assuming 500K avg comp, that's ~300m/yr.
Keep in mind that total cost of an employee is usually twice their compensation.
for someone making 100k this is true.
Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
341–350 of 506 posts
Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#342Based on conversations with some affected friends, there was layoffs outside of the Meta AI org today too. Not sure if this 600 number is representative of how many people were actually let go by Meta today.
One friend told me she feels every time you reapply internally, as the newest team member you end up first on the chopping block for the next round of cuts anyway as no time to make impact, she will just take the redundancy money this time. Lots of Meta employees now just expect such rounds of job cuts prior to earning calls and she has had enough of the stress.
Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those people have families and responsibilities. Leadership should take responsibility for their poor planning. Alas, the burden falls on the little guys. Especially in this kind of labor market.
Hard agree. It was management who messed up hiring. It’s management who should bear the responsibility for it.
How should they do that? I hear that phrase, and it's easy to agree to, but how would it look in practice?
Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#344Wang doesn’t strike me as an inspiring AI leader, and Meta’s AI leadership and strategy feel unclear.
Hopefully they’ll address that soon, because in the meantime OpenAI is executing and shipping.
Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#345This says more about Meta than about where AI is heading. For me personally my work, my life has transformed dramatically, literally, since 2022, since OpenAI launched ChatGPT and what followed then. I feel like having a dozen assistants who help me levarage my skills exponentially, do tedious work, do things I never had the time and resources to do. I see it in my salary, in the results I produce, in the projects I…
Think of the opportunity cost of not spending the last several years developing the primary skills to the point where you don't rely on the help and aren't beholden to whichever tech giant is winning at a given time.
Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#346Every time I see news like this, I just try to focus more on working on things I think are meaningful and contributing positively to the world... there is so much out of our control but what is in our control is how we use our minds and what we believe in.
I like that way of thinking. Out of curiosity, what kind of things do you work on that you feel make a positive contribution?
Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#347Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#348Because the AI works so well, or because it doesn't? > ”By reducing the size of our team, fewer conversations will be required to make a decision, and each person will be more load-bearing and have more scope and impact,” Wang writes in a memo seen by Axios. That's kinda wild. I'm kinda shocked they put it in writing.
> That's kinda wild. I'm kinda shocked they put it in writing.
Why? Being transparent about these decisions are a good thing, no?
Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you rehire that quickly though? I know where I live the government won't allow you to rehire people you just fired. Because the severance benefits have lower tax requirements and if you could do that you could do it every year as a form of tax evasion.
Are you in California?
No this was in Europe. I would never work in the US, not even California.
Re: Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that the point of these layoffs? Less obfuscation and games of telephone? The more layers introduces inherent lag.
The real question is, how/why did they over-hire in the first place?
> The real question is, how/why did they over-hire in the first place place
This question has been answered many times. Time to move on and fix forward.