Obviously there is a ton unsaid in this blog post, but I just wanted to answer your question because it's exceedingly common for companies to be sold, sometimes for lots of money, and for common stock (which is what employees hold) to get wiped out. If the startup was sold for $350 million, but it received $350 or more million in funding, the investors get (some of) their money back, and employees get nothing. This happens all the time.
Again, I don't know what happened in the author's specific case, but think it's important to know that lots of startups have exits that can look big on paper but still are a wipeout for common equity.
Seems like a silly excuse. If his concern is that Israel could use Replit for military purposes, then SA is perfectly capable of doing the same. And SA has - directly or indirectly - killed more people in Yemen than Israel has in Gaza.
I mean, if he was really consistent, he'd also not be operating a business in America, given America is responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent civilians (more than Israel and SA combined) in recent history.
I'd love to hear an argument for this being true that doesn't involve counting all of the deaths caused by Sunni-Shia sectarian violence in Iraq, suicide bombings in civilian markets, ISIS etc. as caused by America.
Well there's Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Libya etc which would tally ~300k civilian deaths alone. Given the blatantly false pretences that America invaded Iraq under, and the sectarian violence that significantly flared post-Saddam, I don't see why you'd not want to involve Iraq in the stats?
I accept US responsibility for a great many of the civilian deaths caused in Vietnam. I don't accept US responsibility for Islamists of different varieties blowing up each other's markets and places of worship with weapons provided by Iran and Syria.
So you don't accept the fact that a lot of this sectarian violence flared after the toppling of Saddam, which was because of the US? And how many of the deaths do you attribute to the sectarian violence, as opposed to the direct actions of the US in the region?
That was caused by a power vacuum and US's intentional act to oust the Ba'ath Party, remove all control from a country and it will fall to chaos especially when blood feuds are involved .
This seems to be a theme of people with certain political inclinations. "It's really America's fault they're blowing themselves up in crowded markets because...."
After toppling Saddam Hussein the US took political control in the country and decided who got to decide what. The slaughter that followed was a direct and rather predictable result of this.
You might be into that. The rest of us like to analyse things honestly, especially given America is going down the route of making the same moves as history. If you don't see that, then it'd probably be better for you to go read something than to offer pithy comments on here.
What is your preferred term for individuals and groups whose stated goal is to create a non-pluralistic religious state advantaging specifically their own religious sect, and whose means involves committing public mass killing of civilians along sectarian religious lines?
Am I in some weird alternative universe where Israel did not just engage in a genocidal campaign against a population of Palestinians that are descendants of refugees from their prior genocidal campaign? Israel just finished killing probably over a hundred thousand civilians. The displaced the majority of Gaza. They destroyed the vast majority of its hospitals and universities and public infrastructure. They killed foreign aid workers even after those foreign aid workers cleared their routes with Israelis. Israeli soldiers raped Palestinians on camera. Then those solders were celebrated on public Israeli television and by the Israeli government. Attempts to prosecute those solders resulted in punishment for the prosecutors.
Is Saudi Arabia a human rights violator? Yeah and so is a bunch of western governments. But no modern government comes close to the abuses of the Israeli government and Israeli military. This is the view of the free people of this world.
Not only there is not a good argument for considering 1948 war a genocide on Palestinians but there is a much stronger argument Arabs have tried to genocide Jews (especially to those who think who think there was a genocide in Gaza because of starvation as a weapon of war + intent):
1. In 1948 Arab forces besieged Jerusalem and they were starting to run out of food.
2. Azzam Pasha, General Secretary of the Arab League, famously threatened "a war of extermination and a momentous massacre", Fawzi al-Qawuqji, commander of the Arab Liberation Army said that "we will have to initiate total war. We will murder, wreck and ruin everything standing in our way, be it English, American or Jewish.". Hell, several have even extended the threats to not just the Jews of Mandatory Palestine, but to Jews of the Arab world as a whole, such as Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Said("if a satisfactory solution of the Palestine case was not reached, severe measures should be taken against all Jews in Arab countries.") or the head of the Egyptian delegation to the General Assembly, Muhammad Hussein Heykal("the lives of 1,000,000 Jews in Muslim countries would be jeopardized by the establishment of a Jewish state." ). As Matiel Mughannam, head of the Arab Women's Organization in Palestine put it in an interview with Nadia Lourie in January 1948, "The UN decision has united all Arabs, as they have never been united before, not even against the Crusaders.... [A Jewish state] has no chance to survive now that the `holy war' has been declared. All the Jews will eventually be massacred. " (See Benny Morris' 1948 for sources on all of these)
Please. There is literally documentaries with retirement age Israelis laughing about the horrible things they did to ethnically cleanse Jaffa and Haifa and various parts of historic Palestine. You accepting real war crimes that have happened repeatedly — from before Israel to now — at the hands of blood thirsty European Zionist settlers against Palestinians because of some rhetoric of Arab leaders? The way Zionists can act like victims when their victims get angry and fight back. It’s like that famous quote by that Ukrainian settler of Palestine that was a prime minister “we will never forgive the Arabs for making us kill their children” or something like that. Psychopaths.
Typical hasbara whataboutism, equating a statement by one guy that may or may not have been said 70 years ago to a livestream slaughter we just witnessed, where more than 50% of Israelis say "not enough force was used", not just offhanded remarks by radical leaders, which there are literal gigabytes of from Israelis of all walks of life. Just open up any popular political figure's Twitter and you'll see the most horrific statements, and not just statements, but action.
It isn't whataboutism to point out a wrong claim. Which statement is "a statement by one guy that may or may not have been said 70 years ago"? I gave four. I have made no claims about the current situation (and there was also plenty of action in 1948).
In my experience, this kind of productivity can only be seen in small startups or, if in a large company, on an entirely new product line when processes like test coverage, reviews, etc are lax. In large firms and existing code-bases, it can take weeks to even get the approach decided. Even once decided, any pull request larger than a few dozen lines will get shot down.
Things are even worse if you're working across time zones because the to-and-fro on pull requests takes several days to be completed.
As I understand it, a benefit of H-1B visa's employees is that they are more incentivized to not talk back since they would not only lose their job but also lose their visa.
I've heard a similar thing with student houses in the Netherlands. House owners often prefer international female students because they are less likely to know their rights or come up for their rights.
yes, despite lots of anecdotes of them being paid more or similar. glassdoor has an article saying they're paid higher but their methodology is crap - it doesn't account for the size of the employer (which tend to be much larger on average if they're hiring lots of h1b, and also pay higher) and that h1b workers are likely later in career than entry level. also glassdoor's customers are companies, so of course they're going to toe the line.
a better source is Economic Policy Institute, which is associated with left-wing people and so therefore presumably not being anti-immigrant, says:
"DOL lets H-1B employers undercut local wages. Sixty percent of H-1B positions certified by the U.S. Department of Labor are assigned wage levels well below the local median wage for the occupation."
1. https://getbootstrap.com/