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

Layoffs at Block

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: Layoffs at Block

#151

Post by MeetingsBrowser »

Refreeze5224 wrote: post #106
MeetingsBrowser wrote: post #102

I don't understand anyone who says layoffs are due to improvements in AI tooling. "Thanks to LLMs, each worker can do twice the work they could before. Naturally we are firing half the company because ... business is good and ... too much productivity is bad?"

It's simple: it's just a lie. We are seeing the goal of AI in action here, which is reducing payroll costs.

I also don't understand that take.

Imagine you run a mowing service with 4 employees. Suddenly 2 more people volunteer to mow yard for your company for free!

Is your reaction to fire two of the paid employees and keep mowing the same number of yards (with reduced payroll costs), or to expand the business to mow more yards?

Which of those responses feels more in line with a "strong and growing" business that is "continuing to support more customers" and has "improving profitability"?

Re: Layoffs at Block

#152

Post by vineyardmike »

daxfohl wrote: post #48

We'll see how much the AI aspect is true by whether they're thinning out teams equally, or just axing whole initiatives. My impression of Block was that it was mostly a one-trick pony (okay, two if you include CashApp) with a bunch of side initiatives that never seemed to pan out, so I'm expecting it to be more of the latter, with this being more of an admission that they're now in "maintenance mode". Either way, I t…

> layoffs will be preemptory. Executives will see the lack of productivity boost as being due to lack of pressure,

Look I don’t like layoffs and I don’t want to come off as an apologist. I’ve been laid off from a wildly profitable company and I get that pain.

But I think at some point we do need to be honest that businesses want to give up on failed projects, and the lazy ones will do that through layoffs because tech has so much churn anyways. It’s in vogue to blame AI for these things. I doubt most of these CxOs think actually that AI will transform their business in the next few years, and I question how many even care about applying pressure to employees.

I don’t want to come off as an apologist for bad corporate behavior, because I think it’s bad, but sometimes I think they’re just taking the easy way out on corporate messaging for a not-crazy decision (of ending failed or bloated projects). As you alluded to, “maintenance mode” for a business just doesn’t need as many employees. 40% at once seems high, I’ll concede though.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#154

Post by simianwords »

itmitica wrote: post #8

Why make others misfortune a platform for ego expression? Why not doing things elegant, quiet, keep it in-house? Because misery of others drives stock prices up! It's a sacrifice he's willing to make.

how do you layoff 40% quietly?

Re: Layoffs at Block

#155

Post by MeetingsBrowser »

themgt wrote: post #149
MeetingsBrowser wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If LLMs really multiply productivity, why would you fire people and handicap the boost? I have 100 people that can now do the work of 200 people thanks to a new tool. How is the logical response to fire half of them and bring my productivity back to where it was before?

Demand inelasticity.

> our business is strong. gross profit continues to grow, we continue to serve more and more customers

Re: Layoffs at Block

#156

Post by borroka »

Anyone who has worked in the big tech industry knows that probably more than half of the workforce performs tasks that, in essence, are superfluous.

But these things happened: 1) Musk has shown that Twitter can operate with 5% (approximately?) of the workforce he inherited; 2) laying off a lot of people was seen as a sign that the company was in trouble, but not now because; 3) artificial intelligence makes point 2) not a semi-desperate move, but a forward-thinking adjustment to current and future technology development.

I've been out of work for almost a year now, after being laid off, and I think it's very unlikely that I'll ever return (not because of my choice but their choice) to work in the tech industry as a W2 employee. Oh well.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#157

Post by suralind »

Sucks for the people to lose their jobs, but probably the most honest message you’ll ever see.

What I don’t understand is why. There’s a natural churn at each company. Of course it’s not 40%, but probably 4-5% per year, but I doubt the company freezes hiring and they are not pressured to do this.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#158

Post by akoboldfrying »

Ancalagon wrote: post #94
toast0 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm a big capitalist, but 5 months of severance seems very generous; a job hasn't been a commitment that the company will take care of you forever in several generations. Covering you until the middle of this year should go a long way, and yeah the job market is messed up, but at least it's not mid-November where holidays mean hiring falls off the rails.

Just wondering, have you been unemployed for 6+ mos before?

Being let go from a job sucks.

So does being dumped from a relationship. You might not be able to find another relationship in 6+ months. But I don't think people would seriously propose that people should therefore not be able to leave a relationship.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#159

Post by tootie »

htrp wrote: post #5

>we're not making this decision because we're in trouble. our business is strong. gross profit continues to grow, we continue to serve more and more customers, and profitability is improving. but something has changed. we're already seeing that the intelligence tools we’re creating and using, paired with smaller and flatter teams, are enabling a new way of working which fundamentally changes what it means to build an…

I question how much of this is really AI vs them just regrouping around their core products and shutting down a lot of ventures or tertiary projects. Either way, the messaging we're seeing is a real shift from the ZIRP ear. Tech companies used to use headcount as a metric of growth. They'd be hiring just to say they're hiring because it looks like growth. Now it's in vogue to boast about your AI adoption and how many fewer heads you need to operate. I think both are lot of blowing smoke, but now it's going to hurt a lot of people.

Re: Layoffs at Block

#160

Post by boredatoms »

simianwords wrote: post #141
overfeed wrote: post #116

> i'd rather take a hard, clear action now and build from a position we believe in than manage a slow reduction of people toward the same outcome. I hope this gets drilled into the heads of everyone who sells their labor. The company is profitable, and Jack could have kept 4000 people employed with no difference in outcome, instead, he chose this.

i don't think this is true. assuming $150,000 average salary thats around $600,000 totally so that increases the yearly profit by about 30%.

While destroying morale, and increasing the difficulty of successfully recruiting later
Post reply on HN