dunpeal

122 ms·

451.
by dunpeal 8y ago
I'm wondering the same. Two growing trends that I'm observing: 1. Businesses moving out of California, especially NorCal. Sergey Brin already said two years ago that he would not have started Google in NorCal today. He was right.
452.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Absolutely. This will increase demand and raise prices.
453.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> And that is by Mountain View that only applies to a single office development. That is not true. The rule applies to all new offices in MTV. The Facebook office just happens to be the first new office that was completed with the intent
454.
by dunpeal 8y ago
The Googleplex has over 20,000 employees, and food trucks are among the least efficient ways to feed them. You'd have huge convoys of food trucks entering and leaving the Googleplex for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Access control is v
455.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> Facebook could open a restaurant in the center. How would that work for a huge complex like the Googleplex? They'd have to provide public access to all parts of their complex to comply. > So for example, it could charge the pub
456.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Different kind of hippies, I believe.
457.
by dunpeal 8y ago
To be fair, there are a lot of efficiency gains and economies of scale involved. Google pays a lot less to provide an employee with a nutritious, healthy meal than the same employee would be paying for a less healthy meal in your typical lo
458.
by dunpeal 8y ago
So over 20,000 employees would leave the Googleplex every day at noon to get lunch? This just means the next massive campus complex will not open in Mountain View. Big profitable companies and their hordes of tax paying employees will go el
459.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> Solving the basics is incredibly important. Ah, but you see, it is also difficult! "Dirty streets" and "traffic congestion" are big, messy problems, requiring careful planning, managing projects and contractors, adv
460.
by dunpeal 8y ago
If they don't want their suburb to turn into SF or Manhattan, then they're definitely taking the wrong turn by introducing this legislation. Instead of a suburban office location, they are actively encouraging urbanization: more r
461.
by dunpeal 8y ago
You think? In my opinion, it's the manifestation of the hippy culture of the 60s and 70s. California was never a hands-off state, never had the hands-off tradition that Texas had. I don't see any reason to expect that the same st
462.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> But that will only last a decade or two before they turn Austin (or wherever) into SF 2.0 and all the business goes elsewhere. I don't think local government in Texas is as amenable to well-meaning but ultimately intrusive and dis
463.
by dunpeal 8y ago
MTV isn't "hostile" to tech. It just got greedy and is trying to get more out of its resident tech companies. "So we have all these big tech companies opening offices in our town... How do we get more out of them... Let&
464.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Mountain View is the quintessential suburb.
465.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> I, as a 20 year SF resident, would much prefer Aaron Peskin do something about the feces and hypodermic needles before he worries about cafeterias. But that would require him to deal with various unlawful behaviors and individuals! Muc
466.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> Ha! So one more perk that only existing, large, entrenched players can offer. A level playing field indeed. Yup, this exemption makes this idea even worse. > Does this include ordering a pizza to a war room or is it specific to a se
467.
San Francisco Weighs Ban on Employee Cafeterias(sacbee.com)
27 points by dunpeal 8y ago|14 comments
468.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Don't forget the tech cartel that suppressed wages by non-poaching agreements. Several of the most prominent tech employers in the US illegally colluded for years to deprive employees of billions of dollars of wages. It was an open and
469.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> Wave and Hello.com each had over 50 engineers, and Andy Rubin spent several hundred million (perhaps billions) on robotics acquisitions, all for projects that ended up getting canceled. And they all got canceled once their business cas
470.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> So their manager asks them "Well, what is it you really want to work on? Maybe we can make it happen here and you don't have to leave all the perks of Google behind." The engineer says "I've always wanted to do
471.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Sure, that's more reasonable. You're describing a match between business needs (the potential Android successor - quite an important business target) and a critical mass of senior engineers eager to work on the product. I'm s
472.
by dunpeal 8y ago
For a functional employer, the definition of "a good engineer" is "someone who produces valuable engineering solutions for me". An engineer who isn't doing that is either mismanaged, misplaced, or is no good. In the
473.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> $50M is tiny compared to the opportunity cost of having 100 of your best engineers jump ship to a competitor or found a new one. See my comment to nnq. You can't just take "100 of your best engineers", and stick them on
474.
by dunpeal 8y ago
This sounds good in theory, but in practice what you're describing will not be stable, sustainable, or at all practical. You can't really run this sort of revolving-door "talent pool" project for long, certainly not a ma
475.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Having multiple competing projects is not unheard of in the business world in general, and in high-achieving technology businesses in particular. Often, those outside the organization are only aware of the winning project, and the others ar
476.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Per the article, Google has over 100 engineers working on Fuchsia. If these are all "senior engineers" that "Google is trying to retain", the cost of keeping them must be at least 50 million per year. That's a lot o
477.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> there are ways to monetize android profitably for google without resorting to anticompetitive contracts. Interesting! What are these ways?
478.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Yeah, not disputing that. Like I wrote, they have an interesting value proposition. The line about disrupting a huge market is still par the course, what's expected of them.
479.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Standard founder bravado. This is basically part of their pitch. "If we are right, then we're going to dominate the market that all the big boys are investing billions to control." (Not being disparaging at all - their value
480.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Are you getting paid your market rate in cash? Did you do a bit of searching, and failed to find anyone who would pay you substantially more? Are you OK with working hard, including these weekends you mentioned? If the answers to all these

More ›