with every tech company
Clearly the problem here is unbridled capitalism, so why are you crying about tech companies specifically??
Comment on A Googler who just resigned after 18 years reflects on the decline of the company he loved
PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 11 months ago
This is the moral of every tech company. FFS, learn and keep the greeds out.
I do think the clock is ticking, though. The deterioration of Google’s culture will eventually become irreversible, because the kinds of people whom you need to act as moral compass are the same kinds of people who don’t join an organisation without a moral compass.
Fades@lemmy.world 11 months ago
PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 11 months ago
You’re not wrong, but why not add onto it instead of being so aggressive. Tech companies do seem especially bad, but that’s probably because I live in Seattle.
linearchaos@lemmy.world 11 months ago
And then don’t ever, ever go public. Once you go public all the greedy people will insist that you install more greedy people.
phoneymouse@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I think this is a big reason Valve did not go public
notonReddit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
Dread the day when it does
AeroLemming@lemm.ee 11 months ago
It’s been so long. I hope it just never does, which is a real possibility. The only danger is that it might go public if Gabe Newell dies and whoever his next of kin is wants to cash out.
nieceandtows@programming.dev 11 months ago
Yeah I’m not holding my breath. Hope Gabe isn’t either because if he is, it only speeds up the process.
stevedidwhat_infosec@infosec.pub 11 months ago
I think it’s less about going public and moreso about the people that have the ability to get to the head of that line via funds.
Why should Joe Shmoe who’s family fortune is based off mafia and cartel funds get to have say in your company? Just because of the money?
I don’t get it. I’m probably naive to facets of this process - open to hearing/learning more from more informed people
Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 11 months ago
Yes. Becasue it is Joe Shmoe's money that funds the company while it builds the product. Without the money, there is no product.
Going public is a big issue, that is how Joe Shmoe gets his payback. He is the one pushing for the IPO so they can get paid.
Once that happens, the founders lose what little control they had, the control is always with the people that supply the money in the end.
stevedidwhat_infosec@infosec.pub 11 months ago
Right I get it, money is needed for growth.
But maybe we just don’t need to grow so much. What if we let that excess need (due to lack of supply) spill over into competition with people who also don’t want the whole public traded, board room setup?
Idk taking the money out of business seems impossible no matter how you cut it. Maybe more self hosted and crowd hosted stuff is one solution? What are your thoughts in terms of solutions?
wtfeweguys@lemmy.whynotdrs.org 11 months ago
The solution I’m most interested in is eliminating the friction to seed/early stage funding coming directly from interested user communities and even better would be to also draw as much of the labor pool as possible from the same group.
I think this eliminates most of the misalignments in stakeholder interest.
We already have equity crowdfunding in the states. We need more innovation in crowdfunding platforms.
linearchaos@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Good, healthy, properly running companies that don’t owe their existence to a lot of external forces don’t go public.
Going public only pays off the stakeholders in the company, like venture capitalists or employees that were under salaried and offered stock as a bonus.
MondayToFriday@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
Once you accept venture capital, you’re pretty much down the path to going public, because the investors have an expectation of realizing their gains if the company is successful.