So you believe it’s okay to not pay the people you hire because Google doesn’t pay people who upload videos to Youtube?
Market share isn’t relevant here, if a company hires you to do something they pay you for your work. If they don’t recoup their costs from the work they hired you to do that’s a bad business decision on their part and not a valid reason to not pay you. This is why developed countries have employee rights laws.
Do you consider that a valid reason to hire people and not pay them? To me it just sounds like an excuse for a company to abuse a lack of employee rights to get free labour.
As someone who interacts with databases regularly… Yeah, that sounds about right.
I was recently working with another team’s feature to handle data retrieval for the end user, pretty front end but it was far too tightly coupled with db management concepts. How is a non-technical person supposed to know the difference between an inner join and a left join?
Not too long ago I suggested using cross apply to a senior dev I work with and they admitted they weren’t sure what that does or how to use it. People who don’t regularly work with databases have no chance.
On an article about employees not getting paid someone commented with the excuse that they’re moving “more in line with youtube” where creators don’t get paid. Since you apparently disagree with the obvious meaning, how did you interpret that?