81–90 of 509 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At a company the size of Facebook, the CEO should not be involved at that level.
Respectfully: Zuckerberg has earned the right to care about whatever he darn-well pleases at company the size of his.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? It's his company. He can do what he wants.
I'm surprised that nobody is questioning this. Zuckerberg owns ~17% of Meta shares, so it quite clearly not "his" company where he can do whatever he pleases. Primarily he is an employee and has a responsibility to the owners (which does include him) to do his job, arguably looking at button padding is not part of his job description.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? It's his company. He can do what he wants.
His company pays design and UX experts a huge amount of money to come up with designs that work for users , not for him personally. Meta isn't Zuckerberg's toy. Ignoring that expertise, and designing for himself instead of users, is failing the shareholders by wasting money and not maximizing revenue. The parallel to Steve Jobs is a fair one, except that Steve was brilliant at design and UX and got things right. He w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this read “Let’s ditch those ethical people who get in the way of profit.”? Yes FB is not for me. Not as a worker, not as a customer.
Imagine how bleak it must be to be an average SWE at facebook. Sure, you get paid a ton of money, but now they are going to "turn up the heat" on you to pump glorified CRUD message board features faster. (yes, I know there are probably lots of intellectually interesting jobs at Meta, but the overall purpose and mission just isn't exactly inspiring)
That's like describing SpaceX as "glorified fireworks"
Interesting quote from CEO in an all hands directly to employees. I don't want to be at Meta right now.. .."turning up the heat" on performance management to weed out staffers unable to meet more aggressive goals. "Realistically, there are probably a bunch of people at the company who shouldn't be here," Zuckerberg said. "Part of my hope by raising expectations and having more aggressive goals, and just kind of turni…
Does this read “Let’s ditch those ethical people who get in the way of profit.”? Yes FB is not for me. Not as a worker, not as a customer.
I read it more as let's ditch those 'lazy' people that don't 'embrace the grind', only want to work 8 hours a day and then just go home.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Performance Summary Cycle. From experience, the psc culture within fb/meta is intense, internally competitive (even within teams) and heavily focuses on quantifiable gains (e.g. often tech-debt or ethical-minded features are forgone for engagement metric increases ... via any means). It's not nice unless you're a very specific type of person.
If Zuckerberg finds it OK to talk like that to its employees, then it means the general culture there must be able to hear him. So you're right, very specific type of person. But I wonder : how would you describe that type ? the type "if I'm in Meta it's because I'm the best of the best and I want to continue to prove I'm the best of the best, at any cost" ?
i have been really pleasantly surprised at how pervasive this mindset is among pretty much every one of my colleagues. it's something that i wanted at my previous jobs. i suppose it's not for everyone but it's been working for the small sample of people i know.
What's so off-putting here is that he's already trying to frame those departures as separating from 'the weakest' (which is disingenuous, because it's old management wisdom that the first to leave in such situations are generally among the best, because those have the best outside options).
My roommate works at Meta and from how he describes the culture to me it seems quite intense and competitive already. I can't imagine what "turning up the heat" even more would imply.
They'll force more people into the lower buckets of the stack rank. It’s very dystopian in its simplicity.