[flagged]
Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
311–320 of 333 posts
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#312[flagged]
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
While X's main use case works, I just tried to run some ads there. When trying to upgrade to verified org: "An unexpected error occurred" When trying to change my display name: "An unexpected error occurred" When trying to run an ad: "Awaiting verification" for a week Contacting support through messages: No response Finally finding a way to submit a ticket: 3 day response time with a standard response that didn't res…
It's sad that you cannot even get through the workflow that gives them money. They must be in absolutely terrible shape.
Yes, like all of Elon Musk’s undertakings; ready for bankruptcy at any moment, if HN is asked.
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter/X hasn't seen notable user growth since ~2015/16 and has been absolutely flat since then, coming up on a decade now. It was 325 million active users in 2015 and it's still about 300 million active users today (spring 2024). A decade of no growth. I don't know if twitter is functioning exactly the same as it was before, but if you have to pay the bills, cutting 80% of the workforce and holding the line seems t…
I worked at Twitter and let me tell you that's not how it works. When you whack most of the engineers out of the company, and if it still continues to work, that doesn't mean you don't need that many engineers. It means the following: 1. The ones remaining are practically working 24x7 every day for essentially the same pay, with the promise of more. 2. You keep falling behind on all the things you need to do to keep…
> I worked at Twitter
I bet you did.
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
They would do terribly. They're completely and utterly different skill sets. It makes as much sense as taking an oboe player and asking them to conduct an orchestra, without any conducting experience. Do you know how to handle investor relations and different factions on the board? Managing sales and marketing strategies? Assessing the regulatory environment in Europe and the legal risks of expansion in China? Can yo…
All these tasks you listed - what makes you think an average CEO knows how to do any of them? How do you know if the company is doing well because of the CEO or despite them?
You might want to go with Occam’s razor here and admit that there’s probably no conspiracy going on with incapable executives running companies, and instead the right hiring choices are being made.
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#316Earlier quoted context omitted.
> why are executives who set the company priorities not also axed? They are the ones that ultimately messed up as they had poor strategic vision. Are you fired for any mistake you make in your job? Generally not. And managing staff size is like 1% of their job. They're also busy running their divisions, managing roadmaps and objectives and all sorts of non-staff resource planning, etc. It's entirely reasonable to thi…
Has anyone tried laying off most of the executive team - instead of the workers?
Until they no longer choose to cut employee costs, or what would be the end goal here?
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
that is more like it. Or we fired 1/2 the scrum masters, so now each project only gets 50% of one instead of a FT one, and BTW, all of a sudden developer meetings get cut in half as a side benefit. Every large company I have ever worked for could have easily fired 1/3 the staff and ran just fine indefinitely - but only if they fired the right third.
In my experience usually the real benefit would have been if they hired the right kind of positions. No, not "hire better developers/etc". Hire for positions they don't hire because they seem superfluous. I think in every bigger project over the last 10 years I asked, in otherwise reasonably staffed companies, for a technical writer. Even part time one. Fohgeddaboutit. Sometimes the issue is, as sacrilegious as it so…
It could be you’ve been in the wrong all those ten years.
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#318If the company fires hundreds or thousands of people and there is no visible dip in the productivity, is it really a bad thing? One thing that is baffling to me is that these companies can fire 10% of their workforce and they just keep on chugging without a hitch. The bullshit job phenomenon is the problem here.
If I went into your body and deleted all your DNA, you'd feel fine too. Chugging along. For a while. Here's another thing: the productivity that's being tracked isn't aligned with the value that the consumer is paying for. You can see this in government contracting a lot, where the consumer doesn't even see the product - they just see the paperwork. If you're really good at "producing" paperwork, you don't need anyth…
Here’s one more thing: if I changed your slippers for a pair of rabid badgers, you’d feel fine. For a while.
God, I wonder what kind of people are out there typing these messages.
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#319If the company fires hundreds or thousands of people and there is no visible dip in the productivity, is it really a bad thing? One thing that is baffling to me is that these companies can fire 10% of their workforce and they just keep on chugging without a hitch. The bullshit job phenomenon is the problem here.
I guess that depends on what you believe the goal of all of this is - making a great society for companies or a great society for people.
What is this weird socialist take about companies being some boogeyman out there to get you I keep seeing on here?
Companies are just collective endeavours of multiple humans trying to produce value to other humans.
Re: Our Company Is Doing So Well That You're All Fired
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would it also be preferable for companies to act as de-facto charities and hire an extra 10% (or an extra hundreds to thousands) of people in order to provide some of the people who are currently out of work a source of income and health insurance? If 100 fewer employees is bad; is 100 more good?
> Would it also be preferable for companies to act as de-facto charities and hire an extra 10% (or an extra hundreds to thousands) of people in order to provide some of the people who are currently out of work a source of income and health insurance? No, that's a low-effort straw man argument. It would be preferable for us to stop trusting companies to provide for people's needs, and build effective systems for provi…
Socialism has never worked and never will.