It absolutely proves that she was right. If you care about market cap? She was right. If you care about employee comp? She was right. If you care about consumer choice, she was right. Number of listings, new potential acquirers for your startup, more diverse office geography, right right right right.

The idea that there's a significant lobby on fucking Hacker News unhappy that a startup IPO'd for a zillion bucks and made everyone rich is twilight zone shit. It makes no sense according to the stated values in the fucking masthead.

> The goal, he said, “is just to reduce prices to the consumer and then help with congestion and the environment.”

Like Uber cares about any of these things (prices, consumers, congestion, the environment)

polycam or scaniverse (gaussian splats though)

The guy had a Ted talk a while back going into his motivations. I believe the main one was he didn't like how phones get between you and the world, and take you out of the moment. This was an attempt to make tech that isn't a distraction in your life but that fades into the background. That was his driving principle, I believe.

> How come there isn’t a household name akin to Apple for apartment development?

Because real estate development is capital-intensive on a fairly unique scale and it's very easy even for good developers to go under. It also doesn't scale in the same way because builders are subject to all of the tax and regulatory implications of each market they're in.

They go bankrupt all the time due to market forces outside of their control. Just look at the price of lumber over the last couple of years. Markets can move more quickly than builders can react because big projects can take years and building supplies can double in price in a matter of months.

> I want to be able to stick to one amazing developer for a consistent experience across multiple markets especially now that remote work is becoming a permanent option for multiple developers.

I don't how realistic a vision this is because it's not like developers that dominate a market are inherently incentivized to do good work. In fact, demand is so crazy for builders that getting good work done at all is becoming harder and harder.

Ah, yes. I trust the internet's wisdom about the aerospace industry. After all the armchair quarterbacking I've seen around every other aerospace event I can't imagine a more reliable source of speculation.

Everyone thinks tech platforms should be regulated, but everyone has wildly different (and contradictory) ideas on how that should actually be done. If no one can agree on what the problem is, there isn't ever going to be a solution.