No it is clearly that as the main technical founder of Hashicorp his endorsement means something here. Where as other causes are outside of the area of his expertise.
It’s hard to know what is really true in those situations. Are those bankers actually corrupt? Or were they victims of political targeting? Or was their corruption authorized by a higher power until they were ready to be disposed of? I personally think rule of law is much greater in the US and most of Europe.
Not really. If a banker in China is taken down for political reasons, it’s not evidence that China is more adept at upholding banking corruption laws than the US.
They could just as easily have trumped up treason charges. Whether the charges are valid or not is irrelevant.
Both of these countries are clearly sending a message. Get too greedy, corrupt, ..etc and we will kill you. Whereas in the US there are 0 real consequences. It is the message that is important here.
The US needs to start putting executives involved in these crimes in federal prison with very long sentences. Fining them doesn’t work they need to lose their freedom.
And you're assuming political backroom antics. Neither assumption is borne out in any way beyond the fact you seem to think China is inherently scary because it's China.
What we do know for certain is that Well Fargo, based in the US, has a long and well documented history of financial tom-fuckery that has been proven, in US courts, to be tom-fuckery that they were given absolute, by any standard you'd care to apply, slap-on-the-wrist punishments for.
In contrast, China sentenced a man to die for his financial tom-fuckery that was proven in their justice system to be tom-fuckery. Whether or not you agree with that being his punishment, it was certainly, IMO, more appropriate to at least punish the person responsible rather than parking liability in an LLC, issueing middling fines, and calling it a fucking day. And considering how many times Wells Fargo (and others!) have had these kinds of cases come up, be proven, be slapped with fines that don't even remotely approach a real consequence, and have gone on to do additional tom-fuckery, I'd say it's well established at this point that the fines aren't doing shit.
Like, to be clear, I'm anti-death penalty and that would include bankers, I don't think Wells Fargo's CEO should be shot for what he did. That being said, if him being shot was a possible outcome, I have a strong feeling he'd be much more hesitant to do financial crimes via his business.
> And you're assuming political backroom antics. Neither assumption is borne out in any way beyond the fact you seem to think China is inherently scary because it's China.
I’m not assuming anything. You’re the one claiming that this factoid means something. The onus is entirely on you. A good way to demonstrate this would be something that shows China is systematically less corrupt.
Russia also has arrested individuals for corruption. is that supposed to be evidence that Russia is less corruption friendly than the US?
By the same token: you are making these statements with the same level of certainty as "water is wet": the US is less corrupt because duh. However, the main reason for your argument is mostly marketing: the US has successfully marketed itself as "free" and "fair" over the years. Whether or not this is factual is very much debatable.
Oh, and don't bother looking up studies by US-based think tanks ranking the US as awesome at fighting corruption. Because duh.
There are many studies that are not run by the US. Even the US based one’s tend to put the US at maybe the bottom of the top quartile. There’s many countries that score significantly better. I think it’s kind of stupid to argue that corruption is more prevalent in the US than China, but mostly I’m just here to shit on the argument that a cherry picked conviction is worth anything as an argument that corruption is less tolerated.
Targeted convictions on charges of corruption are like the hallmark of corrupt governments. It’s not a useful data point at all.
Pretty much all of South America has some version of this as well. Colombia has “transferencia” which is awesome and even as a foreigner I could pay someone using cash at an ATM machine.
I am actually your target market. We are looking to buy a house early next year. But, one thing that put me off is that you don’t list what fees you charge, is it flat rate or a percentage, ..etc.
In the FAQ I see this but no mention of the standard terms of the buyers agreement:
> Do I need to sign a buyer agreement?
> We will let you know if you need to sign a buyer agreement. You will for sure need to sign a buyer agreement when you submit an offer through us, but otherwise we can work out a timeline.
I know you just launched so not assuming any bad intent but it would be good to share pricing information for the services you offer. I have had to deal with lots of “Call us for pricing” in my day job. So, for stuff like this I just move on if I don’t see at least a price range listed somewhere upfront.
Other relators do not put their fee pricing on their websites so we decided to follow suit. We have the same pricing model - negotiable. But we provide better service.
Why would we mimic Redfin, who's a fairly small & declining player in the real restate brokerage space, when we could mimic features of much more successful players like Keller Williams
Minimum for me to work with a company is transparent pricing. Even a range based on levels of service is cool. But, I am not going to waste time on a phone call with no clue as to fee structure.
The whole agent commission business is already fully shady and at least one class action brought that to light[1]. Both buyer and seller agents benefit from higher home prices and from percentage based commission despite the work being the same regardless of home price. The customers are always the victim.
We are not participating in the race to the bottom. There are a lot of 0% fee realtors out there! Try https://www.turbohome.com/, I've seen them on social media
I was so excited when I saw this and now I'm disappointed. This kind of statement "quit on trying to win clients that are trying to get the best price" creates a false dichotomy of those who are trying to pay nothing and those willing pay whatever. There are tons of customers in the middle who are happy to pay for important services but think 30K (3% in high COL areas) is too much for the services rendered.
