Live data from Hacker News

Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

blog.dropbox.com

291–300 of 413 posts

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously it’s embarrassing how leadership in many companies has ZERO vision for AI right now. Too focused on buying houses, drinking wine and riding horses. I think these people need to retire already.

Snark aside, this is something that's always kind of baffled me. If I built a company and eventually found myself in extremely high value (ie, 9 figures), I'd be looking to retire ASAP. That would be it. I won capitalism. Time to spend the rest of my life on Maui sipping Mai-Tais on the beach. Why anybody would want to continue to work when they already have enough wealth to live an extremely lavish lifestyle without…

>That would be it. I won capitalism.

Pet hypothesis: A lot of us say that, not being in the position to. But when you finally exit the working class and are no longer required to work, people tend to work on passion projects instead. Sitting on the beach gets boring after a while.

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#292

So hopeful. People are so hopeful that AI will pan out favorably for them, even when their arguments are a stretch. On this thread, there’s the following sentiment… “Dropbox has access to your data so they are well positioned to do some AI stuff on your data.” But also you have your data so you could work with really any party you want, and Dropbox has few advantages by being an existing custodian. Custodian status p…

On the broader point though, there certainly are some companies that have access to unique datasets that they can take advantage of. Meta and Google come to mind as obvious ones, probably Microsoft too. Apple I'm less sure given their privacy stance. Any others?

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snark aside, this is something that's always kind of baffled me. If I built a company and eventually found myself in extremely high value (ie, 9 figures), I'd be looking to retire ASAP. That would be it. I won capitalism. Time to spend the rest of my life on Maui sipping Mai-Tais on the beach. Why anybody would want to continue to work when they already have enough wealth to live an extremely lavish lifestyle without…

Because no matter how many experiences you accrue or how much leisure you have, you're already dead on the geologic time scale. With that perspective, the best thing to do is keep on pushing. Despite whatever pain and headache that might bring, it's one act our short lives can use to push against entropy and the dying universe. If I ever come into such wealth, I'll spend it all solving as much as I can through my dir…

Yeah.. but do you think most ultra-rich elite are pushing against entropy or contributing more to it or at best staying neutral while further growing their wealth?

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#294
post #140
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can understand some of the skepticism, we JUST finished having every company try to pivot to blockchain and NFT and now it seems history is repeating with AI. However, I also totally see the point, as an example: the biggest reason I like Google Photos is the automagic tagging on the pictures, I can just write any random description and it usually finds them across 10+ years of photos I have stored (not perfect, bu…

Blockchain still hasn't had a killer app that made people want to use it. LLMs do. Guess we'll see if it's really flexible enough to fit into a lot of business models, but it's not exactly the same thing. I don't see it as the wildest thing that say, a corp using cloud storage might want an LLM trained on all their documents so instead of searching for where X employee who left the company 3 years ago stored some inf…

Bitcoin as "digital gold" that's easier to procure, store, move around, and split into pieces is clearly a "killer app". Gold has intrinsic value but it's market cap far exceeds that - it requires a "shared delusion" to accept that it's a store of value. I wouldn't say that Bitcoin as a store of value has society wide acceptance but 1T market cap is still very significant. I keep reading on hacker news that crypto bros lost all their money in the bubble that's now over, but the bitcoin I bought just 2 years ago is still way up. The real losers were the tech stocks I bought - maybe paying engineers 500k a year was the real bubble?

Then again, never try to convince someone of something when their salary depends on believing otherwise.

Uniswap likewise has billions in daily volume. Again, that's significant. I really don't understand how the hacker news groupthink can see a piece of technology that enables something completely brand new - decentralized market making - getting used daily to move billions of dollars around and say "there's absolutely nothing there".

Maybe you think there's no killer app because you hang out on upvote-centric site like hacker news and reddit where people downvote the hell out of things that contradict their narrative. Hacker news is a groupthink bubble.

There's many other examples. Look at how often people brought up energy usage and GPU shortages when NFTs get brought up. Then look how often it gets brought up when LLMs get brought up. It's night and day. None of these people cared about the environment. They didn't like crypto so it was a talking point against it - that's it. Because now, ETH is on proof of stake but everyone and their dog are buying 4090s so they can make waifus with Stable Diffusion. And all those "you're melting the planet people!" are conspicuously quiet.

What exactly is the killer app of LLM? A bunch of writing tools for SEO spam? Does anyone seriously read what ChatGPT writes and think this thing could do real literature or journalism? Everybody wants to use AI to write, nobody wants to read what AI writes. The only real "killer app" I'll give it is Github copilot. Most everything else is froth.

When NFTs were trendy, I read constantly on here they were beanie babies, that they were naming a star, whatever. You know what bubble I saw excited about them? Not the tech bros, but artists interested in a new way of monetizing their work. Go read Grammy award winnner RAC's twitter - he addresses people saying he "scammed" people by @ mentioning those he sold NFTs to and asking if they feel scammed. Fans of his bought the NFTs so they had a digital collectible representing his album, he got money to make art.

When Babe Ruth signs a baseball, it's still just a dingy baseball, but it has emotional significance to people. NFTs were the digital equivalent of that. I'm not surprised techies that have no art in their lives struggle to wrap their head around that.

But what is disappointing is that now Stable Diffusion takes a bunch of art that real humans tirelessly made, uses some neural net to rejigger it, and tech bros will die in the trenches making sure we legitimaze this quasi-plagriasm. For all the talks of NFTs being scams and generative AI being substance, I see one technology that incentivized real humans to make real art and another technology that does the opposite, takes money out of artists pockets so people can use algorithms to lift their style.

