All companies with investors are evil, make no mistake.

They may have nice looking save the world charity campaigns, but once you get even close to affecting their revenue stream, the axe falls. The charity is only a publicity stunt to reduce wages.

Some level of government intervention is needed to control investor's greed.

It is just a question of business model: some business models are eviler than others. Making people pay for operating systems being possible the most evil of all.

One thing must be said however. You can learn a lot by working in a good company, because it ends up putting you in contact with practical real problems that you wouldn't otherwise see by just doing your own random low-tech startup. This is especially valuable if said company is also enlightened enough to use and contribute back to open source software, thus improving the world and paying back the moral debt of using other people's work for free.

Another important point to consider is who in the company is evil. In a sane tech company, the lowly engineers are going to be non-evil. And then the more you go up the management chain, the more aligned you have to be with investors, and thus the more and more evil you get. HR is just evil from the bottom though, it's just the nature of their job.

Ciro Santilli is very fond of this result: the beauty of mathematics.

How can so much complexity come out from so few rules?

How can the proof be so long (thousands of papers)?? Surprise!!

And to top if all off, the awesomely named monster group could have a relationship with string theory via the monstrous moonshine?

all science is either physics or stamp collecting comes to mind.

The classification contains:

In the classification of finite simple groups, groups of Lie type are a set of infinite families of simple lie groups. These are the other infinite families besides te cyclic groups and alternating groups.

A decent list at: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_finite_simple_groups, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_Lie_type is just too unclear. The groups of Lie type can be subdivided into:

The first in this family discovered were a subset of the Chevalley groups $A_n(q)$ by Galois: $PSL(2,p)$, so it might be a good first one to try and understand what it looks like.

TODO understand intuitively why they are called of Lie type. Their names $A_n$, $B_n$ seem to correspond to the members of the classification of simple Lie groups which are also named like that.

But they are of course related to Lie groups, and as suggested at Video "Yang-Mills 1 by David Metzler (2011)" part 2, the continuity actually simplifies things.

Many/most companies are unable to give any beauty to its employees.

Hiring is simply a process of "let's get this money making project working ASAP", bring people in, without considering Brooks's law.

And then when that happens, companies put people in extremely narrow knowledge areas, making them unable to see or participate in the bigger picture of things, unless they spend 10 years there and reach architect status.

This is perhaps particularly painful for high flying birds like Ciro Santilli.

Companies need a higher top to down force that attempts to actually teach the business and tech to every employee to counter the low level manager get things done now pressure.

Companies that are able to do that, will have many more employees with a sense of purpose, and with the ability to innovate. Those companies will win.

TODO why do we care about this?

Note that if a group is k-transitive, then it is also k-1-transitive.