Robinhood lays off 23% of staff • Hacker News Board

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#611

Post by donkeyd » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 9:20 AM UTC

Foobar8568 wrote: post #528

tenpies wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet tech is such a small portion of the labor force that layoffs here basically mean zilch when it comes to the unemployment rate/inflation, and thus there's a long way for it to fall before the Fed adjusts policy The really scary thing for me is the possible macro environment for tech. Indians will soon overtake any of the Western countries as the largest English-speaking population on the internet. As I'm sure ma…

Have you ever worked with an Indian company? I am just laughing each time I hear huge talent pool. So maybe your top 1% is incredible but they already left the country.

This is my experience too. Worked with an Indian start-up and most of them were utterly useless. They also never managed to make any of their deadlines because they'd always say yes to whatever you asked. Thank god for the one guy who always fixed everything we needed.

Of course, this is a broad generalization, but so is the idea that Indian talent will take over the world.

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#612

Post by tick_tock_tick » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 9:51 AM UTC

wyclif wrote: post #569

spookthesunset wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That remote work stuff will go away. People are kidding if they think large organizations can innovate and remain competitive when everybody on a team isn’t in the same room. Individually people might think they are more productive (at least coders do) but the communication issues that arise from remote work are gonna really become an issue soon enough.

Nah, remote work isn't going anywhere—it's here to stay. I know management doesn't want to believe that because they want to count asses in seats, but the collaboration issue has been solved by Zoom/GitHub/Trello/Slack &c.

How can you even say that with a straight face when it's already getting scaled back?

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#613

Post by tick_tock_tick » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 9:57 AM UTC

ab_testing wrote: post #47

Somehow I feel that all these VC backed firms just add employees for the sake of adding employees. I use Tastyworks - another free online brokerage that it almost at feature parity with Robinhood. They have stocks, options, futures and even some selective crypto. They also make money using PFOF just like Robinhood. However on Linkedin, their employee count is less than 100 (99 to be precise) On the other hand, Robinh…

To be fair their mobile app was really really bad the last time I used it.

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#614

Post by tick_tock_tick » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 10:06 AM UTC

xyst wrote: post #127

fleddr wrote: post #85

We live in such morally bankrupt times. You can just say "you take responsibility" without actually taking responsibility at all. Our expectations have become so low and we've become so complacent that just the statement is enough. In similar vain, "we care about your mental health" as is the common internal email from HR. No actual care is offered though. Giving staff a day off is a tangible example of doing at leas…

This is where we balance it out with unions. Unions have historically gotten us everything today that most people think is just SOP. Limited work weeks (40 hrs). Monday thru Friday as business days. Paid vacations. Family and medical leave. Breaks. Paid holidays. Sick leave. It’s a shame there’s been a massive push from corporations pushing anti-union propaganda. We have been complacent. We need unions to make our vo…

> We need unions to make our voice heard. Both in the mega corps and local/state/federal governments.

We have them; it's why education and policing is so fucked.

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#615

Post by twawaaay » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 10:21 AM UTC

twawaaay wrote: post #550

adam_arthur wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No heuristic is perfect, but it's fairly easy to quantify empirically from activity/records. Developers who are productive (actually write and ship large amounts of quality code) tend to be valuable and those that don't, aren't. That being said there are some intangibles, like morale etc. It's possible there are people that benefit the team while having low personal productivity. But anyway, no need to approach in th…

> No heuristic is perfect, but it's fairly easy to quantify empirically from activity/records. Developers who are productive (actually write and ship large amounts of quality code) tend to be valuable and those that don't, aren't. If you are factory line worker, yes. If you are a developer or a manager (a "knowledge worker") -- what you could be observed to be doing has usually little correlation with result for the…

I don't like to respond to my own posts but I forgot to include something which I think is important.

Unfair "heuristics" create unhealthy incentives that are typically way more damaging than having little clarity.

1. People feel treated unfairly and their engagement drops off a cliff at that point in time. People can be happy even accepting a punishment AS LONG as they FEEL they are being treated fairly.

2. People feel pressed to do things for show, just to appease measurements even if they don't believe it is right. Soon they are fine doing substandard or even completely shoddy work even in areas that are not measured, because that's what people do. People do not just selectively resign from doing good work -- if they feel they are asked to do bad work somewhere they will also do it in other areas and find a rationale for it.

