Meta plans thousands more layoffs as soon as this week

Post by bretticus » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 2:24 PM UTC

Iolaum wrote: post #158

zmmmmm wrote: post #88

Two rounds of layoffs seems to say something that one round doesn't. You would expect that all things being equal there is never a scenario where it is better to do two cuts instead of just one. So why? a) things were much worse than realised. Maybe but it would have to be a big shock coming because Meta's general performance has held up OK, certainly nothing that would warrant this. b) HR reasons? some sort of requi…

Could it be that since Twitter hasn't collapsed yet people are trying to pull a Musk headcount-wise (albeit in a better executed manner) ?

Post by red-iron-pine » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 2:26 PM UTC

4gotunameagain wrote: post #152

shapefrog wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes a certain kind of cold detatchment to hire 5,000-10,000 people to r&d and build the foundation of your next big thing - drain every ounce of life out of them then discard them on the heap a couple of years later.

[flagged]

Post by chasd00 » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 2:27 PM UTC

brokencode wrote: post #186

4gotunameagain wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

HN is probably not the best audience for this message. But I obviously disagree. People don’t become doctors because it’s insanely hard, stressful, time-consuming, and expensive. What we need there is not more money, as doctors also have high salaries already, but a reform in the system to make it more appealing to do the work. I’m not sure what you mean by “more engineers, more visionaries”. Are workers at big tech…

Post by itsyaboi » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 2:29 PM UTC

mandeepj wrote: post #134

berkle4455 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would someone quit in this scenario when they can just as easily get paid multiple months of severance with benefits?

> Why would someone quit in this scenario They might have another offer lined up!

Post by achenet » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 2:31 PM UTC

b112 wrote: post #165

mschuster91 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm usually not one to say companies shouldn't take on risks to expand into new business areas, particularly not in times where the core product is bleeding lucrative users... but here it's the same shit as with Twitter prior to Parag Agrawal's term or with Elon Musk's dozens of ventures. It's one thing and bad enough if board members have sometimes dozens of posts... but Zuckerberg, Musk, Dorsey all show it's not a…

And it's especially not good if they use company resources for their personal pet projects. Good grief. I guess if you are a CFO, or finance guy, sure. But a "pet project" is conjoined with passion. And R&D, and testing the waters in other markets, is what causes true motivation. People often complain that big corps can only innovate via acquisition. Yet, this comment is complaining that big corps are innovating by..…