There&#x27;s not much to glean from that link. I&#x27;m always excited to hear things like this, and I was very excited to hear that Jet was committing to F#. I&#x27;m not a fan of heavy enterprisey dev environments, but F# is a great language. How great it would be if more organizations came out strong for functional programming.<p>But I have heard some about the software hiring practices at Jet and what I&#x27;ve heard makes me highly skeptical that they could actually be using proper functional programming techniques. It&#x27;s disappointing -- someone using F# because it&#x27;s vaguely &quot;better C#&quot; -- similar to people using Scala or Clojure because it&#x27;s &quot;better Java&quot;.<p>Sometimes I think they heavy advertisements (&quot;Hey look we&#x27;re so cool we use functional programming&quot;) is more meant to sucker people in under the belief that once the business stabilizes, it will be some sort of Bell Labs of ____ where the company will really try to invest in high-end software solutions and research, and that a lot of it will be carried out with functional programming.<p>But the reality is that it&#x27;s more of just a hiring tactic and a tech status grab. Maybe you can convince people on the fringe of functional programming to accept less pay for the lure of getting to learn a functional language? Maybe it&#x27;s worth it if you get on-average higher quality developers because of the affinity for vague association with functional programming?<p>Of course it&#x27;s possible that they really do use F# and that the overall system has been architected well with functional principles. I don&#x27;t get that sense from the linked blog post or from the overall progress of their online services.