4 ms·

No, it really isn't. It's not remotely the FTCs job to regulate that type of thing, and I really don't think you would want it to be. Would you rather have a

No, it really isn't. It's not remotely the FTCs job to regulate that type of thing, and I really don't think you would want it to be. Would you rather have a system where competing companies have to get government approval before extending offers to you? You know who would love that system? Google.

Dylan16807 1y ago
> have to get government approval before That is not the only form of regulation, and not the form that would be applied here. This would be after the fact, going after companies that try to pull things like this.
- terminalshort 1y ago
  But companies should be able to pull things like this. If a company isn't paying market rate I see no problem with a competitor destroying it by hiring away all its best employees.
  - Dylan16807 1y ago
    If a competitor gets too big and is using its money to remove competition before it can be challenged, that's a problem. In normal competitive situations this rule wouldn't apply. If one company wants the assets and employees of another company they can go ahead and buy it. And any company can offer better jobs as plain old jobs. The negotiation here was not just some high end job openings.
    - scarface_74 1y ago
      There was no world where Windsurf was going to challenge Google and the same is true for the examples. These were regular old job offers. At any time, any of the employees could have stayed at Windsurf instead of taking a lot more money from Google. Google didn’t want the “assets”. Google wanted the people. Even then they only wanted the best people.
      - Dylan16807 1y ago
        > These were regular old job offers. They were not. > Google didn’t want the “assets”. They paid 2.4 billion in licensing fees. Or something like that, looks like part of that was special structured not a regular old job offer money.

4 ms·

No, it really isn't. It's not remotely the FTCs job to regulate that type of thing, and I really don't think you would want it to be. Would you rather have a

by terminalshort 1y ago

Dylan16807 1y ago
> have to get government approval before That is not the only form of regulation, and not the form that would be applied here. This would be after the fact, going after companies that try to pull things like this.
- terminalshort 1y ago
  But companies should be able to pull things like this. If a company isn't paying market rate I see no problem with a competitor destroying it by hiring away all its best employees.
  - Dylan16807 1y ago
    If a competitor gets too big and is using its money to remove competition before it can be challenged, that's a problem. In normal competitive situations this rule wouldn't apply. If one company wants the assets and employees of another company they can go ahead and buy it. And any company can offer better jobs as plain old jobs. The negotiation here was not just some high end job openings.
    - scarface_74 1y ago
      There was no world where Windsurf was going to challenge Google and the same is true for the examples. These were regular old job offers. At any time, any of the employees could have stayed at Windsurf instead of taking a lot more money from Google. Google didn’t want the “assets”. Google wanted the people. Even then they only wanted the best people.
      - Dylan16807 1y ago
        > These were regular old job offers. They were not. > Google didn’t want the “assets”. They paid 2.4 billion in licensing fees. Or something like that, looks like part of that was special structured not a regular old job offer money.