3 ms·
I believe I addressed your points. You want employees to purely care about their own interests. It’s ok for the company to try to align employees to the company
by reducesuffering 3y ago
I believe I addressed your points. You want employees to purely care about their own interests. It’s ok for the company to try to align employees to the company’s interest. I’m sure you wouldn’t care for Fly.io employees secretly self-dealing in ways that gets them promoted and more $, at the expense of your company and customers. “Real easy to say that someone else should take a pay cut to serve a mission you [Fly.io] care about.” when they could be purely doing things that make them look good and puff their resume, instead of what actually helps Fly.io and it’s customers (your mission)
- tptacek 3y agoI don't know what you're trying to say here, but if one of our team members left because they had a better offer elsewhere, I wouldn't call them greedy.
- KoolKat23 3y agoThey joined a company, owned by a not-for-profit with specific goals. They then held it hostage unless it could continue to veer off-course, all in the pursuit of more money. It is literally the definition of greed, selfish desire for money to the detriment of the foundations goals. Whether the foundation would've actually survived thereafter is besides the point. Obviously they're entitled to do that though from a different perspective, its just a job.
- Aeolun 3y agoKinda feels like if 90% of the people you’ve hired for your not for profit are what you’d call “greedy”, maybe the fault doesn’t lie with those employees. Anyhow, the goal of the foundation is AGI, earning the money you need to survive until you manage that does not sound evil.
- Jensson 3y agoSam Altman set this up a long time ago for sure, but problem employees are still a problem even if the person who hired those people maybe is a bigger problem.