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

Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

#21

Post by andirk »

time_to_smile wrote: post #19
polishdude20 wrote: post #3

Him saying he's accountable and not actually being held accountable is not really being "accountable".

Just like we've seen the word "literally" transform into meaning roughly the same a "figuratively, but very strongly" we'll might see the word "accountable", start to mean "no consequences for me, but I do want people to think I feel bad (but don't worry, I don't)".

While I don't agree with the sentiment in this incident, the "accountable" word often means like "I wish I could make this better by doing absolutely nothing".

Re: Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

#23

Post by andirk »

andirk wrote: post #5

Layoffs are always unfortunate, but didn't his company have the bright idea of making meetings all day into a virtual Second Life world where you can actually _see_ the other person's dog barking on the call? The experimental parts of the company hired a lot of those people and now can't keep them. If he gives outgoing employees months of health care, all their PTO, etc. then what is the issue?

Update:

> employees who lose their jobs will be provided with at least four months of salary as severance

OK yeah for a decently skilled software engineer, that's 1 year of free rent in a very nice place in San Francisco. Those not laid off may wish they were.

Re: Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

#24

Post by joegahona »

gregjor wrote: post #22

Responsible, but not really accountable. Accountable would mean falling on his sword.

Interesting:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accountable

1: subject to giving an account : ANSWERABLE held her accountable for the damage

2: capable of being explained : EXPLAINABLE … leaving aside variations accountable as printer's errors … Peter Shaw

Does "accountable" imply there's a price to pay for the person who is held accountable? (Wondering aloud, not challenging you.)

Re: Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

#25

Post by justapassenger »

polishdude20 wrote: post #3

Him saying he's accountable and not actually being held accountable is not really being "accountable".

What would you consider being held accountable?

Sure, resigning is an atomic option, for a CEO, founder, board member and person having controlling amount of votes. Is there anything else that you'd consider as true to that statement?

Re: Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

#27

Post by gregjor »

joegahona wrote: post #24
gregjor wrote: post #22

Responsible, but not really accountable. Accountable would mean falling on his sword.

Interesting: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accountable 1: subject to giving an account : ANSWERABLE held her accountable for the damage 2: capable of being explained : EXPLAINABLE … leaving aside variations accountable as printer's errors … Peter Shaw Does "accountable" imply there's a price to pay for the person who is held accountable? (Wondering aloud, not challenging you.)

I think in context and common usage "accountable" means facing some consequences for your actions or mistakes. Watching your net worth shrink (on paper) counts in some respect, but Zuckerberg won't lose his job, his benefits, have to move, or have to scramble to find a job in this climate.

I suppose we can call the Meta situation "capable of being explained" too. That won't really help the people getting laid off in the next week or two.

Re: Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

#28

Post by jstx1 »

avidphantasm wrote: post #20
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you're worth north of a few hundred million dollars, what practical, concrete, difference does a few billion added - or removed - from one's personal wealth make?

This is why being a billionaire should be functionally illegal. Tax away all of that wealth. It is immoral that we allow people to control that much wealth. Vast wealth should be under democratic control.

Tax away… all the Meta stock? We’re talking about ownership of assets, not about income. What do we do when we take his stock - do we sell it back on the market crashing the price or do we establish government ownership of every large company? How did you come up with 1 billion as the appropriate number? Do we get to decide that part democratically?

Re: Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

#29

Post by jstx1 »

davesque wrote: post #17
jstx1 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's losing 10s of billions, that seems like a very real way in which he's being held accountable.

And his lifestyle would change...how exactly? And where do I sign up for that kind of accountability?

Equating accountability to his lifestyle changing makes no sense to me.

Re: Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

#30

Post by jstx1 »

yamtaddle wrote: post #18
jstx1 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's losing 10s of billions, that seems like a very real way in which he's being held accountable.

Sorta, but I have trouble taking a bad outcome that is "your great-grandchildren still won't have to work for a living, unless you choose to make them" as, like, real consequences. If someone who's already got $10m in the bank would happily trade their success for your "consequences", I dunno, just seems... fake. Like playing poker with quarters—sure you "care" but losing doesn't actually hurt in any meaningful way i…

Yes, he’s a billionaire and he’ll be fine anyway. Does accountability mean something only if his life is ruined or he loses everything? I don’t get that line of thinking at all.
Post reply on HN