I'm not trying to oversimplify these topics but it gets tiresome reading the exact same tired talking points about generative AI being substantive and web3 being all scams when there's strong arguments indicating otherwise. It's just impossible to read them when on sites like these they get faded out because you're not allowed to have divergent opinions without a bunch of defensive dorks downvoting you into oblivion.

There's one last important point I want to make. Sites like Reddit and Hacker News and especially mainstream media are unduly influenced by big corporations. True blockchain use cases give power back to the individual. Sure, there's plenty of VC pump and dump shitcoins in crypto such as Solana and NEAR but the long term real utility is about the individual. Meanwhile, LLMs are almost exclusively trained and served by massive corporations, the same massive corporations that can influence the media you read. If a journalist wants to write an article about crypto energy usage, they'll write it. If they want to write about LLM energy usage, you have some of the richest, most powerful people in the world with some of the premier PR firms in the world who can influence that journalist and that publication in all sorts of ways. So critical stories about AI are more likely to get buried than critical stories about crypto. Keep that in mind.

To me, the biggest difference between the AI hype and the crypto hype is that crypto had the skeptics and the critics in the room - as it should. But AI is badly, badly lacking those skeptics and critics.

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#295

Anyone know why the ~15% number keeps showing up in recent layoffs? The startup I was at recently laid of 15%. I'm pretty sure it wasn't for (public) optics, because the layoff didn't get any press coverage. And based on the startup's business, I very much doubt the layoff was triggered by ChatGPT's success. My best guess would be behind-the-scenes VC strategizing, but this is happening even with publicly traded comp…

It's like a safe sounding number that cuts back on expenses but doesn't spook your existing employees and investors. Besides, you can always do another 15% in six months if need be. If you say, "we're laying off 70% effective immediately" it will sound like the ship is going down.

It's a plausible theory.

Is there evidence that this is the specific reasoning that companies are using?

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously it’s embarrassing how leadership in many companies has ZERO vision for AI right now. Too focused on buying houses, drinking wine and riding horses. I think these people need to retire already.

Snark aside, this is something that's always kind of baffled me. If I built a company and eventually found myself in extremely high value (ie, 9 figures), I'd be looking to retire ASAP. That would be it. I won capitalism. Time to spend the rest of my life on Maui sipping Mai-Tais on the beach. Why anybody would want to continue to work when they already have enough wealth to live an extremely lavish lifestyle without…

Re: extremely lavish

Is probably extremely boring - I have never had more fun than when solving problems, life without working on something interesting sounds insufferable to me

How long would I be able to sit on Maui sipping Mai-Tais? Getting massages, ... and more ... whatever I want, whenever I want it ... that is a curse actually.

Surrounded by fake people everyone wanting a piece of the wealth trickle down to them.

On a personal experience, I was a lot happier when I bought my first house, a rundown estate that was the cheapest on the street that then I had to work to improve upon it, ended up replacing most inside and out, some parts I learned to do myself - I ended up remodeling it piecemeal but so, so satisfying

My second house is very respectable, newer, larger, technically incomparably better, it is not even the same ballpark ... yet my new house never provided me with the same joy.

Be careful what you wish for.

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#297
post #195
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nice, round number. 500 is also a businessy-salesy round number, compared to 512 which is what an engineer would have considered a round number. Gives some clues as to where the number came from.

Come on. I've worked with engineers of all stripes and virtually none of them consider 512 a 'rounder' number than 500.

I've worked with lots of engineers too and virtually none would consider 111110100 rounder than 1000000000.

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#298
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I told you you could replicate all of that with proven battle tested technology… for free.

what if i told you i know that, but i don't want to do the work or ongoing management of that myself. i just want somebody else to do it for me. for money that i pay them, and not for money that some VC or data broker pays them

Then I’d tell you I have a very particular set of skills, skills that could keep your files stored safely for a very long time. For money you would pay directly to me, in perpetuity.

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#299
post #18

> In an ideal world, we’d simply shift people from one team to another. And we’ve done that wherever possible. However, our next stage of growth requires a different mix of skill sets, particularly in AI and early-stage product development. We’ve been bringing in great talent in these areas over the last couple years and we'll need even more. Imagine building a company that lets users store files online, seeing chatg…

I thought Drew’s email was fairly poor written as these things go. Trying to Amp everyone on the future of AI for the company at this moment seemed odd.

Also I always hate “to those departing…” as if it was their idea. These emails always promise fully owning the decision but they never deliver.

Re: Dropbox to reduce global workforce by about 16%, or 500 staff

#300
post #54
post #18

> In an ideal world, we’d simply shift people from one team to another. And we’ve done that wherever possible. However, our next stage of growth requires a different mix of skill sets, particularly in AI and early-stage product development. We’ve been bringing in great talent in these areas over the last couple years and we'll need even more. Imagine building a company that lets users store files online, seeing chatg…

> Imagine building a company that lets users store files online, seeing chatgpt released, and then laying off 16% of your company to.. use ai to store files better? I really don’t see how new ai capabilities lead to big layoffs and new opportunities for Dropbox snark incoming - Imagine thinking you understand the product strategy for a 14 year old, publicly traded company with thousands of employees without working t…

It's not invalid to ask whether companies are making real, strategic and well-thought moves or just jumping on a bandwagon.

Many of us have worked for long-standing public companies with thousands of employees that have embarked on product strategies that were not particularly valid.

Facebook comes to mind, for example, and its Metaverse boondoggle. Or Google and half a dozen things. Evernote, though it's not a public company, also comes to mind...

Did anybody need "insider knowledge" to know Google's Stadia was DOA? For that matter, Dropbox has tried pivoting to mail and apps (Carousel + Mailbox) in the past, and I don't know whether insider knowledge was needed to predict that failure.

I can imagine use cases for AI + Dropbox. Whether they are urgent use cases where customers see a real problem they're willing to throw money at is another question entirely.

Post reply on HN