3. People who will not accept bullshit and would want to do right regardless of unfair measurements, will evaporate from your company. They usually leave on their own. This will leave your company worse overall -- with no people who will tell managers the truth when it is needed the most.

4. The corporate, thinking they have measurements, stop looking to actually do better. The measurements become everything.

It is frequently better to not pretend you solved the problem and accept the problem is hard and try to do best anyway.

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#616

Post by ece » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 10:33 AM UTC

inkeddeveloper wrote: post #401

llaolleh wrote: post #24

That's a lot of staff - it means 1/5th of your coworkers got laid off... I'm very bearish on Robinhood - I don't know if they have enough of a moat to defend themselves from other free stock trading apps. People have forgiven so many outages. The Gamestop saga was the straw that broke the camel's back for many.

I know I’m a mere small drop in a large bucket, but I take solace in knowing there were plenty of other drops like me that eventually wrecked that bucket.

Great game! Assuming you made the Inked game.

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#617

Post by spaceman_2020 » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 10:56 AM UTC

14 wrote: post #39

t_mann wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just saying, the ones who might end up being surprised are those who think that the crazy days of 20/21 are definitely over. For all we know, it's just summer now. Not that I don't dread further lockdowns or even necessarily expect them, but I have them on my list of possible scenarios.

Oh we will be getting locked down again in the fall I am sure of that. Canada didn’t upgrade it’s definition of fully vaccinated for no reason. Come fall those “fully vaccinated” will be allowed to enter restaurants and work while those who oppose further shots will be told stay home

Hard to convince people to lockdown when they see their friends and family getting Covid and bouncing back in a week.

There was legit fear of the disease in 2020-21. It has now morphed into a strong flu - and the data shows it.

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#618

Post by gruez » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 11:38 AM UTC

qaq wrote: post #607

gruez wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Wha the point of paying for order flow if you "execute at market price or better"? https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-02-05/robinh... tl;dr: adverse selection. retail traders are less risky to deal with, so market makers can offer better prices to them. >If the retail trades are random. If retail traders usually buy before the stock goes up, and sell before the stock goes down, the wholesaler would cons…

show me a liquid stock with .25 spread

The numbers are given as examples, not as real figures. If you look at the document from my prior comment the price improvement (and therefore spreads that citadel makes) is on the order of pennies or less.

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#619

Post by username_my1 » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 11:40 AM UTC

twawaaay wrote: post #550

adam_arthur wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No heuristic is perfect, but it's fairly easy to quantify empirically from activity/records. Developers who are productive (actually write and ship large amounts of quality code) tend to be valuable and those that don't, aren't. That being said there are some intangibles, like morale etc. It's possible there are people that benefit the team while having low personal productivity. But anyway, no need to approach in th…

> No heuristic is perfect, but it's fairly easy to quantify empirically from activity/records. Developers who are productive (actually write and ship large amounts of quality code) tend to be valuable and those that don't, aren't. If you are factory line worker, yes. If you are a developer or a manager (a "knowledge worker") -- what you could be observed to be doing has usually little correlation with result for the…

I keep hearing this argument about "knowledge workers" yet writers produce books, designers produce design documents, developers ship code.

sometimes you slow down because you're starting something new or you're blocked by other people, but in general productivity measured in code changes frequency / volume and the impact of the feature being worked on is rather straightforward (how many users use the feature, how much revenue it makes).

anyone who argues against this is ether on the poor side of this measurement or work in a cash flush environment where no one cared about this.

Re: Robinhood lays off 23% of staff

#620

Post by reshlo » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 11:50 AM UTC

jupp0r wrote: post #571

legalcorrection wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a good argument from you. As if the sheer number of employees is what made Google successful in the first place. And as if efficiency alone makes a successful company. Why would you think these things?

GP was stating that 50% of tech workers at big companies are redundant. Armed with that knowledge he should be in a stellar position to found a company that is very profitable compared to its competitors who incur double the labor costs. This incredible competitive advantage will enable him to become the next Google eventually. Sounds plausible? No? I wonder where the error is.

Having a better understanding of who the essential employees are is necessary, but not sufficient, to run a more profitable company than the current market leaders.