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

Googler... ex-Googler

nerdy.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#201

Post by grandempire »

codr7 wrote: post #187
iainmerrick wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it’s not wise or safe to let layed off individuals roam around the office. I don’t really buy this. I take it you’re worried about vengeful ex-employees abusing their access privileges to break stuff on the way out? It seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Probably some people would feel vengeful if you do shitty things to them like removing all their access and firing them with no notice whatsoever. Bad employees c…

Agreed, the explanation for why this is standard procedure never made much sense to me. I just know it feels really shitty on the receiving end.

So you’ve heard the risks. What would be the benefit? And why would it outweigh those risks?

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#202

Post by denkmoon »

neilv wrote: post #129
pjmlp wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a lesson that all senior developers know pretty well, that is why companies rather hire naive juniors, instead folks that already mastered how the game gets played, and cannot be sold on company mission, values, or whatever snake oil gets talked about during interview process.

Not all . You're talking about douchebag companies. If I try to hire someone in the future, and I'm talking straight with a candidate, about how we do things and what we're looking for, and they just nod their head, like I'm going through BS rituals that your stereotypical MBA thinks is professional to say but not mean... I will be sad. And if, while they're BSing me, they're congratulating themselves on having "mast…

Which are the non douchebag companies?

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#203

Post by piva00 »

asadalt wrote: post #175
ryandrake wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Treating people with dignity is “business hostile”… welcome to Hacker News comment section.

[flagged]

Plans change, and so they should be communicated and negotiated with the employees going to be affected by the change. It's the dignified way of doing it, people are people, not fungible commodities, treat them as people and unions won't be an issue at all.

> unions are just corporate blackmailing.

This is such an absurdly ignorant take that is hard to start educating you, it also depends a lot on what society you live in since your view on unions will be tainted by what you see in it.

In places like the Nordics, unions are one of the cornerstones of a free labour market, look up how Sweden has a freer labour market than the USA to learn something at least :)

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#204

Post by watwut »

anal_reactor wrote: post #153
sudomateo wrote: post #116

> But I was also immediately ripped away from my calendar, docs, code, and more. Layoffs are never easy. I've been through a few myself and it really takes the wind out of your sails. That being said, this sentence made me pause a bit. None of these things mentioned are actually yours. They are the property of Google. One thing that helped me immensely in my career is understanding that my relationship with a company…

> I recommended learning how to separate your value from your employer. This is a very recent development. Through the entirety of human history you'd keep working for the same employer for your entire life, which means it was very much worth it to cultivate that relationship, it's only now that we change jobs every two years. A friend of mine has a company in a very small town, and was complaining about an employee…

Do people really have to make up stuff like that? If you said large parts of history, maybe.

"For entirety" definitely not. What you describe was a thing in some periods, typically periods where some group got too much power and they tended to end with huge disfunctions and breakdowns.

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#205

Post by hnfong »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #181
abdj8 wrote: post #110

Layoffs are a difficult thing for employees and their managers. I have seen people (one was a VP of Engineering) escorted out of the building, sent in a cab to home along with a security guard (this was in India), not allowed access to computer or talk with other employees. But, recently have had a very different experience. The current company I work for announced 30% layoffs. The list was made public within one hou…

What happens if your company supports billions of dollars in economic output, and a few employees decides to go rogue and sabotage some systems that then causes an international loss of billions of dollars, and possibly property damages and loss of life? If you were the CEO, would you take criminal/financial responsibility for that?

It's not like there aren't disgruntled employees before layoffs. If a single employee could cause billions of dollars in losses, then the company already has a big problem regardless of layoffs.

It's very interesting how so many people in upper management seem to think that they can trust employees not to sabotage and cause billions of dollars in losses by paying them like 100k a year.

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#206

Post by izietto »

ryandrake wrote: post #165
asadalt wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that’s very business hostile tbh. I wouldn’t start a company there.

Treating people with dignity is “business hostile”… welcome to Hacker News comment section.

It's more like "welcome to US mindset" IMHO

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#207

Post by [deleted] »

mystifyingpoi wrote: post #137

> Relationships that took me years to cultivate… mostly going to be gone too. I don't want to sound condescending, but if being forced out of the job means end for your relationships built for years, maybe these relationships weren't built as they should. They should have been built with the people as people, not coworkers, and definitely not using company as the communication ground.

[deleted]

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#208

Post by knorker »

AndyKelley wrote: post #131

> I really was just a fuckin cog in a mega corp. Yes, you were. Next time, please choose a company that contributes to society rather than shoving ads in everyone's faces.

Ironically you're statistically very likely to be writing this comment in a browser based on chrome.

And Chrome really helped save us from an Internet "embraced and extended" by Microsoft. We were heading for Microsoft succeeding in their (not first) attempt at owning the Internet.

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#209

Post by stevenhuang »

xyst wrote: post #113
throwaway58670 wrote: post #56

Please test your site on a phone. 2fps while scrolling text is not ok.

I noticed this as well on my underpowered MBA. Might be the bluesky integration causing the slow down.

yeah I was lagging as well on desktop and no wonder... the site made 2659 requests to what appears to be display pictures of people who commented on the post.

Re: Googler... ex-Googler

#210

Post by FpUser »

hnfong wrote: post #205
Ferret7446 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if your company supports billions of dollars in economic output, and a few employees decides to go rogue and sabotage some systems that then causes an international loss of billions of dollars, and possibly property damages and loss of life? If you were the CEO, would you take criminal/financial responsibility for that?

It's not like there aren't disgruntled employees before layoffs. If a single employee could cause billions of dollars in losses, then the company already has a big problem regardless of layoffs. It's very interesting how so many people in upper management seem to think that they can trust employees not to sabotage and cause billions of dollars in losses by paying them like 100k a year.

>"If a single employee could cause billions of dollars in losses..."

This situation is endemic in smaller companies with the tight budgets.

Post reply on HN