It always struck me as absolute madness back in my software days a) how much working on the checkout drove sales relative to any product thing I could do for equivalent work and b) why I had to do this, because shouldn’t it be a solved problem.
The fundamental thesis of Stripe Checkout is that if you have less than a thousand engineers working for you there is no way to have a sufficient number of them working on your payments UX.
We centralize this engineering effort to keep you and your team free to do actual work.
This also lets us get returns to specialization, chase marginal opportunities which make no sense for most individual customers given effort involved but which are great probabalistically across network (“+1 bps for all Japanese customers transacting in dollars? AMAZING”), etc.
And of course if you’d rather have engineers build your own checkout experience, that remains completely supported. We just hope to make it unnecessary, and eventually to show you with numbers why it’s suboptimal, because we ultimately want your business to flourish.
Also selfishly as an engineer, and altruistically as an observer of the culture of engineering orgs, this liberates engineers from having to spend lots of time implementing things that have a huge value to fun/challenge/intellectual content ratio.
It’s extremely difficult to hire and retain good engineers when you have to say “I know we sold you on doing great creative work. Instead I would really like you to go into this browser compatibility matrix and make sure autocomplete on each field is sensible. Note: 67 browsers.”
We all know how that conversation goes with a staff engineer in most places.
“Alright. Works in Chrome.”
“And the other 66?”
“Should work in FF.”
“So it’s red in other 65?”
“It’s I-can-get-another-job-any-time in the other 65.”
If that strikes you as a wonderful challenge to work on:
The $850 million was covered with an emergency equity injection (organized among large Tether customers), but I think industry observers have not yet cottoned onto the practical equivalency of that seizure and a fine for money laundering.
Tether has held out hope, including when raising the equity (the LEO token), that the money seized from Crypto Capital Corp's accounts will be restored to them after they demonstrate that they are the beneficial owners. Many people seem to believe this is the natural outcome.
I think the natural outcome is closer to "Oh if you are indicted by multiple governments for money laundering including for Columbian cartels then whichever jurisdiction the money was seized in will probably keep it and maybe, maybe, maybe we investigating governments divvy it."
Note the non-disparagement clause in the order that Tether will, with absolute night follows day certainty, break, and probably within the next 48 hours.
A Japan anecdote on the hospitality industry: after being shown our seat at a hotel’s (very nice) buffet it was explained:
“While of course your children are welcome to anything at the buffet if they are hungry and you don’t want to be rushed we could give them prepared plates.”
“Oh sure.”
“Would you like a plate built around [fish / meat / curry / other mains]?”
“Two of the noodles.”
*They arrive in under a minute.*
“Please take your time in browsing the buffet.”
And of course because Japan they’re nutritionally balanced and presented well. (Someone cared about making the colors pop.)
Many people kinda sorta want to grow tomatoes, but few people really, really care about the supply chain for vegetables relative to the importance to humanity that tomatoes end up in the usual places at the usual times for the usual prices.
And thus you can have a career pretty much entirely based on “I care more about the tomato supply chain more than anyone you’ve ever met.”
It’s surprising, but maybe not, how much Social Network and Big Short impacted peoples’ views on the typical behavior within the depicted industries and the metaphors and memes they used to refer to them in the future.
“It’s just like X said in…”
“You realize that person does not exist.”
“No it’s the story.”
“No that person literally did not exist. That character is a dramatic convenience. Their lines are not historical evidence.”
And a truly surprising number of technologists of my acquaintance learned everything they know about investment banking from the scenes designed to make investment bankers look like incompetent / corrupt actors.