Live data from Hacker News

Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

old.reddit.com

81–90 of 109 posts

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#81
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> general economic decline I'm not seeing it, do you have any proof you can offer that your statement is true?

Unemployment is the highest since 2021: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate Consumer staples have seen almost a 20% decline in EPS YoY: https://ycharts.com/indicators/sandp_500_consumer_staples_ea... A specific example is Chipotle. It could certainly be company specific, but could also highlight a consumer trend. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/30/chipotle-stock-falls-after-q... Still, most anal…

I'm not sure how much significance I would attribute to a specific fairly crappy mid-range chain restaurant's woes.

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#82
post #43

I rarely post comments on LinkedIn, but I saw some of the dumbest content today and felt compelled to leave a response: > Just met a founder who fired his entire team because he was able to individually beat their entire productivity with Claude Code My only thought when I read this is that this absolutely embarrassing...for founder who wasted dozens of hours recruiting, qualifiying, interviewing, onboarding, and tra…

More like "I need to fire everyone, how can I spin this?" Don't forget the implicit admission that "my product can be made in claude code."

Yes; many of these supposed "flexes" are not the flex that these founders think they are.

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#83
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's weird to me is that they say 'well, with AI we need less people for the same output.' Why is the conversation rarely framed 'with AI we will move faster and have more output'? It feels like companies would be well served to expand their product teams and roadmaps to go bigger, but instead choose to hold the pace now with less headcount.

Less headcount usually means faster pace - less lines of comminication, less red tape etc. Or at least that's what many C-level people believe to be true. "We need to move like a startup" is a common mantra repeated by executives, even megacorps like Amazon. I guess it's true to some degree though, anecdotally as an IC at a tech company, I feel like I could move a lot faster if some people around me removed and repla…

But that's not the claim being made. It's about only slightly lowering output or even reducing output for a much larger reduction in spending.

What they're doing is "doing less with less", as they say.

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#84
post #10

The poster is kind of missing the point. If I see a tool that could make a lot of my employees 20% more efficient today, and maybe more than that in the future, I’m going to bet big on it. Layoffs aren’t just to “fund AI” - layoffs (a) always happen and (b) likely genuinely make sense at some scale due to efficiency gain from AI. It’s not “cut employees, send they money in circles to prop up stock prices” it’s “cut e…

Curious, how do you deal with hallucinations for important stuff ?

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#85

We’re in a general economic decline masked, in some key aggregate measures, by the AI bubble. That’s the reason for the job cuts. Shuffling money around between AI adjacent companies may (but I doubt it) be enough to keep the AI bubble going through the downturn, in which case stockholders in those key companies manage to ride it out without pain, and executives too because they serve their constituency well. More li…

> general economic decline I'm not seeing it, do you have any proof you can offer that your statement is true?

Total anecdote here: Watching college ball today and nearly every commercial (80%+) are Christmas commercials in some way. The day after Halloween, not the day after Thanksgiving. I know Christmas creep is a thing, and I may not have been paying attention in past years, but it seems like companies are desperate for black Friday to come this year

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#86
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the CEOs have been there all along, doing the math on ZIRP and getting caught up in FOMO. They could have tightened their belts at any time, or demanded better justifications for investments. Why didn’t they? Because the job of a CEO is not to micromanage. The whole point of hiring middle management is to keep CEOs out of micromanaging decisions. The job of C-suite is to 1. Be the arbitrator between different o…

If you (c-suite, boards) aren’t giving direction then how are the middle managers supposed to know what to build so that it aligns with long term growth goals? This feels like abdicating responsibility and then firing people for building the wrong thing when you never told them what to build in the first place?

> you (c-suite, boards) aren’t giving direction then how are the middle managers supposed to know what to build so that it aligns with long term growth goals...

> This feels like abdicating responsibility...

