I'm not an economist or accountant so take this with a pinch of salt, but this basically transforms Amazon money into datacentres with a guaranteed customer. That's your profit right there.

It's not the mount, it's the labour. People are expensive!

That person wasn't lying or bullshitting, they were extremely obviously joking.

They are probably being sarcastic.

No, half of American households make more than that, and a typical household has 2.5 people.

> No, half of American households make more than that, and a typical household has 2.5 people.

And 2.5 Americans per household will say “they make more than that”

Kids say “my dad is rich” and wives say “we make $70k/month”

The US is very rich, but Europe is not poor. Europe is richer than basically anywhere on the planet _except_ the US. Like even compared to Canada or Japan, Europe is (generally) as rich or richer. Poland just overtook Japan in GDP per capita! Both the UK and France are richer than the oil-rich UAE.

I mean on an absolute basis the average European enjoys a very comfortable quality of life and often a better work life balance then most in the USA.

That said in the context of this thread on why countries seem to bend over backwards for the "privilege" to sell to the USA it's because everyone is shockingly poor by comparison.

Kids also love Cocomelon, that doesn't mean we should create literally infinite amounts of this. It's like digital tobacco.

It's undeniably cool. But look at Cocomelon on YouTube, it's hard to see how this won't converge to something similar, only infinitely more scalable.

Not to speak for the OP, but I think they would argue that 'Cocomelon' type content would be a great use of the tech.

Should they incentivise rice, which doesn't grow great in the climate of economic environment of the UK, or wheat, which does?

Generally both, but rice will grow well, potentially better than wheat, in the coming climate.

Unless the North Atlantic current dies. Ooof.

It's not a good-faith question to say "here's a new technology, write about how it made you more productive" and expect the answer to have a relationship with the truth. You're pre-ordaining the answer!

Lets imagine it is 1990 and the tool is e-mail over snail mail. Would you want leadership of a company to allow every employee to find out on their own if email is better way to communicate despite the spam, impersonal nature, security and myriad other issues that patently exist to this day ? or allow exceptions if an employee insists (or even shows) how snail is better for them?

It is hardly feasible for an organization to budget time for replicating and validating results, form their own conclusions, for any employee form who wishes to question the effectiveness of the tool or the manner of deployment.

Presumably the organization has done that validation with reasonably sized sample of similar roles over significant period of time. It doesn't matter though, it would be also sound reasoning for leadership to take a strategic call even when such tests are not conducted or not applicable.

There are costs and time associated with accurate validation which they are unable / unwilling to wait or even pay for, even if they wish to. The competition is moving faster and not waiting, so deploying now rather than wait and validate is not necessarily even a poor decision.

---

Having said that, they can articulate their intent better than "write about how it made you more productive", by adding more description along the lines of "if not then explain all the things you have tried to try and adopt the tool and what and how it did not go well for you/ your role"

Typically well structured organizations with in-house I/O psychologists would add this kind of additional language in the feedback tooling, line managers may not be as well trained to articulate it in informal conversations, which is whole different kind of problem.

The answer isn't pre-ordained -- it's simply already known from experience, at least to a sufficient degree to not trust someone claiming it should be totally avoided. Like I said, there are not many corporate roles where it's legitimately impossible to find any kind of gain, even a small or modest one, anywhere at all.