721
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 155 points 1 year ago

This is the moral of every tech company. FFS, learn and keep the greeds out.

I do think the clock is ticking, though. The deterioration of Google's culture will eventually become irreversible, because the kinds of people whom you need to act as moral compass are the same kinds of people who don't join an organisation without a moral compass.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 195 points 1 year ago

And then don't ever, ever go public. Once you go public all the greedy people will insist that you install more greedy people.

[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 94 points 1 year ago

I think this is a big reason Valve did not go public

[-] stevedidwhat_infosec@infosec.pub 14 points 1 year ago

I think it’s less about going public and moreso about the people that have the ability to get to the head of that line via funds.

Why should Joe Shmoe who’s family fortune is based off mafia and cartel funds get to have say in your company? Just because of the money?

I don’t get it. I’m probably naive to facets of this process - open to hearing/learning more from more informed people

[-] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 38 points 1 year ago

Why should Joe Shmoe who’s family fortune is based off mafia and cartel funds get to have say in your company? Just because of the money?

Yes. Becasue it is Joe Shmoe's money that funds the company while it builds the product. Without the money, there is no product.

I think it’s less about going public

Going public is a big issue, that is how Joe Shmoe gets his payback. He is the one pushing for the IPO so they can get paid.

Once that happens, the founders lose what little control they had, the control is always with the people that supply the money in the end.

[-] stevedidwhat_infosec@infosec.pub 15 points 1 year ago

Right I get it, money is needed for growth.

But maybe we just don’t need to grow so much. What if we let that excess need (due to lack of supply) spill over into competition with people who also don’t want the whole public traded, board room setup?

Idk taking the money out of business seems impossible no matter how you cut it. Maybe more self hosted and crowd hosted stuff is one solution? What are your thoughts in terms of solutions?

[-] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

I have no idea how we move forward.

Maybe more self hosted and crowd hosted stuff is one solution?

Currently private finding rounds hinge on convincing a few people who control millions to fund you. Part of that is showing them often highly confidential details of what you are trying to create.

Crowd finding would be much. much more difficult. Now you have to convince millions of people to give you funding, possibly exposing you to having your ideas stolen before you can develop them.

Now you have to convince millions of people to give you funding

There are examples of people doing this. Cooperatives can be owned by the workers or by the customers. They're usually cheaper too.

They don't have the "move fast and break things" mentality however because by nature they don't have a billionaire sponsors, so it's harder to complete in a venture capitalist world. It's when big money dries up, like the great depression, when you'll see them popping up.

[-] rambaroo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

It's worked to a fair degree in gaming but yeah, not really a viable solution. Especially because the crowd itself is slowly getting robbed of its money.

the market itself is garbage. its a hot mess of under/over regulation by all the wrong actors.

tax stock trades. ever single one. tax stock ownership. tax the everliving fuck out of the stock market.

[-] wtfeweguys@lemmy.whynotdrs.org 1 points 1 year ago

The solution I’m most interested in is eliminating the friction to seed/early stage funding coming directly from interested user communities and even better would be to also draw as much of the labor pool as possible from the same group.

I think this eliminates most of the misalignments in stakeholder interest.

We already have equity crowdfunding in the states. We need more innovation in crowdfunding platforms.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Good, healthy, properly running companies that don't owe their existence to a lot of external forces don't go public.

Going public only pays off the stakeholders in the company, like venture capitalists or employees that were under salaried and offered stock as a bonus.

[-] MondayToFriday@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Once you accept venture capital, you're pretty much down the path to going public, because the investors have an expectation of realizing their gains if the company is successful.

load more comments (14 replies)
this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2023
721 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

60123 readers
3948 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS