Learning should not be done only as a direct path to getting paid.
Learn to create pattern matching and intuition to solve future problems.
When you are 17 it is a good time to understand how the world works so you can build on top of it in the future. If we assume most tech is going to have an LLM as part the stack, a solid basis in how LLMs work is likely to help you in future endeavors the same way a solid basis in how the web works helps you today.
Maybe a 17 year old should learn both. As a small anecdote when I was 17 I learned a lot about load balancers, failover, and building self-healing systems running small hosting company that had to be fault tolerant when I was attending high school. This wasn't at state of the art levels (e.g. I wasn't configuring gigabit routers or global CDNs -- but it was useful pattern matching for future problems)
I currently don't touch any of that tech, but I have working knowledge that still serves me today.
I am not the parent but I took it as them saying the premise was wrong to begin with, which I very much agree with. Learning should not be primarily directed by job availability.
Their homepage, https://lina.sh/, reminds me of the early days of the internet. Are webrings back in fashion? Or is this just a group of old school folks keeping the nostalgia alive?
14X at github's scale is unlikely an easy problem to solve.
Additionally, there is a strategic reason to be the repository for all code, free, or not which is likely at conflict with reliability goals.
(e.g. they could get rid of their free tier which would improve reliability at the cost of allowing a new competitor to be the repository for all new AI driven code)
The long term strategic benefit of being the home to all code (or most of it) is enormous. They are likely balancing that strategic goal with what is seen as short-term internally as reliability.
2) OpenAI recently raised 40B from SoftBank and others.
3) Windsurf is getting roughly 1% of OpenAI's valuation.
OpenAI needs to keep moving fast to outpace MS, Google, and others -- and I think we can all agree that agentic coding is a major trend -- that is likely to keep growing really fast -- and super high leverage in that the folks doing the coding are well paid -- and more likely to be early adopters than any other field. (e.g. if openAI wants a fast way to grow beyond $20-$200/month, owning a tool like windsurf is a good move)
Some folks have been speculating the cash/equity split. I'd be confident whatever number they arrived at de-risks things for windsurf, and preserves the right amount of cash on hand for openAI.
Even if OpenAI is burning 10-20B a year, with the recent raise would buy them between 1-2 years, and given the pace of AI development that's a pretty long time.
1) How do you know the new place can’t match the counter offer?
2) why do you think the folks who hired you for less than your current salary would not understand sticking at your current job for 25% more and a role change?
3) if you took the raise/counter and it wasn’t fulfilling would you be willing to take a job paying 30% less 1 year from now? Why or why not?
4) why did you want to work at the other company you just signed and offer letter for?
We’ve lost candidates after their current employer drastically increased their salary. It happens, normally before an offer letter is signed.
1) They were already "overextending" their generosity when I got the 95% offer of my current pay and they said that was as much I could realistically get
It does not bode well for future pay rises to be honest, but it felt somewhat good that they went beyond what one normally would get for me personally.
2) Not sure, I myself have always had sympathy with others if they were leaving a job, or understood if they decided to not join on account of a great counter-offer. This is probably easier as an IC. Feels bad to taint oneself on account of money, but it's the entire package that's enticing now, not just the extra take-home pay every month.
3) If I was sure it'd be fulfilling I think I could make do with 30% less. Right now I can do normal weeks (9-5 every day) and work at a leisurely pace and sometimes from a home office.
4) It would have been a comfortable job where I could probably make do for 10 years into the future without really expanding my horizons. That does sound scary though, at some point being 50 and knowing I missed out on a "better" career.
My guess is there was likely some move behind the scenes to boost revenue, and keep the business running initiated by a founder, or board member, which resulted in hiring Greg, relocating the headquarters from MN to CO, and probably also shifted the future of makemusic.
Quite, MakeMusic, Peaskware, and Alfred have all had a complex relationship.
To be clear, the company MakeMusic is not going out of business. They still are running their incredibly popular Make Music Cloud web-based app, used heavily in education (formerly called "Smart Music"). This was just an attempt to jettison a dinosaur in their portfolio. They haven't done any active development of Finale in many years.
Cumberland also happens to be where the Chesapeake and Ohio canal tow path terminates, and is a really nice 168 mile mostly off road dirt bike ride all the way to Washington DC. It has been extended all the way to Pittsburgh. So if you were into biking, Cumberland could be kind of a cool place to hang out.
Useful context:
Open ai had 11 cofounders.
Schulman was one of them.
Schuman was not the original head of ai alignment / safety he was promoted into it when former leader left for Anthropic.
Not everyone who’s a founder of an nonprofit ai research institute wants to be a leader/manager of a much more complicated organization in a much more complicated environment.
Open Ai was founded a while ago. The degree of their long time success is entirely based on their ability to hire and retain the right talent in the right roles.
All of that is true. Some more useful context: 9 out of those 11 cofounders are now gone. Three have either founded or are working for direct competitors (Elon, Ilya, John), five have quit (Trevor, Vicki, Andrej, Durk, Pam), and one has gone on extended leave but may return (Greg). Right now, Sam and Wojciech are the only ones left.
Learning should not be done only as a direct path to getting paid.
Learn to create pattern matching and intuition to solve future problems.
When you are 17 it is a good time to understand how the world works so you can build on top of it in the future. If we assume most tech is going to have an LLM as part the stack, a solid basis in how LLMs work is likely to help you in future endeavors the same way a solid basis in how the web works helps you today.
Maybe a 17 year old should learn both. As a small anecdote when I was 17 I learned a lot about load balancers, failover, and building self-healing systems running small hosting company that had to be fault tolerant when I was attending high school. This wasn't at state of the art levels (e.g. I wasn't configuring gigabit routers or global CDNs -- but it was useful pattern matching for future problems)
I currently don't touch any of that tech, but I have working knowledge that still serves me today.
Think long term.