The CEO then went on to explain, “We raised base salaries in Japan by 10 percent in April 2023,” adding, “Since then, we have continued to review our compensation system to ensure that remuneration aligns with employees’ demonstrated capabilities, and in April 2026 we implemented further salary increases, including for starting pay.”
If their last raise was 3-4 years ago, this is a simple inflation adjustment, amazing they get good vibe front page Hacker News credit for this.
In Sweden, there's a fundamental agreement between companies, the state and unions to not have raises follow inflation (as it becomes reinforcing and hurting the rack economy).
Now, there's always discussion (you can guess who's arguing what if inflation is high and low...), but overall it seems to work pretty good.
Debit cards have to pay too many people. The acquiring bank, the receiving bank, the network, all take their fees. Stripe and their minimum $.30 per transactions leave no room for $0.01 API calls.
Maybe most people here are social platform agnostic and thus EFF's limply constructed reasoning does not make make much sense for a brand trying to maximise their audience. Unless EFF are not platform agnostic and hold some view of the kinds of social platforms they are on. Then this EFF action makes sense.
Have the costs to post to X grown too high? The salary of someone with the technical know-how to work the social media platform is too expensive? How does the math compare with Mastodon? Do you know about buffer.com?
I started giving to EFF about 10 years ago. It's pretty much the first and only organization I have regularly given to. It always felt like a non-political organization focused squarely on the right to access. Especially with its support of the Tor project. But this news has me confused and other commenters seem to be seeing virtue signaling or politically motivation.
>I started giving to EFF about 10 years ago. It's pretty much the first and only organization I have regularly given to.
I'm in the same boat - not 10 years, but regularly, and a significant amount of money (for me).
I'm a bit confused now. Their post is absolutely not convincing (for the reasons you outlined - tweeting does not cost anything, and despite what they say they clearly get a lot of outreach there). I think I'll evaluate their achievements with more scrutiny before my next yearly donation.
And while I respect everyone on it for their achievements, from their own bios and other political work they're involved in you can clearly tell which stated goal is in service of another.
I've met and spoken to at least half of them and...yeah.
John Gilmore is gone. Brad Templeton is gone. John Perry Barlow is dead. The civil libertarian bent that the organization began with is long gone.
Your first sentence is key. Most people don't look behind the green curtain, but it's often where you find who the really important people in the org are.
Using Twitter in 2026 is a political statement. I don't consume it, but using Twitter would be supporting right wing extremism (or whatever you classify Musk as).
Maybe, but this is not what they claim in their post. Their official reason is that the numbers are not working out.
And even if that was the reason, that doesn't make sense. They're an activist organisation, their goal is to promote their ideas to people that need to hear them, and twitter users need that more than bluesky users.
Btw. I login to twitter once every few months to share my blog post or report. That's not a political statement.
I replied to a comment, not EFF. EFF is doing the correct thing, but very late. I'm not advocating for one platform over another.
It is indirectly a political statement to use Twitter. You are supporting Elon Musk who has made himself a central figure in extreme right wing political views.
There are tons of famous people on Twitter who I'm pretty sure are not doing it as a statement of Musk alignment. There's not really any other place they'd be.
It's my opinion that the most powerful weapon consumers have is the power to vote with your time and money. Using Twitter is voting to support Elon Musk whether intentional or not.
Satoshi Nakamoto was likely created in response to the December 2005 raid of e-Gold in Florida by U.S. Secret Service/FBI, and other similar incidents. e-Gold was the largest Digital currency at the time clearly showed the dangers of centralization. Douglas Jackson's indictment occurred about 18 months before the Bitcoin whitepaper.
So the risk of centrally founding another digital currency was clear at the time and e-Gold was discussed by both Back and Finney.
Launching without a single point of failure, a single arrestable founder was critical to the success of Bitcoin.
Biggest take away - 90 million acres in the US go to corn/ethanol production.
31 acres of corn for ethanol to match the energy production of just 1 acre of solar panels.
Revenue could be 3-4x that of corn production.
Get ready for rise of the photon farmers.
Youtube has this model with Preimum. If Chrome rolled out Chrome Premium, (and copied the Brave BAT model of paying sites you give attention to), I'd be happy to pay.
reply