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

Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 432 posts

Re: Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

#141

Post by yodsanklai »

alpha_squared wrote: post #110
voidfunc wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This feels a little off. I think those who stand to financially benefit the most are taking advantage of the opportunity to do so while they can. 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…

> I'm willing to bet sizeable amounts of money that most voters do not support rolling back employee protections

People often vote against their interests. They may not understand that alternatives are possible or even exist, and they can be brainwashed into thinking the other candidate is dangerous and so on... Also, the decline in quality of education isn't helping. So I don't know if there will be a backlash. Even worse, as a European, I'm afraid Musk's propaganda crosses the Atlantic and that we'll get the same fate and will vote to give up our social benefits.

Re: Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

#142

Post by ramesh31 »

psunavy03 wrote: post #107
lacker wrote: post #73

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…

Why? Why set an arbitrary number of people who need to be fired as opposed to grading people to a standard? Is your hiring process so flawed that you just accept that you screwed up hiring 5 percent of your people? This smells like the Welchian nonsense that drove GE into the ground.

>Why? Why set an arbitrary number of people who need to be fired as opposed to grading people to a standard?

A person, individually, indeed must always be judged by themselves objectively. But people, in aggregate, can generally be understood stochastically. And in any group of people there will always be the obvious slackers who everyone knows aren't pulling their weight. Good management clears these people out rather than allowing them to fester and lower morale. It doesn't matter if it's high paid SWEs or minimum wage workers, the dynamic is the same.

Re: Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

#144

Post by soulbadguy »

lacker wrote: post #73

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…

Level and start/end year of tenure if you don't mind sharing. As meta grew in employee number things definitly worsen on that front

Re: Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

#145

Post by bdcravens »

tqi wrote: post #94
lacker wrote: post #73

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…

Yeah 5% is a very weird number. Why not just stop over hiring?

Fear. Effects on stock price during when talent is a hot commodity.

Besides, all those Associate Directors of Nonengineering Engineers of Developer Conference Swag Acquisition need to eat too.

Re: Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

#146

Post by netsharc »

m348e912 wrote: post #121

Can anyone from FB explain the user hostile UI? Reading comments or posts is an exercise in futility. Resizing or moving a page will result in a refresh where you lose your place or can no longer find what you were reading. Is this an accidental side affect of design or do you guys sit in a conference room conjuring up ways to make user experience miserable?

Some people use FB like phpBB, despite the massive shit of a UI. Maybe it's because reading comments don't earn them ad-revenue? "Quick, annoy the user so they'll move away!".

Maybe if they replaced every 5th comment with an ad (like how every 5th or so post/story/reel on Instagram is an ad).

Re: Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

#147

Post by r00fus »

mywittyname wrote: post #103
voidfunc wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wouldn't call it a cultural reset. It's more of a revolution. 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.

I mean, in an Oligarchy, you need powerful oligarchs. We no longer have any semblance of being a democracy, possible haven't for a while.

Re: Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

#148

Post by nateglims »

tqi wrote: post #94
lacker wrote: post #73

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…

Yeah 5% is a very weird number. Why not just stop over hiring?

The goal is to always be bringing in new talent and cutting lowest performers to increase productivity. They want the new talent and don’t care about the low performers at a personal level.

Re: Meta announces 5% cuts in preparation for 'intense year'

#149

Post by elevatedastalt »

lacker wrote: post #73

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…

It's understandable that in an organization that hasn't tightened its screws on employees, you will be able to find 5% low performers. But do you expect to find 5% low performers even after 5 iterations of these firings? Like eventually you are left only with medium to high performers, and you are just making their lives miserable by turning work into a meaningless Hunger Games season.
Post reply on HN