First person who gets it. It’s 2026, there is no moral panic here. Shareholders don’t care. It’s all completely fake and orchestrated as cover for some other purpose (To offload shares or otherwise).
Legally you're right contract law does not assume that. But realistically your average Joe does not have the resources or time and is not willing to take the risk to sue a megacorp. Contracts only work when lawsuits can happen.
300 years ago average Joes were routinely signing tenant contracts for renting a plot of land from the local aristocrat, the imbalance of power was similar.
The trope of a mortal man making contracts with the devil is quite old. The popular message seems to be to not do it under any circumstances cause you can't outsmart him, even if you're on nominally equal terms.
What nobody understands is people will move on to bigger and badder hobbies, like 100 years ago your hobbies might have been playing cards or maybe woodworking. 100 years from now your hobby won’t be debugging Python exceptions, it will be working on a fusion reactor in a friend’s garage over a couple beers.
Whenever I read comments like these I feel like people are living in a completely different reality.
Most of the tech companies I have worked at are ridiculously easy and generous, I get to work with smart people, and the entire job can be done in a few hours per week. It's not like we're doing manual labor and digging ditches; half the people on this website are laptop-class workers who occasionally use the slightest bit of energy to write a few lines of code or participate in a meeting.
I show up to work and I often do extra because I like it.
The company isn't "extracting" anything from me except the extremely consentual labor I want to give back simply out of the love of the game. If you don't feel that way, the problem isn't the capitalist system it's probably your own life choices.
You’re reading negative valence in technical language that doesn’t mean it. ‘Extraction’ and ‘labor’ aren’t bad, they are technically descriptive. You extract fun and cuteness value from puppies and LeBron labors at basketball. Not an unhappy process in itself, though of course abusive versions exist.
That’s why your happy experience is not inconsistent with this description.
I completely agree and I think smart companies also understand this. There is still a lot of leverage employees have, especially in tech. Tech as "adult daycare" isn't a meme for no reason.
None of this changes the facts of the comment you're responding to. Every business must extract surplus value from their employee's work to be profitable. Nobody said every business has to be miserable, or not mask this extraction in fluffy terms. Doesn't mean it isn't happening though
The correct comparison isn’t him working by himself but with a similar sized cohort where distribution of revenue was fairer. Co-ops are a thing as are the productivity benefits of working with others.
Even if you don’t like the concept of co-ops it’s fairly easy to ask yourself if you would you be more or less motivated if you shared more in the success of a company rather than it being sucked up by shareholders?
How else would they stay in business if they did not make money off your skill/services? Unless you are a non-profit, why would you hire people just to break even or lose money?
You think a company can exist with just executive leadership?
Would love to see just one example of a billion+ valuation company with nothing but C-suite and that against the ratio of companies with 1000+ employees who are worth a billion+. The only two sub-dozen workers that come to mind for me are Theranos and Bernie Madoff and I'm not sure they are examples of success.
I think the 80/20 rule applies to employees correct?. 20% of employees actually do the work that is making money. So for every 8 sitting around doing nearly nothing there's 2 that are actually directly related to revenue.
The way frame rate work on conventional film vs. an LCD are completely different. It’s like trying to ask the bitrate of a Vinyl record.
Conventional film projectors don’t show each frame continuously, they transition the shutter blade smoothly between frames, and projectors often flash each one a couple of times (48 or 72hz). A cinema projector is going to demolish a LCD in smoothness and motion quality even if it technically has a higher refresh rate on paper.
So when remastering from film, do they put each frame into the digital video and keep it 24 fps, or do they play the film and digitally record it at 60 fps to capture the projector effect?
Can you not literally see the frames skip as you move the mouse cursor across the screen? To me it’s OBVIOUS and excruciating and I’m only a light/casual gamer and use all my computers for work.
If I move my cursor slowly I can see the difference, I guess? But I don't habitually do that - I run with mouse/trackpad dialled to maximum acceleration, even at 120Hz there's a skip when you flick the cursor halfway across the screen. And I'm rarely scrolling a line at a time, I'm going page at a time.
I don't really get the obsession with smooth movement for desktop use (as opposed to gaming). Possibly this is a generational thing? Why is anyone intentionally using a computer primarily via slow analogue inputs?
You can trivially fix most of the VRM cooling issues btw by pulling the heat sink off, cleaning thoroughly and re applying fresh thermal pads. At this point almost all of 3090s are degraded in some way since those pads have a lifespan. The good news is it has nothing to do with the GPU itself.
I know it's probably not that difficult, but I always feel anxious doing things like that with expensive components. The thought of being slightly misaligned and causing issues gives me pause. I guess now that it's out of warranty, I have a bit less to lose.
reply