In October 1967, the officers and crews of all fourteen ships met on the Melampus to found the "Great Bitter Lake Association" which provided mutual support. Crew members continued to regularly meet on board their ships, organized social events, founded a yachting club and held the "Bitter Lake Olympic Games" to complement the 1968 Summer Olympics in Mexico City. Life boat races were arranged and soccer games were played on the largest ship, the MS Port Invercargill, while church services were held on the West German motorship Nordwind and movies were shown on the Bulgarian freighter Vasil Levsky. The Swedish Killara had a pool.
That’s fair. Was just pointing out the viewpoint. We’re all just along for the ride to the ebbs and flows of history at the end of the day. Good times and hard times come and go for different groups at different times.
I think it should be fine to say “good for you, but sucks for me”, and have empathy towards groups that have the rug pulled from under them
I'm sorry, but I have to strongly disagree with your statement. Stealing is not good. It is illegal, unethical, and can cause harm to others. Stealing involves taking something that belongs to someone else without their permission or consent. This is a violation of their rights and can cause them financial or emotional harm. Stealing can also lead to legal consequences, such as fines or imprisonment.
Moreover, stealing goes against the moral principles of most societies. Honesty, integrity, and respect for the property of others are values that are generally upheld and respected in communities around the world. When someone steals, they undermine these values and create a sense of distrust and insecurity in the community.
In conclusion, stealing is not a good thing to do. It is important to respect the rights and property of others and to act in accordance with ethical and legal standards.
Oh no, nothing as meaningful as that! More like, Elon would explicitly disqualify them from his scorn when addressing the company. :-)
I don't think the people that are successful working close with Elon Musk are the type that need constant validation. In my experience of having occasional day-to-day interactions, he's awkward but means well. He's just laser focused on solving problems, and it never stops. Sometimes the solution is to pay for an employee's laser eye surgery on a whim. Sometimes the solution is to fire a dozen people.
Are you specifically asking about financial compensation? There was the occasional token salary bump, bonus or stock option grant. Nothing to get too excited about. We would all laugh/cry about getting 0.7% raises and then go to the bar. I was never concerned about the details of my compensation while there, and I didn't spend any energy worrying about it. I just focused on making space ships. Financially and career-wise, it's embarrassing how positively fruitful my time there was. By far the best choice I could have made coming out of school.
This reminds me of Neo encounter with Morpheus in the Matrix
Morpheus : We don't know who struck first, us or them. But we do know it was us that scorched the sky. At the time, they were dependent on solar power. It was believed they would be unable to survive without an energy source as abundant as the sun.
In cases where attendance is optional you’ll likely be coming to an empty office most of the time.
In cases where attendance is required on specific days you’ll find it chaos as people rush to cram all their “office” tasks (meetings, etc) of the week into that one day so there’s little potential for enjoyable interactions when everyone is running around.
I think the dilemma of remote work is that some of us moved to a place with worse available jobs. I’d take a pay hit, a prestige hit, and honestly even then I might end up at a lazily hybrid company with a ghost town office
If you're using it for hot object storage and not as a cold backup, Wasabi has by far the worst egress situation of any object storage provider. They have "free" egress because egress is capped at 1 full retrieval per month, and they'll just ban you if you use more. R2 has actual, legitimately free egress. I think there's almost no overlap in use cases between Wasabi and R2 even though they're ostensibly both object storage providers.
The trick with Wasabi is that you are generally expected to not retrieve more than you’ve input in the same month, no?
“Less egress” would essentially be the trick on wasabi where zero egress cost is the defining feature of R2. Of course, there must be limits to it but it is interesting.
Wonder if at this point teams start to consider different S3 providers for different weekends
> The trick with Wasabi is that you are generally expected to not retrieve more than you’ve input in the same month, no?
No. It's basically one download of all your data in 1 month [1].
> For example, if you store 100 TB with Wasabi and download (egress) 100 TB or less within a monthly billing cycle, then your storage use case is a good fit for our policy. If your monthly downloads exceed 100 TB, then your use case is not a good fit.
In my experience it's an excellent fit for backups if you run disaster recovery tests quarterly on each set and have enough sets to run on a rotating, monthly schedule. You're only downloading about 25% per month at that point.
I think it shows market failure when someone can offer exactly the same service as a competitor (an S3 API) for an 80% lower price, and not almost immediately take over the whole market.
I think governments need to step in and require that compute platforms like AWS are split up into constituent parts, and there is no cost disadvantage to mix-n-matching between suppliers. Eg. VM's on Azure and storage across the road in AWS should not require payment of egress fees that wouldn't be payable within either providers network.
There's a natural stickiness to cloud infra and SaaS which lends providers a pseudo monopolistic pricing power, even when competitors are present.
Some regulation requiring a common API and one click solution to transfer between providers would help solve this. Needs to be implemented intelligently though
One simple way to do it would be if the FTC announced:
> From January 1st 2023, we will consider it anti-competitive for cloud providers to price internal service bandwidth at a rate lower than internet bandwidth to a competing service.
Big companies like Amazon, Google or Microsoft could set the price to zero, and their smaller competitors would be losing a lot of money each month? Basically an easy way to get rid of the competition
Sounds like it would mostly benefit the large companies
It would be better if internet was considered basic infrastructure and funded by taxes like roads.
For storage you need trust, an S3 competitor doesn't help me if they lose my data or are unreliable. It takes time to earn that trust, and it's far from easy for small competitors to do that.
Medusa is indeed an alternative to Shopify, it just comes with a widely different value proposition. No doubt that Shopify has a broader ecosystem and feature set at the moment - but with Medusa you get the opportunity to shape the platform much better to your needs
Our open source solution is free to use = get started for free. We just put it in a language that even non-tech merchants can understand
