Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only if you're dumb enough to leave a paper trail showing that's what you did.
It seems it would be easy to show a pattern.
Is it not fine to just cut for pay rate? That should be easy
Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
711–720 of 1001 posts
Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#712Earlier quoted context omitted.
"A company finds itself with surplus labor capacity due to the efficiencies in AI" That is one possible interpretation, though I don't think it's supported by any facts. A competing explanation: companies are spending a ton of money on AI in search of efficiency, and then laying people off in order to offset these investments. That's certainly what's been happening at Microsoft, Oracle, Meta, etc.
You can't really compare them to Microsoft, Oracle, or Meta. Those companies aren't cutting costs because AI replaced their own employees. They're pouring money into AI infrastructure and models because they want to sell that capacity to others. Their thinking is more: instead of funding another internal product team, they can redirect that payroll spend into more AI compute and models they hope to monetize. I don't…
Hasn't Cloudflare been investing on AI infra for a couple of years now?
Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#713Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#714Sorry to everyone affected by this. If any infra/platform folks in Europe are looking, Luxonis is hiring a Senior DevOps / Platform Engineer. It’s remote in Europe, focused on cloud infrastructure and internal developer platform work for spatial AI / computer vision products:
https://www.luxonis.com/about-us#devops-engineer
Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#715Interestingly NET is down 15%-ish in extended hours trading and was even down 20% at some point. Many times a stock will make a positive move when layoffs are announced. Cloudflare is a growing company by most metrics so if efficiencies through AI were the reason for the layoffs they'd just take the boost and grow even faster. It all doesn't check out and I think the real reason for the layoffs and the negative senti…
-24% now
Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#716Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is completely acceptable. When was the last time you saw any job seeker seriously enquire about such practices in interviews or at the application stage? A lot of people here and in the industry in general seem to optimise for compensation package and put blinkers on themselves for other factors that are definitely relevant. Companies aren't penalised by candidates for such practices. I'm not saying it's good bu…
> When was the last time you saw any job seeker seriously enquire about such practices in interviews or at the application stage? There’s some kind of reverse-survivorship bias here. I’d never apply at Meta because their management does the “hire a bunch of excess people in the good times, so when Zuck‘s next inevitable efficiency-drive happens, the team is able to layoff lots of people while still staying operationa…
Selection bias
Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#717Earlier quoted context omitted.
This genuinely wouldn't surprise me, and I need to go back to looking at balance sheets to see if I can sus out the validity of that narrative. As AI subsidization ends prematurely and costs skyrocket, we should expect to see those costs reflected in the operation statements of major customers. Since I had Coinbase up for review already, I decided to peek there first for any sort of correlation. In 2023, their "Techn…
And to factor in other infrastructure costs that's become more expensive too, such as hosting or hardware. So unless you can isolate AI spending from others that's not going to be convincing.
...hence why I qualified the statement like I did. I'm well aware one example from one company in a budgetary line item that's inclusive of labor and licensing and hardware and purchases and AI is not going to be remotely conclusive on its face.
Yet even taking into account all of that data, a $300m jump in three years must include some significant and growing amount of AI spend; everything else would've contracted (licensing, hardware) stagnated (cloud consumption), or been a singular event (CAPEX purchases) relative to the company's health and headcount.
Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#718Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve seen managers hiring people with an intent to lay them off when winds change to protect themselves and their close circle. I can only imagine they’ve had great KPIs in both cases: first for scaling the team, and then for cutting costs.
This is completely acceptable. When was the last time you saw any job seeker seriously enquire about such practices in interviews or at the application stage? A lot of people here and in the industry in general seem to optimise for compensation package and put blinkers on themselves for other factors that are definitely relevant. Companies aren't penalised by candidates for such practices. I'm not saying it's good bu…
I cannot imagine a company or managee that engages in these practices being honest about them
Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#719>Cloudflare expects second-quarter revenue of $664 million to $665 million, just under analysts' estimate of $665.3 million
Is this considered below expectations on wallstreet... enough to merit an 18% stock cut?
Re: Cloudflare to cut about 20% of its workforce
#720Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI tools make great team members even better This is the predominant (public) talking point. And it’s true. But along with that: when you have effective people becoming even more effective with AI, it becomes glaringly obvious who the INeffective people are. At which point it becomes hard to justify keeping those people around. (That often includes people who are otherwise effective but aren’t utilizing agents and…
I know you're arguing a more general point, but it's worth pointing out in their layoff announcement, CloudFlare is claiming: - This is NOT performance related. - This is NOT a cost cutting exercise. They say both things explicitly. What they don't say very clearly is what the layoffs ARE about.
That to me is a pretty clear reason to question the accuracy of those two claims. Insiders are saying that even people who were performing well in very profitable groups are being cut, which is hard to square with the stated motivations.