731–740 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How has the team's headcount changed over the last 18-24 months?" “It didn’t change” and it would not be telling much. They are just hiring and firing X amount of people every year.
False dichotomy, the same team members could have been there for 24 months
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both of those are true assuming the lay offs come from different demographics. You lay off 1100 who are late in their career for younger people who will work more hours for less. You're building the future with new fresh people instead of the "dead weight"
> You're building the future with new fresh people instead of the "dead weight" If the "future" being built is one that those same interns would be dropped as "dead weight" as soon as they settle into families and refuse to be exploited with overwork, then it's a bad future, even if it's one with more CDN features. Although, instead, it will be a more enshittified one anyway: they're cheapening your company and the p…
The incentives do not allow it to look more than a year (and in a lot of cases a quarter) down the road.
Earlier 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…
This reads to me almost like saying “Why are pigs not avoiding the most problematic slaughterhouses?” A. We have to work somewhere, and in 2026 honestly it’s actually the employer’s market which is kinda new to me, as someone who always just passively waited until an interesting job offer fell in my lap. B. They all pretty much work the same. Everywhere is “like a family” and “cares about sustainability” and all, unt…
https://variety.com/2017/digital/news/netflix-company-cultur...
Earlier 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.
It's the natural result of "fire the bottom 10% every year". If that's the rule in your organization, and you have a core group of people that actually know the systems and get the work done, you better make sure you have 10% padding every year, lest you layoff someone important and their friends all quit in disgust. And since competence and institutional knowledge is built over time, that implies a revolving door of…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it should be the companies job, being jobless in the US is a potential death sentence and since we don't have universal healthcare, universal childcare, or universal higher education/vocational training the onus should be forced on the companies to provide welfare for workers since they are so adamant about not paying taxes to create a welfare system that doesn't mean homelessness or death. There is also no ind…
I'd be very hesitant to throw out so many of the fundamentals that made America into what it has been for the last couple centuries. The goal, at least here, is to expect individuals to mostly take care of themselves rather than depending in the state or some other authority to do it for them. Universal healthcare, guaranteed indefinite severance, universal childcare, etc are completely antithetical to our system. Ma…
I don't see how that follows. How is your system that different from e.g. the UK, which manages to have all of those things (severance is not indefinite and is unemployment).
On a side note, I'm curious as to how "600% increase in AI usage" is measured. Are their agentic workflows' bills skyrocketed 600% in the last 3 months? That would be in line with what other people using agents are seeing (costs are way higher than they expect/used to be). In that case, that would mean that LLM/agents are no longer necessarily cheaper than human labor, no?
Labor market data this week came out stronger than expected, even as large layoffs in IT continue to happen and IT job market continues to be very slow.
Earlier 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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely not--the printer is capex, so it's preferable to the humans who are opex.
Usually, companies value opex more than capex - opex is much more flexible. That's one of the reasons why printers, coffee machines, companies cars and other things are typically leased.
Also tax treatment isn't the only consideration for financial engineering: It's easier for a company with a huge capital spend to argue that they're investing in the future and CapEx doesn't hurt EBITDA. On the other hand, some companies get worried about reporting a high "capital ratio" (ratio of capital assets to income).
In reality you can't say categorically that companies prefer Opex to Capex.