Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Pretty telling that the idea of voting against one's own financial self-interest, even as a single part of a large platform, is a wild idea to these business journalists.


Having a few large companies that have colluded to keep salaries down by having no poaching agreements doesn’t seem it’s good for tech workers. Having a bunch of companies and a competitive labor market is much better for tech workers.


"salaries down"

if anything, all IT salaries need to come back to earth. i assume via massive taxation from the likes of warren and sanders.


Why should capitalist do-nothings and mangament capture all the wealth of a company? Lower pay for labor is an acceptable consequence of lowering consumer prices, not a goal in itself.


It actually can be self-interested. If you work for AWS, why would you want to be inside of Amazon, who you subsidize with your bsuiness’s profits? A lot of the subsidiaries would be massive companies in their own.


AWS only exists because Amazon retail financed it and provided a use-case to motivate the design.


Yes, and no. Megacorps are many smaller entities, sometimes at war with eachother.

Maybe it makes sense to vote for breaking up the mothership if that means your product stays alive. See: the retardedly long list of things Google killed...


How is it voting against their self interest?


the article is using a single, narrow definition of self-interest: income.

that is one interest that we can pursue but we can also have value interests that are sometimes in conflict with each other.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: