emilsayahi

I know you're getting downvoted but this is painfully true, especially the part about the founder 'choosing which promise to break'. Something I've observed in many Europeans (really just any region with very conservative financing) is that they view venture capital as a system where ideas immediately take off or are doomed to fail. They don't think about how Apple, Amazon, Tesla, etc, took years of trial & error, making tradeoffs, breaking promises, and creating multiple product lines to deliver more and more value. Of course, maybe there's not much disruption to be done in the oven industry (I'd suspect that's actually the case in reality) but Microsoft started off as a flight simulator company; you can just pivot.

The mistake was when they didn't just switch to selling two types of dough. They had a genuine innovation and should've squeezed as much juice out of that and moved on to finding some other innovation. You don't need to build exactly what you described to your first investors, you just need to build a valuable business for them.

In software (and business in general!), innovation is expected. If you built a building in San Francisco that couldn't handle a relatively minor earthquake you could argue it would be a 'stress test'.

Isn't this kind of card normal? The Fidelity card is basically the same (no fees, 2% cash back) but without any Apple-specific restrictions

EDIT: The Fidelity card has late fees, I guess. Does the Apple one not? It shouldn't really affect you if you know what you're doing

Location: San Francisco, CA, US

Remote: Yes (in-person preferred)

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Rust, TypeScript, Python

CV: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/emmyoh/resume/refs/heads/m...

Email: limesayahi@gmail.com

Had a lot of experiences with very early-stage startups (including co-founding a YC company, and joining another as a founding engineer), seeking to work someplace more mature.

I often hear this and am confused; not only are things like 'object soup'[0] possible and straightforward (putting things in collections and referring to them by indices), I never concretely hear why a graph or doubly-linked list becomes uniquely difficult to implement in Rust (and would genuinely be curious to learn why you feel this way). If you needed such data structures anyway, they're either in the standard library or in the many libraries ('crates' in Rust-lingo) available on Rust's package registry[1]---using dependencies in Rust is very straightforward & easy.

[0]: https://jacko.io/object_soup.html

[1]: https://crates.io/

Related thread on Reddit: https://reddit.com/r/rust/comments/1fpkqrv/oku_a_web_browser....

I tried this two years ago when I was still actively 'learning' Rust: https://github.com/Dirout/depi

Democracy is a system of government, not an economic model. You could easily argue, simultaneously:

1. Capitalism has failed in those countries, even if in different times and places one could say capitalism has succeeded

2. India and Mexico have major issues with their democracies—if a democracy is a system of government in which the citizens of a state hold collective power over their government, then there are many obstacles preventing either country from having a well-functioning democracy.

I can sympathise with your feelings that the current global status-quo is failing many people—I would agree—and I would argue India and Mexico are great examples of how unchecked capitalism and authoritarianism are causing an active erosion of democracy (and standard of living) in those two countries.

I'd go with yeah. It's nice having some sunlight around.