Layoffs Don't Work • Hacker News Board

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#251

Post by WalterBright » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:37 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #232

indigodaddy wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that perhaps you were using the proverbial "I" in your last sentence as an example of something everyone should be willing to do in/for their career, but does someone of your stature even need a real interview, much less a LC test, to obtain a top job? It's kind of funny imagining a young tech bro interviewing you, tbh.

It's an interesting question. I'll try to answer. I generally do not use clever algorithms in my code. I just use straightforward ones. Rarely, I might need a better one and go looking for it (like a better hash algorithm). I rarely use a data structure more complicated than an array, list, binary tree, hash, or single inheritance. What I have, though, is decades of experience with what works and what doesn't work. (…

P.S. I was once asked to review the code of a famous programmer I won't name. I was shocked to discover that the large codebase had 3 different implementations of bubblesort in it. I replaced them all with a call to qsort(). He asked me how I managed to speed it up :-/

We all have our blind spots. I do, too.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#252

Post by owl_vision » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:39 PM UTC

Workaccount2 wrote: post #150

Real talk here, and I'm sorry for being "that guy" Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? I know multiple people who have worked their entire career thus far without ever staying at a place for more than 3 or 4 years. Some no more than two. Tech job culture is practically a mono culture with "hop jobs" being a hallmark. From an employ…

In tech, consultancy usually last between 3 months and 18 months, so one can have many consulting positions of under 2 years.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#253

Post by dehrmann » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:40 PM UTC

yalogin wrote: post #139

Layoffs are a blunt instrument. I don’t know if al layoffs should be seen through the same lens. I see layoffs as signals from the companies. They see the future as unsure and so they want to reduce costs. That should be an immediate layoff for the ceo and his team

> That should be an immediate layoff for the ceo and his team

Maybe not quite that, but investors and the board (hah!) should ask really hard questions about how they got there.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#254

Post by lr4444lr » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:41 PM UTC

lumost wrote: post #167

filoleg wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot speak for layoffs in all industries ever, but I agree with your assessment of layoffs in big tech from personal experiences. I have way too many “lifer” friends in big tech who are deadly scared of layoffs and job hopping. They are also the ones who rarely got promoted and havent had a significant pay bump pretty much ever. On another hand, half my team at a big tech company got laid off back at the start of…

Big tech interviews tend to be daunting. Many long term employees lose the skill, and fear the impact of work interruption on their resume as well as their ability to get in again. Anecdotally, the LC bar for many firms has risen to the point that passing requires at least one through of the question before. If you Time bound your practice per question to 20 minutes, this means that you can solve most LC problems at…

I agree, but I look at it like trying out for an athletic team.

Once you're on the team, you are mostly practicing plays, doing clinics, and simulating competition, but to get on the team in the first place you have to prove your general fitness by running, say, a 6 minute mile.

You may not be able to do that again easily right away once you've been on the team for a while because you don't practice running for pure time at that distance, but it's a level of fitness you should be easily able to obtain again if you had to, and it's a very useful benchmark to a scout.

When you're laid off, it's time to start doing that "roadwork" again. It will be a bit hard at first in practice, but if you've been a solid contributor, you should be able to get fit enough again to prove that.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#255

Post by s1artibartfast » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:41 PM UTC

huang_chung wrote: post #206

Workaccount2 wrote: post #150

Real talk here, and I'm sorry for being "that guy" Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? I know multiple people who have worked their entire career thus far without ever staying at a place for more than 3 or 4 years. Some no more than two. Tech job culture is practically a mono culture with "hop jobs" being a hallmark. From an employ…

Well, getting fucked out of your 401k money 6 months before it vests stings some.

Is that an average time given a 12 month vesting schedule?

edit: Actually curious about the dead comment. What companies have multi year 401(k) vesting?

Every company I have worked at or seen does a match on a 12 month schedule or less.

Are they thinking of stock options?

