It’s common sense - he did behave in an unethical way.
It’s common sense - he did behave in an unethical way.
To wit, stealing trade secrets is recognized as an actual crime, and got someone 8 years of jail for trying to sell the formula for Coca-cola to Pepsi.
When I work for a company, I don't spin-off that company using corporate knowledge, I just find something else to do (and that's probably why I'm not rich :D), but it's the most elegant thing to do.
Zuckerberg is a famous example of such behaviour.
I think this Radon is talented too (good tech + doesn't wait for others to give permission + very interesting ideas), and what he did is probably okay-ish, a bit borderline but still on the ok-side (he seems more like a fan of Repl.it than anything).
I just wouldn't go til the point where I complain about it publicly.
That is a very common way to do a spin off. Usually it involves some patents or non public knowledge and you make an agreement with the original company for it. But when it is all open there is nothing, legal or moral (in my opinion), from stopping you from making your own spinoff. Companies don't care about you, you shouldn't care about them.
If everyone followed this rule there would be no Fairchild and no Intel.
And if it's a topic or industry I have expertise and knowledge of, why would I throw that all away just because I worked for a company where I used that expertise and knowledge? That's basically implying that we're all "ethically" subject to non-competes for the rest of our lives after working for a company making a particular kind of product.
That's clearly and absolutely "inelegant", to use your phrasing.
Then they want you to not use the knowledge, skills, and understanding to build a product when you aren't working for them.
This is hypocritical and self-contradictory. They require you to do the very thing they don't want you to do, just as long as it's in their favor.
Employers do what they think they can get away with to extract maximum value from you. If you are smart, you will do what you think you can get away with to extract maximum value from your employer, too. Playing fair when the other side doesn't is just forfeiting.
If the intern was under a no-compete, or stole any IP, this would be known and there would be nothing to talk about.
I mean I couldn't for the first year after working there because I had signed a contract saying I wouldn't which is what most people do, is that what you mean? That if you sign a non-compete agreement you can't? Because ok, but I would think if you don't sign the non-compete agreement it means you can because otherwise why would people have non-compete agreements?
If it's a huge company (e.g. you work for a large telecom company and launch a new telecom company), then it's fine because you started only from one brick, and had to figure out most of the pieces by yourself.
No reasons to be surprised if private army A colleagues don't like your move.
That guy didn't get bullied by the CEO, the CEO got bullied by HackerNews.
A logical conclusion is that the breach doesn't exist and arguments that rest on it are unfounded
"you can't just walk to Mordor" - I guess the "cant" is to refer to the grave consequences. (orcs with blades are dangerous)