This is very typical. He is talking about cutting now former employees access to email, source code repositories, internal systems. It is done all the time. It looks very harsh.
And if I were a customer, I'd be concerned if they didn't cut off access immediately.
IMO it's concerning that they don't have more granular security controls than totally shutting down someone's access (or maybe they do, but they laid off the person who knows how to take access away from production systems without taking away someone's ability to read email)
> If you are affected, you will receive this notification in your personal email, because we made the decision to cut access to Coinbase systems for affected employees. I realize that removal of access will feel sudden and unexpected, and this is not the experience I wanted for you. Given the number of employees who have access to sensitive customer information, it was unfortunately the only practical choice, to ensu…
Cutting off access for any IT / OPs / SRE type role when releasing an employee is mandatory, not just typical.
The PIP thing varies. Some companies just use them as a risk reducing tool to fire people, but a few really believe in them and will keep employees who've gone through them. I take a dim view of that, personally, just because it ends up feeling like management-by-fear.
People can get their act together especially if external factors were a significant part of the problem. That said, assuming they can find employment elsewhere--which may be easier or harder depending on their skills and location--they're probably better starting fresh somewhere else.
My view is that if your employer is telling you to come to Jesus, the productive relationship is already gone. Work isn't a marriage or a family; if it's not working, you don't have to take extraordinary measures to preserve it.
Never heard this happen (Scandinavia) other than in the cases where an employee clearly breached laws or company policy. Standard procedure here is that you as a salaried employee will be guaranteed 1-2-3 months (depending on your contract) of notice. Edit with example: https://www.arbeidstilsynet.no/en/working-conditions/dismiss... > An employee may usually remain in the post as long as negotiations or legal proceed…
Being paid for 1-3 months is entirely independent of whether they want you in the office or not. In Britain it's called gardening leave, and it's common in finance and other jobs with tight security. You are paid, but you stay and home and do some gardening. (Or, more likely, look for a new job.)
I work with online payment processor and early during the covid pandemic we had some layoffs. They were all notices of 1+ month and everyone of them continued to work for the majority of the notice period. Nobody had anything revoked early.
I understand it happens, but it seems _way_ too common (reading the comments here) compared to what is actually necessary.
It’s been pretty interesting watching YC backed Coinbase get absolutely crushed by FTX, which has a higher % of crypto trading volume despite having less than 10% of the headcount. Crypto is a zero sum game, and the old Paul Graham essays and other tired VC dogmas really only work in positive sum games. FTX was founded by traders which is valuable when the ultimate purpose of the crypto industry is to separate uninfo…
FTX is also going to feel a lot of pain when the crypto market crash completes. None of these companies are IMO sustainable without mass interest in cryptocurrencies, which is rapidly fading as people realise they're not going to get rich quick.
This is the case for most market makers in whatever markets they're in. A crash usually produces a huge trading windfall, and then the subsequent "recession" leaves people with little money to invest/gamble with. FTX's traders are veterans of the industry, and they understand the need to be lean when order flow is light, and the need to make as much as possible when it's hot. Coinbase just watched the best two years of trading pass in front of their eyes, and failed to monetize it even to 10% of its potential. If they're lucky, they will get another opportunity to do things right in 5 years. But the trading graveyard is filled with people/companies like Coinbase who did really well for a year because they lucked into a good position, but who should have done 10x better. But then the real players see the opportunity, and run the Coinbases of the world off.
So they scaled from 1000 to 2000 employees in a year because ... There were new use cases enabled by crypto getting traction practically every week. We saw the opportunities but we needed to massively scale our team to be positioned to compete in a broad array of bets. ...yet they have not enabled their users to use the Lightning Network? I wonder why. The LN would enable all Coinbase users to do nearly instant and n…
Probably because they see that the vast majority of their users never withdraw their coins, and they probably prefer it that way.
Nobody's using crypto for its intended purpose - its value proposition when it comes to payments is just as dubious as it ever was. The vast majority of the attention for crypto has been for its speculative aspect.
I'm receiving part of my salary in USDT, and find it valuable. Traditional banking system doesn't work well for everyone.
That is the case with stablecoins. Stablecoins are the most boring thing in crypto and few people really use it for payments.
Gains from trading are zero sum - whatever anyone takes out (when selling), someone must put in (by buying). More specifically, it is a negative sum game, since exchanges and miners want their cut. So, the assertion that crypto as a whole is zero sum hinges on the assumption that for the vast majority of people, the utility of crypto comes from capital gains (buying and selling for a higher price), rather than, say,…
No. If I buy Monero on an exchange, I pay only the marginal buyer’s price. The ability to transact privately may, however, be worth much more to me than that price.
Monero and its ability to transact privately is only valuable if you're participating in criminal activity, which is not the vast majority of people.
You may say that, no, hypothetically you are a privacy-enthusiast and like monero as a hobby money, but in reality most rational actors on Monero as evading taxes and using DNMs.
(I would also argue that Monero is the only crypto that is more currency than any other crypto today bc of this, but it's not a selling point IMO)
What struck me about this announcement was that the CEO states a couple of times that he is accountable for the decision, but doesn't say what form that accountability takes. I try not to be cynical, but I suspect in this case that there will be no actual, real accountability.
He just bought a house for $133,000,000. That's enough to give everyone who was laid off slightly a severance of more than $120,000. Somehow I'm expecting accountability to be significantly less than that.
I had to look this up after seeing that eye popping number. Apparently 9 figure homes is a thing amongst the billionaire class: