I’m by no means saying that they have no further role in the company, and you are absolutely correct that these companies need to continue to innovate. This is why I mentioned transitioning control to a better candidate, because the role of the CEO changes as the company matures.
Smart founders should find a way to continue to play into their strengths instead of clinging to the highest title, otherwise they will always need to be removed.
Generally the type of people who make good founders have to be dreamers to believe that their crazy idea not only can work but can change the world.
These people do not make good leaders as the company matures, as it now needs certainty for investors and detailed plans and structure instead of moonshot fantasies.
The same traits that make them good founders also make it difficult for them to let go of their position, or recognize that they should transition control to a better suited candidate, so often they must be removed by the board.
Source: Software Engineer in a tech startup
For me personally, the answer to the original question would be “only once no other non-violent means are available”.
Does this resonate, or would you consider it different to your perspective? I see them as similar.
Surely protecting is by definition preemptive since it means you are not allowing the violence against yourself or someone else to occur? Not saying your first point is wrong just doesn’t seem consistent to me.
Only revenge/retribution would not be preemptive which imo is not better.
Highly recommend the podcast ‘It’s probably not aliens’ if you want to find out more about the real history of the claims made in these kind of shows, and how the claims of aliens are often rooted in racism and colonialism
Delete this before the EA CEO sees it please.
Totally agree. There’s no reason to respond to posts where the OP on Reddit will never see it, and the bot posts drown out any genuine user posts.
It works for a small number of cases, but on the whole it’s a misguided attempt to fake content instead of growing communities naturally and it needs to go.
Monetization: Providing a way for people to pay for something they want
Exploitation: Making people pay outside their means for something they need, or feel like they need (usually bc of FOMO)
ARM is also expanding hugely into the autonomous vehicle space, given the amount of computing required in cars is increasing and low power is very desirable.
RISC-V is an interesting experiment into what an open source ISA looks like, and it is getting funding and interest, but I’d say we’re at least 5-10 years from RISC-V meaningfully competing with ARM’s market share, which it massively dominates currently. It just isn’t a coherent product yet.
Good luck ever doing anything embedded if you always need a clunky IDE. Best thing I ever did was get comfortable in a solely vim/cmake/gcc environment. Even if the majority of work doesn’t require it, it’ll teach you a lot.
Isn’t Dishonored somewhat of a spiritual successor?