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#256

Post by mistercheph » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:41 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #129

nthingtohide wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not saying HFTs can't sell but there should be penalty for higher frequency. It means they have to craft algorithms which will take longer term view of stocks (and their fundamentals) rather than ignorance of other participants

Market makers make fractions of a percent per trade. How will your "penalty for higher frequency" deter traders that prey on "ignorance of other participants" or whatever, but don't put market makers out of business?

Easy, bye market makers! It's like a layoff, some good will end up getting culled with the bad.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#257

Post by mistercheph » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:42 PM UTC

callc wrote: post #179

nthingtohide wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we have a different kind of stock market which forces participants to consider long term outcomes more? E.g. no HFT firm should be able to make a profit from such a stock market. Selling stocks earlier and often should result in a penalty or percentage being taken away as a fee. As a retail investor I would love to use invest and forget strategy based on trends observed in such a stock market.

Consider no stock market. Just keep the company private. Honest question, why do so many companies strive to go public?

Access to large pool of capital

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#258

Post by gruez » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:42 PM UTC

nthingtohide wrote: post #247

gruez wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Revenue is high but no meaningful transaction has happened. The money is just being exchanged between the same top HFT firms. And the best of our minds are fighting it out in the arena of algorithms rather than creating real world value. Liquidity is "real world value". Being able to buy/sell a stock instantly without a massive premium/discount makes stock ownership for the average person possible. Contrast this to…

https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/research-publications/resbul... Conclusions and policy implications To return to our initial question: does stock market liquidity deteriorate when HFTs compete? The results suggest that competition among HFTs increases speculative high-frequency trades, which could lead to a deterioration in market liquidity.

Taking the study at face value, it only says that competition among HFT is bad. It also specifically admits that "As market-makers, they can update their price quotes fast when news arrives and provide liquidity to the market. In this case, the low-frequency traders in the market – the investors – benefit from lower transaction costs". In other words, at best it's advocating for some sort of monopoly for HFT, rather than getting rid of HFTs entirely.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#259

Post by nine_k » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:42 PM UTC

andrewlgood wrote: post #235

mym1990 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is ultimately what some of the risk comes down to: you invest time(a decade is a long time!) into creating meaningful relationships at work and one day you come in to have your key card de-activated and some corporate speak as to why. There are certainly people working on truly meaningful projects out there, with teams they trust and adore...but for most of the workforce, even in tech, its just work and any fun…

How is this different than the manager who has spent years developing an employee - making sure they are getting the experiences they need to build a better career, hiring the right people to complement the team, fighting for bonuses and pay raises - only to have them quit to join the next company for a 10% raise. It is difficult to build a long-term culture when society seems to expect job hopping to rapidly advance…

I've never seen people leaving great jobs for a 10% raise. It's always something else: a much bigger benefit, or a significant downside of the current job, which are not widely publicized. Instead, I've seen people going to a lower-paying position for a more interesting job, a chance to learn new hot thing hands-on, a different set of responsibilities, etc.

Re: Layoffs Don't Work

#260

Post by giantg2 » Sun, Mar 09, 2025, 5:44 PM UTC

andrewlgood wrote: post #231

giantg2 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I make the same adjusted for inflation that I did when I got my last/only promotion 10 years ago. I have grey hair, a disability, and a family that relies on the health insurance. Switching or being laid off is a risky proposition for me. It sounds like all your examples are young, childless people (who else could take a month off to go vacationing?). Life is much harder for some of us.

I understand the trade offs you mention. I do disagree with your assertion that “Life is much harder for some of us.” You have chosen a different payoff - your family, certainty of health insurance, etc. You get the benefits that children bring and the joy of being a parent. The “young, childless people” have made a different choice - more freedom in employment decisions but no joy from children. Everyone has their o…

Haha you must be young. It's entirely possible young people will make the same choices and face the same realities I currently do. They just havent gotten to that stage yet. Even comparing my life now to my life 10 years ago would show the younger me had an easier life. However, having a disability is not a choice, and in general makes life harder than those without a disability. Don't get me wrong - I believe life is hard for almost everyone at at least one point or another in unique ways and to varying degrees.