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

Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 540 posts

Re: Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

#381

Post by zeusk »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #368
scottLobster wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm referring to the complacency of the last 10 years, when every time the fed even muttered about raising rates they caved to Wall St panics and politics. Those super low rates are primarily responsible for everything from the insane wealth inequality we've developed over the last 10 years to housing becoming largely unaffordable to people losing their shirts gambling on bitcoin. What kept inflation at 2% was a perf…

How do low rates lead to wealth inequality?

Because the rich get to borrow and buy assets and assets go up in prices.

The haves benefit way more from cheap debt than have nots who can't take out debt or have appreciating assets to begin with.

Re: Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

#383

Post by jgwil2 »

q7xvh97o2pDhNrh wrote: post #176
411111111111111 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They want to change that by having people switching en masse to the Metaverse but I'm really not sure this is happening. The tech isn't even close to there yet. Current gen VR tech demos sparks the imagination, and it's definitely great for people that want to like it... But that's not even close to good enough for mass adoption. Their teased prototypes look like a solid upgrade, but it's still not going to be enou…

> centuries Centuries ? I haven't taken a close look at VR (though I'm flirting with buying a headset soon, just for kicks...) but I'd always assumed it was more like 10-25 years away. What are the hardware breakthroughs that you think would do it?

Only thing I can think is that GP is making a sports reference (1 century = 100 runs in cricket) a la "home run" being used to mean a smashing success.

Re: Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

#384

Post by SantalBlush »

itsoktocry wrote: post #218
yuan43 wrote: post #161

> “I had hoped the economy would have more clearly stabilized by now, but from what we're seeing it doesn't yet seem like it has, so we want to plan somewhat conservatively,” Zuckerberg said. A Meta spokesperson declined to comment. The economy is stabilizing. It's being weaned off of ultra-loose money for the first time in years. The stock market is starting to behave more rationally, demanding that a company whose…

>*The economy is stabilizing.* The economy is never "stable". It is constantly in a cycle of ups and downs, over-investment and under-investment, easy money and tight money... The current state is no more "normal" than any other period.

>The economy is never "stable". It is constantly in a cycle of ups and downs, over-investment and under-investment, easy money and tight money...

That's pedantic and beside the point. The question is whether the economy experiences periods of relative stability. The answer is yes.

Re: Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

#385

Post by scottLobster »

dragontamer wrote: post #353
scottLobster wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm referring to the complacency of the last 10 years, when every time the fed even muttered about raising rates they caved to Wall St panics and politics. Those super low rates are primarily responsible for everything from the insane wealth inequality we've developed over the last 10 years to housing becoming largely unaffordable to people losing their shirts gambling on bitcoin. What kept inflation at 2% was a perf…

> What kept inflation at 2% was a perfect historical moment in global growth/globalization that will not come again in our lifetimes. If that "perfectly balanced 2% inflation" was pushed away with say, the central bank raising interest rates, what do you think would have happened? We would have had deflation. Which is incredibly dangerous. Its not even a question, all of that inflationary pressure (low rates, QE1, QE…

A target chosen completely arbitrarily. Obviously deflation is playing with fire, but I see no reason why something closer to 0% inflation would have been an issue. Maybe even a quarter or two of deflation wouldn't have killed things. Things more or less cost the same year to year? People would be less incentivized to invest unless they have an idea they think will have a return that beats a savings account? Cool, maybe slow, steady growth and savings could have stored up a decent cash pile for... oh, I don't know, a pandemic and a full blown war amongst (by world standards) wealthy nations? Those fun unforeseen events that I guess those in power (in the west at least) arrogantly deemed were no longer possible?

There are probably literally a thousand proverbs in a thousand languages, probably more in languages lost to time, that amount of some version of "when times are good, prepare for the bad". This is fundamental human knowledge.

I guess we generally agree, I just get frustrated when institutions like the fed, who are politically insulated by design, fail to appreciate their responsibility or make full use of their privileged position. Seems like for most of the last ten years leadership in general was conflict-avoidant to a fault.

Re: Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

#387

Post by mbesto »

BurningFrog wrote: post #234
yuan43 wrote: post #161

> “I had hoped the economy would have more clearly stabilized by now, but from what we're seeing it doesn't yet seem like it has, so we want to plan somewhat conservatively,” Zuckerberg said. A Meta spokesperson declined to comment. The economy is stabilizing. It's being weaned off of ultra-loose money for the first time in years. The stock market is starting to behave more rationally, demanding that a company whose…

> The economy is stabilizing. The economy is in the early phases of the biggest Fed tightening since at least the 1980s. If you know where that will end up, congrats. For the rest of us, it's very much uncharted waters.

> For the rest of us, it's very much uncharted waters.

Aren't economies all uncharted waters until they aren't (e.g. hindsight)? 2 years ago we hit a global pandemic and tech stocks were trading at absurd PE levels 6 months later. So, no one really knows "where this will end up".

Re: Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

#388

Post by askafriend »

naniwaduni wrote: post #361
dadoge wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Length of tenure at time of severance” That is such a better metric, why is this not used more often

It has its own almost-opposite problem in only counting employees who did leave .

Well you can also just count current employees' tenure. That fixes the problem and is qualitatively consistent IMO.

Re: Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

#389

Post by prakhar897 »

Ozzie_osman wrote: post #53

Our startup spends a little bit on Facebook Ads (across FB, Instagram, etc). It's very clear over the past few months that there's trouble in the ads engine. Attribution is a mess, ad efficiency fluctuates randomly, the UI and API are flaky. I don't know whether this is a result of the ios privacy changes, the broader economy affecting ad spend, or internal issues... Maybe a mix. But it's clear that Meta's main reven…

As a user, FB is a hot mess rn so much so that I'm forced to switch to other apps. 8/10 posts are either sponsored or "suggested" by some random page. It's like watching 30 mins of ad to watch 1 min of video on youtube. When I instictively open the app, the first 10 posts (ads) help me in breaking the habit.

Re: Meta announces hiring freeze, warns employees of restructuring

#390

Post by neves »

dadoge wrote: post #360
brilee wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 years is deceptive - in an exponentially growing company, the majority of employees are fresh, pushing the average tenure low. The relevant number is "length of tenure at time of severance", which I believe skews much higher. Any company seeing 30% churn is having a bad, bad time.

“Length of tenure at time of severance” That is such a better metric, why is this not used more often

I thinkit is impossible to get this number
Post reply on HN