huffman

He could get himself, Sam Altman, Alexis Ohanian, and Steve Huffman all sued for fucking over Conde Nast (i.e.

Operationally, Huffman would be doing the same thing he's doing now, but the optics would be clearer.

How in the world does Huffman think using something so vague as an actual punishable rule will turn out well?

Why would Reddit have had a hard time simply installing Ohanian or Huffman as the CEO?

As a tactical move, bringing in Steve Huffman might not have been the worst decision though.

Reddit may still go that direction, but Huffman won't have the same baggage weighing him down.

The return of Huffman signals a shift back to the Cult of Growth, in the hopes that investors won't worry as much about monetization so long as the site is growing.

I speculate that Apple originally intended to use a fancier variable-length encoding, probably based on a Huffman code.

Alexis Ohanian was chairman (and possibly CEO) and Steve Huffman was the original CEO.

So, Huffman just announced more or less the policy you just suggested.

Anyway, good luck to Huffman he is going to need it.

Steve Huffman has his work cut out for him.

> "How in the world does Huffman think using something so vague as an actual punishable rule will turn out well?" Because it is the only tenable position.

>> "How in the world does Huffman think using something so vague as an actual punishable rule will turn out well?" > Because it is the only tenable position.

I'm pretty sure Pao's "remove" was going to be a tiny fraction of what will end up hidden and she was closer to Yishan's "Do whatever" position than Huffman will be.

That's an interesting point, but my read on Huffman's original comment is that it's more for market reasons.

If someone created a petition to now remove Steve Huffman, I'd sign it.

Caught up and read Steve Huffman's stuff, he seems like the real deal, he seems to care, be all over it, maybe he'll fix it.