Hmmmm.
\n\n", "content_hash": "sha256:aae5bfb949ddc2f904b04d8e07cf6deb7841d2055ed175dd8167ab32343e0d2b", "media": [], "changelog": [ { "version": 1, "at": "2026-11-11T18:10:00Z", "note": null } ] }Is this a deeply cynical take about how to succeed in office politics? I don’t actually think so. Large tech companies operate at something like 20-60% efficiency at any given time (as they get larger, they get less efficient)1. Even knowing that, growing is a deliberate choice: companies grow in order to capture more surface area, since even at a lower efficiency that’s a way to produce much more value. If individual employees are willing to lift their local team to 80% or 90% efficiency by burning their time on glue work, companies will take that free value, but they don’t have any real interest in locking that in for the long term (since it depends on exceptional people volunteering their time in hard-to-reward ways and thus isn’t sustainable).