Likewise as a recent founder myself the fact that I’ve been able to start a company with no office and have the flexibility to hire people from anywhere in the country is a game changer.

If big old fashion companies want to make people work in person, it’s basically just a gift for smaller competitors ready to eat their lunch.

If everybody was able to easily see Google’s results vs competitors it’s likely they would try harder and wouldn’t have just spent all their effort on cramming more ads above the results.

Now, the question to ask is if Google wasn’t paying off other companies to make them the default would they have been more incentivized to make a better search experience?

At this point I don’t get any better results from Google than DuckDuckGo/Bing. A few years ago Google was better, now they are increasingly useless and no better than competitors.

If iOS users got a prompt to choose a search engine the first time they open Safari, and the order of choices was random, how many would even notice the results were different in any way?

That’s not how the VC mind is wired. A bad investment loses money, a good one makes money. That’s all.

In some sense I’ve always thought Apple is focused so much on reliability and deterministic approaches that wrapping their heads around probabilistic outcomes is harder than for other companies.

These numbers seem right to me.

There’s zero point in switching from Chrome to Edge.

Firefox to my knowledge has no ads revenue, apples limited ads revenue doesn’t come from the web.

Brave I think is a low-key crypto grift run by a homophobe, but still better than Chrome.

Likewise, the degree to which Director+ jobs just hire based on current title at a competitor alone is bonkers. I’ve worked under people who are utterly clueless but managed to make VP at the place up the street. So they just get to be a VP at the next place.