291–300 of 432 posts
It seems Zuck is turning into Elon. What's next? closing the European offices? forcing people to return to the office? relocating HQ to Texas?
Elon had a great year.Him weaponizing Twitter to go all-in on Trump has earned him so much political capital that those perky 50billion he paid for it look like a still now. I bet Zuck is feeling the heat, now with the government gunning for TikTok and looking at monopolies
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is why we say that we hope you get everything you voted for. Because it will back fire on you first. It always has, and it always will, not our fault you can't learn from your mistakes.
Is that a quote? I'm not American.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Why set an arbitrary number of people who need to be fired as opposed to grading people to a standard? Is your hiring process so flawed that you just accept that you screwed up hiring 5 percent of your people? This smells like the Welchian nonsense that drove GE into the ground.
I think grading people to a standard is very difficult. At the last place I worked I was managing people and we were given a set of "standards" to rate employees on, used to determine raises, promotions, and so on. I tried my best fairly evaluate my reports, but obviously the standards are inherently imprecise and so the evaluations are mostly qualitative. I found that other managers, wanting to do well by their repo…
The idea that some fixed percentage of people always underperform is possibly Jack Welch's most toxic contribution to management, and with all the BS he spewed over the years, that's saying something. It makes people compete against each other Hunger Games-style as opposed to working as a team.
So in the first two weeks of the year Zuck has announced: - Replacing their global policy chief with the company's highest ranking Republican. - Appointing Dana White to the company's board. - Changing content policies to be aligned with the incoming administration. - Elimination of DEI programs in hiring. - Removing tampons from men's restrooms. - Defending all this in a 3 hour Joe Rogan interview. Ranting about the…
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/01/07/texas-meta-content-m...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Isn't this quite paradoxical that those kind of companies have hard interviews where you have to almost prove that P=NP in front of 5 people that judges everything you do Interview process at Meta isn't that hard. Mostly medium leetcode questions (in front of single interviewer), not particularly tricky. With enough preparation, it's doable by any reasonably good undergrad. Google was slightly harder though. Simila…
It is harder now. They are steering away from 2 LC med each round
When I was an engineering manager there, engineering leadership described performance reviews as, in a large well run engineering organization, you'll probably be firing 5-10% of your employees every year for low performance. (Well, "non regrettable attrition", which includes people who quit when they get pipped.) Lower than 5% at scale would be a red flag, not necessarily wrong, you don't want to "stack rank" with a…
Why? Why set an arbitrary number of people who need to be fired as opposed to grading people to a standard? Is your hiring process so flawed that you just accept that you screwed up hiring 5 percent of your people? This smells like the Welchian nonsense that drove GE into the ground.
Essentially the individual incentives for managers are naturally to avoid making the tough decision, the idea is to put some more pressure to make the right call.
Your value of X% will vary but you hope it’s tuned by some research within the org.
I feel like people are missing part of the memo where he said they will backfill all the roles. You can say it's not fair or cruel but this isn't a layoff. They want to churn (maybe for cheaper talent? Maybe for H1-Bs?)
Meta is already filled with H1Bs. They are probably the model utilizer of H1B visas. They pay them all really well and the employee base is truly global, not just all from one country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand that you made up your 20%, but at that point it feels like you are blaming bad team fit or environment as bad hires, and this fitting can change over time as bad politics or shifts to different goals happen.
bad hire doesn't necessarily mean bad/stupid/incompetent person, it just means bad hire. might not be a fit for the role, might not be a fit for the company. for example, i freely admit i was a bad hire at Google because i got demotivated by big corporate/political bullshit getting in my way, it just wasn't for me. then i went to a 20 startup and, in the words of the CEO, "saved the company" and scaled it to 200 peop…
Why do people still have accounts on Twitter and Facebook already? Those reactionary billionaires are clearly offensive to humans and we should collectively tell them to f*ck off
Earlier quoted context omitted.
lol yea or a few bad jobs reports? I think many got use to the most incredible labor market of a generation or two and we are just now back to something more historically normal.
>> lol yea or a few bad jobs reports? Which ones? The ones they released or the ones they re-released after overstating the numbers several times?