10,000 hours is nice whole cozy number. But it's not about 9,000 hrs or 11,000 hrs. You have to keep at it for an extended period of time. That's where passion and innovation helps you sail thru.

http://blog.eladgil.com/2016/07/end-of-cycle.html :)

Different Strokes. This was my primary reason to choose between New York city and the Bay Area some 6 years ago. The 250 miles radius around the bay area has lot to offer. That said, I do feel there's a deprecation at play. You can only make so many trips to Tahoe and Santa Cruz.

If Los Angeles had 1/3rd the tech scene that you've here in the Bay Area. I'd move there in a heartbeat. By tech scene I mean a good mix of big tech co., an unicorn or two, and buzzing startups.

A 250 mile circle around NYC has a lot of stuff. The Adirondocks, various flavors of Atlantic shore stuff, etc. Lack of things to do outside isn't a reason that holds water :)

To me, California is where you go if you hate winter and like outdoorsy stuff. The unique Californy things are unbelievable, but the reality is most people are living in generic developments and driving to generic office parks, and doing very little else. You can do that in Toledo.

I do not entirely disagree. I don't hate winter but icy sidewalks are scary:) I also agree with your assessment that "...most people are living in generic developments and driving to generic office parks..."

But that begets another questions - is it more about finding a passion that keeps you high spirited 24x7 anywhere or finding a place that is stimulating everytime?

Offtopic, but thank you for not saying "begs the question" incorrectly.

Snapchat is in LA, and you have a bunch of tech companies there.

+1 for Sublime Text. It's one of those things that just works smoothly.

Aha factors fizzle out quickly. What they have for a holding company is appropriate and error-free.

Thought provoking. I read it earlier today, dropping in to add my two cents. I've been toggling between roles that either fits into 'product manager' or 'product developer'. That included a short stint as a startup founder.

IMHO (and experience) an A1 CEO/product/sales/business-guy can't be an A1 CTO/tech lead/research-guy and vice-versa. My operating keyword in this argument is 'A1'. This is counterintuitive to our natural inclinations.

Edit: Typo

Stuffs like these are going to be great boost for MS and its cloud initiative. Zenefit-esque product is next on the horizon.

That's enough for me to side with these two guys. I think Magic Leap is not that magical after all.

Yes, it's the employees.

Have you ever noticed that working on an ultra-cool product that goes bust won't cut you any slack. You get more credits for minor contributions to known brands than massive contributions to busted products.

Your skills are tied to your product's PR (apparently).

I know someone who worked on healthcare.gov (the initial one). Couldn't get an interview anywhere until he stopped listing it.

Well I mean the site the was fundamentally unusable. It's not surprising that advertising his role (whether related to the myriad problems it had or not) didn't help his career much.