101–110 of 432 posts
I feel like people are missing part of the memo where he said they will backfill all the roles. You can say it's not fair or cruel but this isn't a layoff. They want to churn (maybe for cheaper talent? Maybe for H1-Bs?)
This is your regular reminder that tech is essentially a fiefdom. Just because you aren't a serf doesn't mean you aren't a peasant.
It seems Zuck is turning into Elon. What's next? closing the European offices? forcing people to return to the office? relocating HQ to Texas?
Everyone who is smart see's which way the winds are blowing and it isn't in the direction of "more liberal". The US is looking at a cultural reset back into the mid to mid-late 20th century.
We've never known a country where the wealthy had this much capability. Owning just one of Facebook, Amazon, Palantir, X, etc makes a person incredibly powerful, but the fact that they've all seemingly combined forces makes me think we are in for an era that makes Cyberpunk novels look like a Disney flick.
> Below is Zuckeberg’s[sic] internal memo, which CNBC obtained. Meta is working on building some of the most important technologies of the world. AI, glasses as the next computing platform and the future of social media. It's very funny that he included the Ray-Bans here. Maybe it will be the next iPhone, but along with Meta Worlds (or whatever it's called), Zuckerberg simply goes all-in on dumb sci-fi toys. Consider…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean the one he took "personal responsibility" for, while laying off >10000 people and conveniently still having a job for himself?
"But make no mistake. Though they're the ones leaving, it is I who must remain and bear the heavy burden of their failure." ~GB
When I was an engineering manager there, engineering leadership described performance reviews as, in a large well run engineering organization, you'll probably be firing 5-10% of your employees every year for low performance. (Well, "non regrettable attrition", which includes people who quit when they get pipped.) Lower than 5% at scale would be a red flag, not necessarily wrong, you don't want to "stack rank" with a…
This smells like the Welchian nonsense that drove GE into the ground.
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
About six months into my own daily beating regimen, I found I was sleeping longer and deeper, I had more energy and focus, and my libido had returned to a state not unlike my early 20s. My morale was fantastic. Only after having been repatriated and thus no longer subject to daily beatings did my morale return to lower levels.
Why doesn’t Huberman talk about this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Performance reviews aren't bullshit - it's crucial to have an objective (as objective as possible) system for measuring performance both to reward your high performers and to understand your low performers whether to provide support or to document reasons for firing them. Several kinds of performance management system such as mandatory percentages for each rating level ARE bullshit, but without performance management…
There isn't any real objective way to measure performance though - there are things you can quantify (lines of code written, code reviews performed, etc) but those don't encompass the entire job, and once it becomes clear the metrics you use people will work to optimize their numbers at the expense of the other aspects of the job that are harder to quantify/measure. Who has time to mentor junior colleagues when you g…
It seems Zuck is turning into Elon. What's next? closing the European offices? forcing people to return to the office? relocating HQ to Texas?
Everyone who is smart see's which way the winds are blowing and it isn't in the direction of "more liberal". The US is looking at a cultural reset back into the mid to mid-late 20th century.
Getting more specific, I don't buy the argument that we're getting more conservative. Instead, I'm inclined to think that a narrow election victory will lead to extreme measures that will create a significant backlash in the coming years. If you're in a position to exploit a system with little repercussions for four years and all it costs is a little bit of dignity and some public image, most corporate leaders would take that opportunity for the money, prestige, power, etc.
I'm willing to bet sizeable amounts of money that most voters do not support rolling back employee protections, or removing the debt ceiling, or buying/bullying [insert random country], or any of the other wildly regressionist statements thrown around by un/elected folks. Conflating the complexities involved in how a person votes with a general mandate for one specific reason people vote is not a good idea. Extrapolate that to over 100 million voters as some unified stance and it starts to feel like propaganda.