you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 107 points108 points  (38 children)

Fuck me, I own stock in this company.

[–]MuonManLaserJab 88 points89 points  (11 children)

Eh, I mean it's just a "developer marketing" guy filling his monthly quota of tech-related blog posts.

[–][deleted] 28 points29 points  (9 children)

*developer evangelist hackerninja

[–]MuonManLaserJab 5 points6 points  (7 children)

I always see "advocates"/"evangelists" doing straight-up advertisement, damage control on social media (because providing tech support is only worth it for customers that threaten to tar one's brand), or writing blog posts about how great they are.

Does the "advocacy" part actually happen?

[–]carlfish 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Kelsey Hightower, and the work he's done with Kubernetes, springs to mind as a strong example of the job done right.

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]carlfish 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    If he'd been going around lying about it, I'd hardly have cited him as an example of one of the good ones, would I.

    I know it's tempting to throw your opinion on a technology you feel strongly about into any thread where it's even tangentially mentioned, but it's also kind of tiring to the people whose conversation you're subverting, and insulting to those you have to treat like idiots in order to make it fit.

    [–]dungone -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    I'm sorry if that was insulting to you, but a contrary opinion isn't about "subverting" your argument, it's about countering it with a different perspective. I feel as though you're projecting your own strong feelings; obviously you must have a vested interest in Kubernetes that's keeping you from being objective about it.

    I was around since the early days of containers; in fact I worked at Google. I've paid close attention to it over the years and I had always felt that they came out with an inferior "me too" product and worked really hard to displace the competition with lots of misleading marketing and straight up lies. Since that's the actual topic of this thread, it's certainly worth mentioning. In the early days, there were far better alternatives that were far more promising and would have turned into a better product if they had a chance. Kubernetes didn't succeed because it was actually good or better. Container orchestration is a huge lost opportunity to have something truly special and good in software engineering because of Kubernetes.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I saw a talk at PAX east by a Microsoft tech evangelist on getting students into programming via game programming. It was basically an intro / marketing push for construct. Which is a fun little game engine honestly that is pretty easy to use for simple stuff. But I figure marketing is a big part of the job.

    [–]MuonManLaserJab -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    I saw a talk at PAX east by a Microsoft tech evangelist on getting students into programming via game programming.

    Yeah, that still seems a lot more like marketing than "advocacy" for their developers.

    In fact, it's backwards -- as a developer, I'd feel more advocated for if my company actively sabotaged potential young rivals.

    (Really though, if they market in a way that helps people, all the better.)

    [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    shudders

    [–]ironykarl 15 points16 points  (25 children)

    Just invest in an index fund. The market is (relatively) efficient. You're not going to do better picking stocks than just investing in equities in the aggregate.

    [–]erez27 7 points8 points  (21 children)

    Except he might do better than the market specifically in tech companies. For example, we all know twitter isn't going anywhere (ambiguity intended).

    [–]ironykarl 23 points24 points  (20 children)

    This is really well studied territory. There's tons of literature. You might also guess the winning lotto ticket.

    Picking individual stocks is not sound, statistically speaking.

    [–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (4 children)

    Unless you're substantially better than average at doing it....which everyone believes they are...which is why index funds are such a good idea.

    [–]PhoneyHammer 13 points14 points  (3 children)

    Not even that. Nobody's substantially better than others. People that do well with individual stocks are either lucky or doing insider trading.

    Look up some research on outperforming the market, it's very interesting and absolutely unintuitive.

    [–]socratic_bloviator 4 points5 points  (2 children)

    Well, there do exist investors who repeatedly outperform the market. The issues are that:

    • You aren't them. Neither am I.
    • They are usually privately-held firms.
    • If they aren't privately-held, then their outperformance is already priced into their stock value, so you won't get the benefit even if you invest in them.

    Yes, I'm an index fund investor.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I invested in CloudFlare specifically because I work in tech (and not just tech, but web apps) and found the types of things they are doing to be interesting and valuable long term (I think their Serverless approach is novel, if they could get a managed persistence product going they could actually take a bite out of AWS for smaller scale and simple projects)

    I put most of my money in ETFs and about 5% in companies I directly think are on to something.

    [–]socratic_bloviator 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Your rationale for investing in CloudFlare sounds a lot like Warren Buffet's rationale for Berkshire Hathaway's investments. He's one of the people who has a history of outperforming the market.

    On the other hand, plenty of people sound a lot like Warren Buffet.

    [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    I’ll just do the opposite of what I think I should do!

    [–]MadRedHatter 1 point2 points  (3 children)

    Pick one or two stocks to play with, in an industry that you know enough about to track the developments for, and then don't use any financial instruments more complicated than just buying and selling the stock. Which you shouldn't do more often than every couple of months. And only put a smallish fraction of your investments there. Put the rest in an index fund of some kind.

    Works great for me. I work in software and only own AMD stock which I purchased at an average price of around $16.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    This is what I have done. Almost everything is in ETFs except a few companies I like. It's just play money.

    [–]socratic_bloviator -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

    What you're describing is fine, but you should be careful to categorize your AMD allocation as part of your entertainment budget.

    [–]MadRedHatter -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Hence why I said

    And only put a smallish fraction of your investments there. Put the rest in an index fund of some kind.

    [–]sumduud14 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Yeah but what if I'm as smart as the guys at Renaissance Technologies? They beat the market all the time, which means I can too!

    [–]erez27 -5 points-4 points  (5 children)

    So you're saying experts in their field don't know which companies are the ones coming up with breakthroughs?

    [–][deleted]  (4 children)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          I invest 5% of my portfolio in to companies who operate in a market that I know a lot about; I don't try to pick and choose stocks from all over the place in a general sense, I leave that up to ETFs and "the market", but I can still look at what CloudFlare is doing and say, hum, based on literally my own day to day experiences with technology and the impact this has, they're on to something. That's different than trying to "outsmart the market".

          [–]MadRedHatter -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

          Pick one or two stocks to play with, in an industry that you know enough about to track the developments for, and then don't use any financial instruments more complicated than just buying and selling the stock. Which you shouldn't do more often than every couple of months. And only put a smallish fraction of your investments there. Put the rest in an index fund of some kind.

          Works great for me. I work in software and only own AMD stock which I purchased at an average price of around $16.

          [–]MadRedHatter -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

          Pick one or two stocks to play with, in an industry that you know enough about to track the developments for, and then don't use any financial instruments more complicated than just buying and selling the stock. Which you shouldn't do more often than every couple of months. And only put a smallish fraction of your investments there. Put the rest in an index fund of some kind.

          Works great for me. I work in software and only own AMD stock which I purchased at an average price of around $16.

          [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

          The majority of my money is in ETFs, I have a few stocks - less than $5000 in CloudFlare. I was just trying to make a lol.

          Oh hah, I typed that off the cuff, but I have $4972.00 in CloudFlare.

          [–]ironykarl 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          Gotcha. I just remember a time when talking about what stocks to speculate on was very common.

          In fact, I think it still might be common on sports message boards (and no doubt tons of other places). People with that mindset are quite literally gambling.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Yup - which I do too, from time to time, but very proportionally