Anecdotal, but still: What you have described might have been the case in a handful of top schools, mostly at metropolitan areas. The key difference for the "rest of us" was a high school theacher who would pick top 1-2 pupils after couple of lessons and teach at their pace for the rest of the year. This is my case and the story that was confirmed by dozens of people in my university.
The last time I checked, we didn't have a whole lot of songs that feature a cat playing the cowbell and therefore I would be doing myself a disservice, and every member of the HN if I didn't perform the hell out of this.
Sigh. Double checking my email: still the same. Order placed: January 16, 2019. Shipping ETA: mid-to-late November 2020. Off topic, I know, but ghrghghr....
> I'm highly skeptical of the claim that such tax would discourage startup founders.
Discourage starting a company at all? Probably not, but the article does not suggest that. Do you think it might influence where they start it? Looks reasonable to me, at least qualitatively.
"Everyone else did it better" - by some very loose definition of "better" maybe. Author is agreeing that Symbian failed for good reasons at the very end of a very short blog post.
"Finally, after I cofounded a company, I closed my LinkedIn account". It does seem that author never tried to use LinekdIn other than as an online copy of the CV. In my expirience it can be an ok job board replacement for example.
It is a personal account and an unusual move I guess. Try to reverse what you consider to be the cause and the effect here. The argument does not seem to be LinkedIn is usedless in all possible cases, but it has no value for the author that they cannot get otherwise.
I think this is what author is saysing exactly. If you use it passively then there is no value (add?) and then the question is why to have a profile at all? Did not look like a rant to me.