that didn't have the capital, the connections, or even the timing. This hero worship makes zero sense. If Bezos wasn't already rich, Amazon wouldn't exist. If Bill Gates didn't have contacts inside IBM, Microsoft wouldn't be what it is. If Elon didn't grow up filthy rich, he wouldn't be the world's richest man. I know it's easier to believe the good old "work hard and you'll be rewarded" adage, but it's a plain lie. We have multiple orders of magnitude more of hard workers compared to billionaires (or even millionaires) to prove that. No, it's not because they were geniuses or hard workers. They might've even been that, it's beyond the point. They were plain lucky. In today's society, previous capital is the best predictor of success there is. Not intelligence. Not hard work.
latency-guy2 3y ago
> AWS would not be possible without the contribution of hundreds of thousands of people and projects from the inception of the internet. Quite notably, that number of people developing, distributing, supporting, and extending AWS is a few magnitudes smaller than the billions of people that live on the earth and benefit from or use AWS everyday. So, what do you have to say about that inequality? You can claim the man sweeping streets in Africa was quite integral to developing AWS alongside myself and thousands of engineers, but you will never make me believe it.

by rsoto2 3y ago

vacuity 3y ago

Aside from that, it's not obvious to me why we need a Bezos to achieve this. If people were capped to $5 billion (which seems absurdly high to me), would AWS never come into existence?

gottorf 3y ago
> If people were capped to $5 billion Bezos's net worth is basically just the number of shares of Amazon he holds times the price per share that the market arrived at (and continues to arrive at, changing every minute of every day). How would you cap him at $5B? Would you force him to divest his shares as that equation approaches $5B, even though he's not the one setting the price per share? That hardly seems fair, like an old widower whose home's value arbitrarily fluctuates with the real estate market, and who may no longer be able to afford the property taxes at a higher valuation. Would you force the market to not value each share above that which would place his stake at $5B, even though each buyer and seller (neither of which is Bezos) agrees that it's a fair price for them to transact at? That doesn't seem right, either.
- vacuity 3y ago
  I don't think it's unfair to make him divest some of his shares. I suppose there could be leeway there, but having over $100 billion in shares certainly seems excessive. Hey, if taxes are paid as they should be, working conditions improved, and whatever else, I personally don't care so much about a wealth cap. But a wealth cap is a means to ensure that the government has the money to redistribute the wealth appropriately. In the end, as long as the outcomes are achieved, I'll consider that a win.

Draiken 3y ago

More importantly, Bezos did nothing. Nothing. He used money he hoarded from another venture to allow the thousands of engineers to build it. Anyone can do that. And I'm 100% sure Bezos was not the one that came up with the idea either. He just benefited from being in a position of power with tons of capital at the right time.

latency-guy2 3y ago
> He used money he hoarded from another venture to allow the thousands of engineers to build it. Anyone can do that. So why didn't they? > And I'm 100% sure Bezos was not the one that came up with the idea either. He just benefited from being in a position of power with tons of capital at the right time. Same question again. What in your opinion, is a bet that you can make right now, today, that will lead to another Amazon? Or maybe even something bigger? I have a similar amount of capital as Bezos did free and ready to go to when he started Amazon, even inflation adjusted. I probably have a lot more power than he did at the same time since I am actually a manager of a few engineers which he was not. Are you going to make that bet?
- Draiken 3y ago
  Am I going to be back in those times where that capital was a lot? Where what we have today isn't there? Will I have access to the contacts and his network? Let me guess: no? What an odd request. This is such a lazy argument. > So why didn't they? The truth of the matter is: they couldn't. Bezos, Musk and Bill Gates were perfectly positioned to do what they did. You don't even hear about the hundreds of others that had the same (or better) ideas, that didn't have the capital, the connections, or even the timing. This hero worship makes zero sense. If Bezos wasn't already rich, Amazon wouldn't exist. If Bill Gates didn't have contacts inside IBM, Microsoft wouldn't be what it is. If Elon didn't grow up filthy rich, he wouldn't be the world's richest man. I know it's easier to believe the good old "work hard and you'll be rewarded" adage, but it's a plain lie. We have multiple orders of magnitude more of hard workers compared to billionaires (or even millionaires) to prove that. No, it's not because they were geniuses or hard workers. They might've even been that, it's beyond the point. They were plain lucky. In today's society, previous capital is the best predictor of success there is. Not intelligence. Not hard work.

latency-guy2 3y ago

> AWS would not be possible without the contribution of hundreds of thousands of people and projects from the inception of the internet. Quite notably, that number of people developing, distributing, supporting, and extending AWS is a few magnitudes smaller than the billions of people that live on the earth and benefit from or use AWS everyday. So, what do you have to say about that inequality? You can claim the man sweeping streets in Africa was quite integral to developing AWS alongside myself and thousands of engineers, but you will never make me believe it.