Unlike a startup that pays with illiquid RSUs, Meta paid its people extremely well for its bets though. I dont think Zuck is a great leader at all, but he’s definitely willing to pay for talent.

To add to this, I would assume that advertisers are more diverse and numerous than donors are, therefore reducing the influence any single one of them can have.

Calling it "just a speculative research project" is severely underestimating how big of an effort Fuschia was. At its peak it had a couple hundred eng IIRC.

I don't think that description underestimates it at all. Google took a moonshot and threw a lot of resources at it, but they in no way put eggs in that basket so when it didn't yield something substantial they just scattered the team and now they keep trying to get something out of that investment.

Not that I disagree with you, but I’ve heard of such tactic being used in some orgs at both Google and Microsoft as well.

It seems like a common conclusion from a management that wants to push for AI adoption. I doubt it’s super effective, but we’ll see how it turns out.

It gets worse, my corp is tech adjacent at best, so we get push to use AI, but also get heavily restricted tokens, ridiculous limits on internal tooling ( think context for one short prompt ) and expectation that now one should be able to create the $result fast anyway...

Edit: and if you question that, you are a troublemaker to add to the list

Having worked in big tech, I can almost guarantee you you’re overthinking this.

I’ll never forget how when I was at Google, every email with subject line “An update on X” meant X was getting axed. Like, just say so in the subject line…

It got to the point where people were sarcastically posting "An update on <myself>" when sending goodbye emails.

Wow, exempting people over 60 from property tax is such a fiscal self-own... The way to do it is to provide a deferral with interest which becomes a lien on your property. This way you can still live in your house, take advantage of your asset appreciating and the county still gets its taxes in the end (and can better handle the delayed cash flows). King County in WA does this for example.

> That's 600 million per year in revenue.

According to your math, that's $600 million per day

Yes, the GP wrote the wrong unit on this place. That supports his conclusion that the pay-off would take decades, if it was actually per year, it would take several centuries.

> Meta is going to surpass Google this year in revenue. I agree on the diversification front though

Meta might surpass Google on _digital advertising revenue_.

Google's overall revenue is still ~2x Meta's

What you're saying is all true, but typically road design influence driving speed more than anything. Changing speed limits rarely has an impact on that (at least in the US).

Not sure, but I think that in the Netherlands a municipality is not allowed to slap some 30kmh road signs along a roadway and call it a day. If the street does not 'communicate' that it is designed for that velocity, i.e. it is too broad, too many car lanes, then it must be adapted first to slow down traffic. There are a number of interesting design guidelines and manuals on the web, like CROW [0] for bicycle traffic, applied across the Netherlands.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CROW_Design_Manual_for_Bicycle...

That's how it should work but the UK definitely doesn't do that. I don't think the US does either.

One thing that may also help: an Amsterdam local told me that virtually all drivers there (and their parents/kids) are cyclists _also_, and so have more empathy for bikes and tend to operate motor vehicles safely them.

Really you should do both. Otherwise you do end up with roads that feel like you have to go slow but nominally you're allowed to go fast (and some drivers will certainly take that opportunity).