That being said, I think as long as you are honest that "better pricing" isn't your goal then fair enough. It isn't the service for me, but I'm sure some folks will certainly be excited about it.
Your communication style in this thread is adversarial and curt, yet you aim to provide good service. You clearly have a very, very long personal journey ahead of you if you want to satisfy the good service objective.
...So being up-front with your pricing, even if that's a "our fees are negotiable but tend to be (flat rate or percentage) around the X range" is a "race to the bottom"?
So 3% and even lower touch service, oh yea “the seller pays for it” right? Buyer Agents are already grossly overpaid for the amount of actual work involved IMO, you so much as pointed that out in your stated value prop except found a way to keep the greedy commissions and not actually improve anything for the buyer.
There’s flat fee agents that will do exactly this without AI and at a cost of $500-1000 where I live. You should do that and go for volume. Edit: Oh and their offer doc includes a clause that effectively negates the 3% buyer commission and nets seller the same amount without letting their agent keep the full 6%
If you could normalize this, you will have truly disrupted the industry. As is, your an ai substitution for status quo
I don't know a single home buyer who likes that though. You have an opportunity to differentiate by moving away from the obnoxious dynamic that exists today.
The texting service we provide works similarly to texting a regular realtor. You can text it "Is a $1200 HOA fee per month high for san francisco?" and it will do the searches and compare the local properties to tell you an answer
I'm a licensed agent in CA and am particularly interested in the answer to this question.
There's very strict regulation around unlicensed individuals performing activities requiring a license (negotiating, showing property, etc). Thus I would be surprised if they have AI doing this for a client!
Aren’t you trying to be better than them though? People need to know that they are saving money with your new and unproven service that could go awry in so many ways.
People buying consumer products typically believe in price signaling. We've actually had clients believe in our services much more at full price than when we were discount a couple months ago.
The default question when we charged a discount price was - "but what am I missing out on if I choose you?" - and even when we said "Nothing!" clients bought into the discount pricing signal already and could not be swayed. This question is never asked at full price
It was actually worse than that. It was Tesla’s GPUs and the board refused to even address it. I was actually a bit surprised that something hasn’t come of that yet.
I wrote an ansible pipeline that pushes config backups, json and ndjson, to a GitHub repo. It just uses the “git” cli tool to clone the repo, commit any changes, and push those commits to “origin/main”.
Only piece that you have to be a bit careful with the guarding credentials or token you will be using for the “git” commands. In my case we use Hashicorp Vault for secrets management so I can just checkout the token to use from there.
Broadcom is just a Private Equity firm cosplaying as a tech company. This is just what they do. They don’t care if it dies as long as they are able to get every last drop of blood from their -victims- customers.
The company I work for started migration planning right when the acquisition gained approval. We all knew what would happen and have a “no Broadcom” policy when it comes to software.
If you read the article, the OOP was running a gambling site so it is fairly reasonable for Cloudflare not to want their IP blocks to be associated with that.
It’s a communication failure on CF’s end, but it’s not an ordinary situation.
And all of that is fine when communicated properly. Even if OP is an unreliably narrator are we to believe they also left out some of CF's emails?
To me it looks like https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_pr... is entirely the wrong email to send in the situation and if you are as old as I am and come from where I come from, you will have flashbacks to "reading between the lines" of the party daily in the 1980s. The real content is at the bottom:
> As we have a very short window to report back to Trust & Safety team, please let me know if you can make time tomorrow
Big red flashing lights: the right questions are 1) why is T&S involved at all 2) What are their concerns which forces such a hurried deadline? 3) What are the consequences of missing this deadline.
The right email would start with something like this:
> Providing services to your business constitutes serious legal risk to Cloudflare. We are happy to work with you in the future if you are buying an Enterprise plan. As we need to commit significant resources to accommodate you, we need an annual commitment. Otherwise, with much regret we need to terminate our services provided to you as it is our right per Terms on date/time. ("We may at our sole discretion terminate your user account or Suspend or terminate your use or access to the Service at any time, with or without notice for any reason or no reason at all.")
I did read it and understand that they are running a gambling site. CFs handling of it though where they instead took this as an opportunity for high pressure upsell is the scummy part.
Why wouldn’t they allow them to pay monthly for enterprise? This would allow them to use their own IPs, eliminating the risk to CF, and allow for an orderly migration off the platform if they wanted. Forcing an annual contract with a massive price tag is again just scummy sales tactics.
Also after reading that and searching a bit it looks like this isn’t the first time that CF has had these types of “communication failures”.
EDIT: a few words to clarify what I meant on the lack of a monthly option in this exchange.
Ten thousand percent. When I read the article earlier they made the email something to the tune of "CF engineering says your account is seriously messing up our network. contact us to resolve this"
and it was a sales call. scummy as hell to get your kpis
reply