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

Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

coindesk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#921

Post by ikrenji »

e-clinton wrote: post #774
Johnny555 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep pointing to Armstrong's $110M house like it's some sort of injustice. If you think billionaires should exist at all, then that's one of the least-bad injustices imaginable Ok, I'll admit it, billionaires should not exist at all, there should be a heavy wealth tax that makes it hard to become a billionaire. Will a CEO work less hard if he (and his peers) can only ever gain $100M in net worth before a wealt…

The issue with that thinking is that not having billionaires isn’t going to automatically redistribute that wealth onto others. The most likely scenario is that that wealth would’ve never been created… and neither will the jobs that came with it.

rich people are not a new invention. not taxing rich people is

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#922

Post by actually_a_dog »

evilsetg wrote: post #907
stevenjgarner wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A wealth tax implies a tax on unrealized appreciated assets, which is beyond bizarre IMHO. So you buy a house for $500k somewhere. It surges in value to $1.2 million. You therefore have an unrealized capital gain of $700k. You are NEVER going to get that money until you sell it, and when you do you are going to pay a whopping amount of capital gain tax. But a wealth tax implies you pay that capital gain tax now. Okay…

How about an exemption for one house/apartment? If you use a house for personal purposes, e.g. to live there then your point stands but in case of commercial purposes the tax is something that should just enter your business calculation.

How about not? If you live there and take advantage of municipal services, you should be expected to pay up.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#923

Post by effingwewt »

Geee wrote: post #50
joshmarinacci wrote: post #40

Coinbase had over 5k employees?!!! WTF. What were they all doing?

Probably customer service. They have about 100 million customers, so 1 employee per 20000 customers.

Do they really have that many customers or do they just claim that? Also per their website that's only 'verified users' which is a super nebulous term, and also exactly what I'd expect from a crypto exchange.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#924

Post by sytelus »

kleer001 wrote: post #672
sytelus wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they still didn't have ability to provide statements!

What's insufficient to your needs with their current transaction reports? It's bare bones, but I think it's useful.

For many legal requirements, you need to provide monthly statements of accounts. You need to show balance at each closing period. Every financial account in world does this.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#925

Post by overtonwhy »

wskinner wrote: post #719
boc wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USDC. They see something really bad on their books that's separate from their core business. Just like how Lehman Brothers was a profitable bank that got shredded by one risky trading strategy. These stablecoins have been devoured one by one, and each time they fall more people start trying to get their money out. USDC will experience a run and it might not be survivable without liquidating user account holdings, whi…

“These stablecoins” lumps together some very different implementations of “thing that is always worth $1”. USDC: fully collateralized by cash or cash equivalents held in US banks - basically a money market fund Terra: partially collateralized by crypto assets + algorithmic magic Tether: like USDC but not held in US banks, and the actual collateral may be partial or of lower quality Dai: overcollaterelized by crypto a…

You neglect to mention that Tether's alleged assets have not had a reputable audit published in a long time. And that the people who control it have already demonstrated an ability and willingness to utilize those assets for whatever they please.

"The order further finds that Tether and Bitfinex’s combined assets included funds held by third-parties, including at least 29 arrangements that were not documented through any agreement or contract, and that Tether transferred Tether reserve funds to Bitfinex, including when Bitfinex needed help responding to a “liquidity crisis.”"

https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8450-21

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#926

Post by piva00 »

marco_yolo wrote: post #919
Johnny555 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep pointing to Armstrong's $110M house like it's some sort of injustice. If you think billionaires should exist at all, then that's one of the least-bad injustices imaginable Ok, I'll admit it, billionaires should not exist at all, there should be a heavy wealth tax that makes it hard to become a billionaire. Will a CEO work less hard if he (and his peers) can only ever gain $100M in net worth before a wealt…

you are making the incredibly naive assumption that taxes is capital that is properly allocated once seized. more often it isn't used well. what gives the government the right to wastes someone else's hard earned money?

That it wasn't hard-earned money but simply a product of exploiting what society provided to them: skilled labour and collective time to build their vision.

They might manage this vision, take on more risk, etc., nothing about that is work enough for them to be rewarded orders of magnitude what they pay others to exploit them. It's a very basic morality issue, better that society wastes the product of exploitation than a single individual.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#927

Post by Markoff »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #15

I think if employees feel slighted by being fired, they're fooling themselves. The best mindset is that you could be gone tomorrow. It gives you clarity and purpose. It also happens to be the truth. Coinbase was also extremely generous with severance. 12 weeks plus two for every one year at the company, I think. I've had the experience of being let go without notice and without severance. Devs seem a little more griz…

> Coinbase was also extremely generous with severance. 12 weeks plus two for every one year at the company, I think.

3-3.5 months resignation/notice period is hardly worth mentioning, pretty standard in Europe, 2 or 3 months being the usual minimum. Sure, no need to come to work and still getting salary is nice, but in the end you will get same money by European standards. And for mass layoffs standards are even stricter, so this seems like completely ordinary layoff by European standards.

It's like saying 2 years warranty is extremely generous and great, while it's the legal minimum in Europe nobody would bother to talk about, heck even 3 years feels pretty mediocre nowadays. Half of my recently bought things like washing machine, headphones or hair trimmer have 5 years warranty (after registration).

> I've had the experience of being let go without notice and without severance.

That just means you sign crappy contracts, have very low standards and don't value yourself, if any company does this to you after probation period. And it's possibly illegal even in United Slaveries of America.

> Three and a half months of dev salary is pretty incredible.

14 weeks ain't 3.5 months any way you look at it, at best it's a few days over 3 months. Originally mentioned 12 weeks are not even 3 months.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#928

Post by jspaetzel »

Fargoan wrote: post #905
UncleMeat wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only feels weird because there is a concerted effort to make you feel that way. It is absolutely identical to property taxes on homes, but that doesn't make people feel icky in the same manner.

Property tax is bullshit

Go start your own town to live in then and don't charge anyone property taxes

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#929

Post by pmontra »

kurisufag wrote: post #836
UncleMeat wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only feels weird because there is a concerted effort to make you feel that way. It is absolutely identical to property taxes on homes, but that doesn't make people feel icky in the same manner.

> but that doesn't make people feel icky in the same manner. speak for yourself! a property tax makes sense in theory: you're contributing to the entity that ensures your land is safe in the first place, but basing it on valuations instead of something like flat rates based on sqft is preposterous. I'd go so far as to say that the degree to which the knowledge of such a tax affects your decisions relating to the prop…

It's not as if I stole the money I bought my house with, the house I'm living in now. I paid taxes on them and keep paying taxes on the money I'm earning now. I really don't see why I have to pay a tax on something I already paid for. Taxes on taxes...

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#930

Post by midasuni »

kurisufag wrote: post #836
UncleMeat wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only feels weird because there is a concerted effort to make you feel that way. It is absolutely identical to property taxes on homes, but that doesn't make people feel icky in the same manner.

> but that doesn't make people feel icky in the same manner. speak for yourself! a property tax makes sense in theory: you're contributing to the entity that ensures your land is safe in the first place, but basing it on valuations instead of something like flat rates based on sqft is preposterous. I'd go so far as to say that the degree to which the knowledge of such a tax affects your decisions relating to the prop…

There are no “natural property rights”, there’s what the person with the bigger stick can enforce.

But let’s take your premise. The more valuable the land, the more an entity will spend to procure it (bigger army etc), and the more you thus have to spend to defend it, thus the more it costs.

Post reply on HN