Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter announces layoffs

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 410 posts

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#391

Post by IndianAstronaut »

jobu wrote: post #218
ghshephard wrote: post #98

The number, 336, is roughly 10% of their employees - which is pretty much exactly the number that Jack Welch recommended turning over each year to improve the work force. I often wonder whether these "layoffs" aren't actually layoffs, but simply performance based assessments. It's not like Twitter is shutting down an entire office, or abandoning some technology, and letting everyone associated with that office/techno…

A large company with stable growth can afford to lose and retrain 10% of its workforce each year. It's also a lot more difficult to get fired from a very large company, so some forced fat-trimming is often necessary. Twitter is not that big, and it's growth is not very stable right now. Any layoff is going to be a morale hit, and they're likely to lose some very talented people in the aftershocks. The last company I…

This seems like common sense. I know if there are layoffs at my company, the first thing I will do is start looking around.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#393

Post by wylee »

rconti wrote: post #212
cwbrandsma wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Startup is just a code word for "tech company" anymore.

"Anymore" is just a word used to mean "now" anymore. (I kid, but seriously, I've searched for analysis on the use of the word 'anymore' in the positive (eg, as something other than part of a 'not...anymore' clause) and haven't been able to find anything. Any links would be appreciated, I am legitimately curious as to when and how this became a thing).

I have family in the southeastern US who use "anymore" like the person you're responding to did (and they have for decades). I don't think it simply means "now". There's a slightly different connotation that seems somewhat negative. Kind of like: "It used to be like this, but now it's like this... and I'm not sure I approve".

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#394

Post by MichaelGG »

sirkneeland wrote: post #316
nsxwolf wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's better than "rightsizing".

or "streamlining" or "must be accomplished within an appropriate financial envelope" Or any other of Stephen Elop's greatest hits..

The Twitter layoff uses "streamline": "the rest of the organization will be streamlined in parallel."

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#395

Post by developer1 »

uptown wrote: post #139

"we plan to part ways with up to 336 people from across the company. We are doing this with the utmost respect for each and every person." Bart might disagree: https://twitter.com/bartt/status/653946266938818561

This. It's the thing that stands apart from the rest of the email. "Up to 336". Huh? That is far too specific. Either that was an exact percentage of staff, or they have the list of 336 people, and may reverse on up to a couple of dozen if they fight for their positions with good explanations as to why they deserve to stay.

"Up to 336". The fact that phrase made it into the email is unbelievable. Who, being at the head of a company so large, writes with that kind of language?

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#396

Post by developer1 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #277
kamaal wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's ok, But the opposite should also be true. Don't scream 'disloyalty' when a employee wants to leave on a short notice.

There's likely a severance package, so pay will continue for a period (usually at least two weeks, often several weeks per year of seniority). Not that this blunts the message much. And FWIW, I tend to agree with your comment regarding loyalty -- that ship sailed long ago, 1980s, possibly 1970s.

For the employees affected, the "generous exit packages" is all that matters. Do you know what I consider to be generous? 6 months of pay, no less. What did they probably get? 4 weeks. It's disgusting to see this kind of language in an email, when the employees are obviously being screwed beyond belief.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#398

Post by masklinn »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #210
dexcs wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter's Servers are running autonom. We just do not need you anymore... Thanks... AI

Error: No payroll records for your username. ("We fixed the glitch!"

That's not far from reality either: https://twitter.com/bartt/status/653946266938818561

> I've been impacted by $TWTR's layoffs. This is how I found out this morning.

[screenshot of iOS account showing inaccessible @twitter.com account]

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#399

Post by andyjohnson0 »

celticninja wrote: post #70
andyjohnson0 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why the parent post is being downvoted: trading using Twitter sentiment analysis is apparently a thing [1][2]. [1] http://www.deltixlab.com/research/an-automated-trading-strat... [2] http://cs229.stanford.edu/proj2011/TrusheimChakoumakosYendlu... Edit: typo

there have even been a few instances shown on HN where these algorithms picked stuff up from the internet and have run with it, i.e. placed real trades. I remember at least 2 instances of this recently, once where the story was fake and once where an earnings forecast(i think) was released on a site but they had not published the URL so the assumption was no one would see it. The bot made a significant sum on the sec…

Fascinating - especially if the loop get closed and trading algorithms can generate short-lived tweets (Markov chains?) to disrupt their opponents sentiment analysis.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#400

Post by quarterto »

BlackJack wrote: post #122
quarterto wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of language is communication. Did you understand what melvinmt meant? Yes, of course you did. What's the big deal? What are you gaining by "correcting" a pointless[1] semantic distinction, other than your own smug satisfaction? [1]: Yes, it's pointless. Why is there no such distinction for "more"?

He was just giving a tip. Your "smug satisfaction" view is in your mind. I would want to know if I was misusing a word.

Fun fact: all our perceptions of other people's emotion is "in our mind". Doesn't make the perception invalid.
Post reply on HN