CoolAndComposed

> The key difference with Amazon is that Amazon could choose to be profitable at any time

Wait what? No. They were a loss leader because they kept doubling down on a bad business models until they made headway on the reseller market to push themselves as an online retailer, which brought them out of the red. Only after the massive success of AWS, did they solidify as the most successful retailer because THAT got reinvested.

Notice, Google tries to follow this EXACT model, as it has for decades. It has little profit to show for chasing this fable-strategy because it doesn't work. Grabbing Doubleclick was a minor misstep (there were far superior companies to choose from), but at least they got youtube and were able to keep the boat floating (with a little Ad Tech dust). Riding their search engine product as far as it will go and then building an ad network on top of their search+youtube is where Google has settled.

Amazon has been looking into advertising for the last couple years and will probably be less successful than Google without a big new thing, which is unlikely to come from this mythic "reinvestment". Why does this fairytale story about Bezos keep getting pushed? Successfully keeping a company running is not the same as him being nigh prescient about how to manage the resources.

How does that random thought happen?

Just because we know the Romans used lead, doesn't mean they were the only ones or the only possible cause (both unknown unknowns). There's no contradiction, there's an unshared set of assumptions.

The double standard judgements here are disappointing =/

I don't know a potential employer. Why would I respect them to start? I have expectations, they have expectations and we try to meet in the middle. That's society.

I just get paid very well and like moving up.

I take issue with this is a rather rigid classification of things, that isn't useful, and I hear a lot out of various modern scientist/philosophers.

> There is nothing supernatural; there is nothing outside of or distinct from Nature and independent of its laws and operations.

It's pretty common to associate supernatural with magical because super-natural sounds like beyond the rules of nature, when it can just as easily mean beyond the known rules of nature. If you can't explain events under natural law (rules, whatever), it's practically and effectively supernatural. That doesn't necessarily exclude a future explanation, just because people have been averse or ignorant, to investigate in the past. Straight from history, countless supernatural events have been brought in to the fold.

Otherwise, this guy sounds like he had some contemporary beliefs shared by rationalists.

I've had 15 odd positions in my career. I have no trouble bailing and everyone who stays can continue being miserable. It's not uncommon to hear from past teammates that they should have left sooner. Best time to find a job is when you already have one.

Not working in chrome or ff

Perfection is the enemy of good. You have to have a product before improving it. Blah blah blah. God forbid you tie yourself to that git ecosystem. eyeroll

It's pretty common to notice new details when reviewing things, where you don't need to focus on the same details you did last time.

Foreshadowing is all over in movies, as well as artifacts of cut subplots/scenes. Re: /r/moviedetails

It is compliant to an RFC, just not a specific RFC. That's part of the issue, that's simply taken for granted because of ideology.

Crabbing companies cannot reliably exploit cheap labor this year, whereas other companies will be able to for the first time, in a lottery system (for cheap labor). Seems ok to me.

Just because a server announces HTTP/1.1 doesn't mean it conforms to that specific RFC.