Tim Cook of apple got paid $92 million in 2022 - a massive degree of overcompensation in my opinion, and an amount he got sued for.
If he got paid at a comparable percentage of revenue to spez last year that would have been (amusingly) a 92 Billion dollar paycheck - 1000x as much.
Regardless of how much I dislike the guy personally investors should be running away screaming from this IPO.
So… the asshole who used reddits “unprofitability” as a fig leaf for hamstringing their user base with a garbage API policy just so happens to be the same guy that got paid 25% of the entire company revenue for the last year?
What a Fucking chode.
That can vary widely across industry and circumstance. I’ve stayed with the same company (granted through a couple mergers) and grown my comp more than 10x in that time.
And while I’m not at all advocating for being any more loyal to a company than they are to you, I can definitely say seeing a big string of quick flips in jobs in their resume is a big red flag for me when hiring people.
I don’t mind people having a practical attitude to comp, but in my line of work at least I find it takes a good few months of orientation for someone to start adding real value anyway. Definitely not something I’m looking to repeat all the time with folks I hire. Granted, I also work damn hard to earn some loyalty and put “my money where my mouth is” for my people, I’d often not the case.
In any event, I’d definitely agree you’ve got to keep a close eye on your own self interest. You may run into bosses and companies that will do right by you like I have, but there is sure as hell no guarantee of it and precious little way to tell the difference till you’ve spent time there.
Why wouldn’t we include a server call on every button press? We need usage data to optimize the experience!
These assholes will stop at nothing to get you to upgrade.
You tell me. Your user name suggests some expertise.
Next time you have to fart just squeeze your butt cheeks together real hard. It’ll pop right out.
deleted by creator
Oh I think that’s probably true, but the question assumed it taking place
If governments started regulating bitcoin because it was proof of work based then people aren’t going to pump real money into another proof of work scheme to replace it - why would they take the risk of it happening again when there are alternatives? the mining profit margins would disappear and so would they.
Don’t forget flings with Octopus Face and A Literal Demon.
Joke’s on you. That’s an owl.
Can you blame em? Things are much better down where it’s wetter, much hotter under the water UNDER DA SEAAAaaaaa!
Last three cats I’ve roomed with all have zero interest in catnip. My disappointment is immeasurable.
Oh definitely lots of places under hire, that wasn’t really what I was getting at. I meant if someone is in a full time role at a job and has enough free time to take a whole as other job without any apparent impact on his output, odds are good they have a lot more people on the team than they really need and a good proportion of people’s time gets spent on the illusion of work getting done more so than the substance.
It’s nice when a company just comes right out and tells you not to bother even considering the garbage they’re shoveling.
I manage a decent sized team of salaried people and I am 100% behind this.
If I were to have a criticism it would be of management hiring more people than they really need, not paying good wages, and/or not recognizing when one of their people is ready for a bigger role.
It’s never happened on my team that I know of, but if I were to run into that case and my guy was getting his job done properly then zero fucks would be given.
The only ideal that type of company has at its heart is the pursuit of profit. If they see a real cure that costs less than the long term “maintenance” care they would be all over it. If not, then not.
Novel cancer treatments aren’t a terribly good comparison in my opinion. Rarely does a single one in isolation offer a clear and permanent cure - though with any categorization that broad there are of course exceptions.
Hell, when scientists identify care that is likely enough to prevent the need of reactive treatment insurance companies often make it free to lower their overall costs - teeth cleaning and flu shots for example. That’s not altruism on their part, it’s economics.
The way that article is written is a little vague, but it sounds like that is how much cash and stock he received just last year - independent of any gain he received from the value of his existing stock going up.