Let's do some math. In both cases we're buying the same home for keeps, so we can ignore the value of the final asset (would be the same in, say, 2100 A.D. in both cases):

Amazon stock 13x'd from 2012 to 2023. Say you had $50k vested by year 1 (close to what you'd have in 2013 as new grad). That money would be $650k in 2023. If you invested that into a house just around then, say in a $300k home, your interest rate would be ~3.7%. That means you would be paying $415,040 over the next 30 years, including your down payment.

Now let's say you were...you...and decided to wait till today. That same home is now worth $1.3 million in 2023. Your mortgage rate is 6.5%. You have your $650k in stock, so you put 20% down ($260k). Your mortgage is $1.04M. Over the next 30 years, you will be paying...a whopping $2,341,800. But hey, congrats on your "extra" $390k in stocks. By the way, you paid (if we are VERY conservative) ~$250k in rent while living in an equivalent property in those ten years.

I don't see it that way, complacency can be just contentment from one's own perspective — it may take a third party to call it complacency (sometimes wrongly so, such as that parable[0]).

[0] https://thestorytellers.com/the-businessman-and-the-fisherma...

(Though that parable fails to account for unforeseen financial emergencies and such...)

Sure, but so am I — and I know for a fact they make very little, because of the way they talk about our mutual friends' job offers — I cannot even tell them my salary, to be honest. (Making less money is not a bad thing, but the pertinent point is that they work longer hours than I do, in the same industry!)

> Msft stock is up 10X in 10 years.

Here I'd like to correct you on one point — stock going up like this does not necessarily equate to outsized wealth. When you join as a new grad, you get very little stock, and as you get more grants, they are market-adjusted (not to mention vested over time). Plus the early stock inevitably gets sold to buy a home, etc.

Feel free to ignore me if you knew these things.

Contentment and complacency are ostensibly the same thing, though the primary reason I tend towards the latter term is because I think we ought to aspire to growth (in whatever sense you determine for yourself). That's just my opinion though. It's also worth noting that I have no way of knowing what others are aspiring to, aside from what happens in their life over the years (which can be a poor proxy, given the role of luck).

Microsoft has the magic formula for lifers who don't ask much and work just as hard as anyone else, if not harder (by big tech standards — startups folks work way harder for way less).

In the vein of the TFA, this would be a negative shibboleth (which just goes to show how being pedantic in certain contexts is just silly). The reason being that eventual consistency has no guarantee on what "eventual" means. If your replicas converge ten years from when a change is made, you can (correctly) claim to have eventual consistency.

Is not typing `-u` really worth installing a whole app that spies on you? Especially since shells like `fish` (FOSS!) will have you just write `-u` + up arrow?

This seems objectively worse to me but I guess we'll see whether they find a real market.

Thankfully, at a large company with plenty of hard problems to solve (and smart folks to work with), you can grow quite a lot whether or not the company chooses to recognize said growth.

Except in this case: https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1995-12-27-951228...

The earliest smartphones did not even have touchscreens, I just used an example that would be easier to digest.

What about when you tried the first touchscreen smartphone, which was probably resistive and came with a stylus?

Seems unfair to compare an emerging tech with the iPhone (which took an emerging tech to the next level) off the bat. It's almost an argument in bad faith.

There are exceptions, such as where a studio that made the switch for reason X or reason Y is able to clearly articulate what they're doing and why, but these exceptions only serve to prove the rule since they're extremely rare to come across.