How a tech company is supposed to work is:

1. You get feedback from a cohort of customers. This is primarily collected by the CEO and Sales, as well as PMs.

2. Based on feedback collected, you then decide what to prioritize or build. This is primarily done by Product Management

3. Based on the scoped feature, you then try to understand how long it takes to build and what is the expected cost to build. This is primarily done by Engineering Management and a bit of Product Management

4. Based on the scoped proposal, now you try to project net new ARR and COGS that can be attributed to that proposal. This is done by Product Management with coordination with Sales and a subset of Engineering Management

5. Based on the set of proposals that have come in from all PMs and EMs, you now decide which ones make sense with existing customer demand, and which can drive revenue. This is done by Product and Engineering Leadership.

6. Based on those proposals that passed muster, you now propose an annual operating plan (AOP) to the board to justify headcount allocation. This is done by the C-Suite.

In a normal tech company, the primary steps (2-5) are done without the CEO in the conversation because that is not the job of the CEO. Their job is supposed to be the Sales and Customer Relations Manager for your largest 20 accounts, Investor Relation Management, and arbitrate between the various different functions within an organization.

A CEO is not expected to take part in the larger product creation lifecycle because it creates fear amongst ICs, because no one below the VP level wants to give a CEO unadulterated feedback - even if they really trust them - because of the power differential. This is why most CEO-driven initiatives have been severe boondoggles, such as Zuckerberg and the Metaverse, because no one could tell Mark otherwise and expect to keep their job - even people as powerful internally as Sheryl Sandberg (COO), Mike Schroepfer (CTO), and Marne Levine (CBO).

We are all adults. It is expected that people in your reporting structure are adults who are aligned with the primary incentive of the business - generate growing revenue while maintaining or enhancing COGS.

Mind you, this is the ideal world. Like everything else, humans muck it up. Boards, C-Suites, Mid-Level managers, and line level ICs all have various relationships with each other, and in a lot of cases, rational business decisions are disincentivized in order to prioritize personal decisions.

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#87

"Firing everyone" is greatly exaggerated. Google is not at its all-time high, but still pretty close: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GOOG/alphabet/numb... Amazon: similar. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMZN/amazon/number... Microsoft: all time high? https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/MSFT/microsoft/num... It sucks if you need to find work, but these are still major employers, even after…

Agree that "firing everyone" is exaggerated, but what we're seeing now is pretty unique. Headcount increases between 2010~2022 at these companies were around 15~25% CAGR; now, it's at best flat for the past ~3 years. I think that's going to make a pretty big dent.

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#88
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found John Gruber's roundup of tech company profits (not revenue) interesting: https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/10/30/apple-q4-result... - Google (a.k.a. Alphabet): $35B - Microsoft: $27.7B - Apple: $27.5B - Nvidia: $26.4B - Amazon: $21.5B

MANGA is the new FAANG.

Just use BigTech, then you don't have to keep shuffling letters nor inserting Netflix to prevent it becoming a slur.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Tech

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#89
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found John Gruber's roundup of tech company profits (not revenue) interesting: https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/10/30/apple-q4-result... - Google (a.k.a. Alphabet): $35B - Microsoft: $27.7B - Apple: $27.5B - Nvidia: $26.4B - Amazon: $21.5B

MANGA is the new FAANG.

FANG (notice the missing A) was always a meaningless term. Cramer initially left Apple off and it was already the most valuable company, Microsoft was already in the top 5 most valuable and Netflix was t really that valuable then.

Re: Tech companies are firing everyone to "fund AI", spending money on each other

#90
post #43

I rarely post comments on LinkedIn, but I saw some of the dumbest content today and felt compelled to leave a response: > Just met a founder who fired his entire team because he was able to individually beat their entire productivity with Claude Code My only thought when I read this is that this absolutely embarrassing...for founder who wasted dozens of hours recruiting, qualifiying, interviewing, onboarding, and tra…

More like "I need to fire everyone, how can I spin this?" Don't forget the implicit admission that "my product can be made in claude code."

They are probably one fork away of having a full product but open source is considered boring now.
Post reply on HN