"They have very thorough sizing information on their site and they treat customers really well," Ariella Major, a 25-year-old marketing associate and Everlane devotee, says. "Their marketing emails are very inviting and they send you really nice personal emails too. You can tell a thoughtful person wrote it."
A marketer praising the work of another marketer; "you can tell a thoughtful marketing intern wrote it!"
We have not undergone a 409A valuation to determine the current strike price of Clef stock.
So basically, what you're saying, is that unless you're guaranteed to strike it rich, it's better to ask for more salary, more vacation time or other tangibles? Greeeeeat.
I would prefer profit sharing to stock options/equity or actual ownership that means something, such as in a co-operative. It's great they want to make sure they're building a company for the future, but cash now is always better and even better is if it's guaranteed cash in the future too (as with profit sharing where you can actually see the increase or with performance bonuses where you can actually see if they're shrinking or growing).
I'm glad they separated out react from the DOM. This makes it much more likely that people will export the ideas and the API of React to other languages. The API is sane for data-flow programming and the lifecycle is well-defined. The separation of properties from state can be useful in other contexts.
Indeed, it's something you can really appreciate on a university campus where most everything you need as a student is within 10 minutes of walking. Amazing how easily we give that up for a fat paycheck and a mortgage.
I'm about to go from a 40min commute to an hour and a half commute (or so). It's quite astounding how many people commute in from the suburbs to downtown when it would be much easier and cheaper just to setup smaller offices in the suburbs or allow more remote work.
It's also amazing to me that after 30+ years, the suburbs are barely built up. It's somehow economically sustainable to move a bunch of people from point A to point B but not to have point A built up with more shops, industry, etc.
That distinction gets very weird. If it's a full-time project, they are working on it full time? So they are being paid by Google to develop it, they do so during regular work hours, the code is owned and released by Google, yet it is not a Google product.
I understand the point you are trying to make but at some point it becomes semantics.
I think it's important to distinguish that Google is not putting the effort that they could into this project, and that the quality of the project is not what they want you to expect out of an official Google product.
ie they want to give their engineers the ability to do neat projects—projects that could potentially make money—but they don't want to back each one fully, and they don't want to have their brand tarnished if the project fails.
Yes. We* are doing this full time during regular work hours. But this is not, yet, a product that deserves to be tied to the Google brand. It is just some code and some design documents, and hopes and dreams :)
It could fail. And even if it succeeds, it isn't ever going to be a "product", but a Web Platform feature.