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

Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

inc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 250 posts

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#131

Post by gtirloni »

iepathos wrote: post #120
juunpp wrote: post #5

I don't know, seems like a weak article. It just names the obvious examples of companies ("tech"!) that over-hired and all that. Others still celebrated the increased demand but also planned ahead, and not everyone has laid off. Guess they don't talk about those.

Yeah, also doesn't mention the super low 3.4% unemployment rate the US still has. Most of the people being laid off are being re-hired within a very short timeframe. The Fed has wanted unemployment back up to ~6% for over a year and can't get it.

> The Fed has wanted unemployment back up to ~6% for over a year and can't get i

Why is the Fed interested in that and why does it want that number to be higher?

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#132

Post by gtirloni »

renewiltord wrote: post #66
not2b wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The companies that celebrated the increased demand but planned ahead did not fall for the forever fallacy. They took advantage of the increased demand but didn't overhire to nearly the same extent. Apple did a much better job at this than Google and Meta.

Interesting, so it appears that you advocate expanding contractors and then firing them over full-time employment like with Apple.. I think it's likely we'll move to that environment naturally.

I was thinking the same thing. How does one's "plan ahead" doesn't include firing people they overhired?

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#133

Post by auggierose »

> Just the law of large numbers says that eventually you reach all of the people who are likely to be your customers and you stop growing (see Netflix).

That has nothing to do with the law of large numbers. That's just discrete and strictly monotonic growth hitting any upper bound eventually.

What a bullshitter.

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#134

Post by Eisenstein »

dools wrote: post #106
tombert wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah; the thing that kind of triggered me on this was the Google CEO saying in December or January that he "takes full responsibility" for all these layoffs. "Full responsibiliyt"? Really? How are you doing that exactly? By still getting your full paycheck and bonus while you fired twelve thousand humans because you didn't consider that the economy after years of a pandemic might be volatile?

That's what private companies are supposed to do though. They exist to make a profit. The type of people working for Google will be the first to get hired when the economy picks up again, if you really care about the impacts of boom and bust don't worry about what the private sector is doing, think about advocating for a federal Job Guarantee which helps those who need it most: http://www.jobguarantee.org/

> That's what private companies are supposed to do though.

Google is not a private company though.

> The type of people working for Google will be the first to get hired when the economy picks up again

So instead of spending the time looking for a job, possibly relocating, settling down, getting used to a new workplace, etc, and staying there, they get to do all that and then do it again. This is not a trivial set of events to have to redo.

> if you really care about the impacts of boom and bust don't worry about what the private sector is doing

This makes zero sense.

> link

No thanks.

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#135

Post by permanent »

auggierose wrote: post #133

> Just the law of large numbers says that eventually you reach all of the people who are likely to be your customers and you stop growing (see Netflix). That has nothing to do with the law of large numbers. That's just discrete and strictly monotonic growth hitting any upper bound eventually. What a bullshitter.

Agreed. Truly despise when otherwise smart tech bloggers use jargons (incorrectly) to appear authoritative

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#136

Post by Eisenstein »

bilvar wrote: post #127
LunaSea wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cry me a river. Will the company have to uproot its family to find a new worker?

I don't understand how the convenience of the worker makes it fairer to demand loyalty but not reciprocate. Sounds entitled and self-serving.

The reason no one shows loyalty is exactly because it is not reciprocated. Why should the employee have to be loyal when they are just a number to an HR department and the CEO will strike off their job without a second thought? You have things backwards. People used to be loyal, back when you could work at a place, grow your career, and retire with a pension. It wasn't the laborers who broke the loyalty deal.

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#137

Post by BeFlatXIII »

tjpnz wrote: post #7

How do you achieve infinite growth on a planet with a finite population and resources? It should be obvious to most, yet the supposed "smartest guys in the room" are the first to stumble through it.

A whole bunch of fantasy hokum about the unlimited power of human ingenuity.

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#138

Post by m000 »

pdimitar wrote: post #128
DrScientist wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By saying that he is directing internal heat ( and external heat - like yours ) to himself, rather than HR, or middle managers etc in Google. I suspect that's the reason for saying that. If you feel the need to blame somebody - blame me ( not other people or external conditions or shareholders ). Ultimately it is his fault - even if it was forced on him be shareholders - he'd have the option of resigning ( following…

This does not change the fact that the "heat" he is taking had exactly zero consequences for him. So "I take full responsibility" is an empty platitude that means basically nothing.

That's not true. I'm sure he was more sweaty than usual, laughing on his way to the bank. /s

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#139

Post by mbork_pl »

robertlagrant wrote: post #93
tombert wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know, it's a corporate platitude. It doesn't "mean" anything, but it just rubbed me the wrong way. "Taking full responsibility", to me, would imply some sort of sacrifice on your end. Words are cheap; hell, I can say that I take full responsibility for the Google layoffs. I have never worked for Google but I did about as much as Sundar Pichai to take responsibility for the layoffs.

He's saying don't get angry at anyone else at Google, I think.

That's not what "responsibility" means, I think. (Although I think the parent is right, my criticism is not directed at him.)

Re: Tech companies keep falling for the forever fallacy

#140

Post by mbork_pl »

Eisenstein wrote: post #134
dools wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what private companies are supposed to do though. They exist to make a profit. The type of people working for Google will be the first to get hired when the economy picks up again, if you really care about the impacts of boom and bust don't worry about what the private sector is doing, think about advocating for a federal Job Guarantee which helps those who need it most: http://www.jobguarantee.org/

> That's what private companies are supposed to do though. Google is not a private company though. > The type of people working for Google will be the first to get hired when the economy picks up again So instead of spending the time looking for a job, possibly relocating, settling down, getting used to a new workplace, etc, and staying there, they get to do all that and then do it again. This is not a trivial set of…

> Google is not a private company though.

Well of course it is, isn't it? It's not state-owned, right?

Post reply on HN