Live data from Hacker News

Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

twitter.com

31–40 of 209 posts

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The transition is being handled with as much dignity as possible - The company is also offering to help place people through USV.

It wasn't possible to give more notice? Do you know why?

I've never heard of a company giving advanced notice of layoffs. Its always just an email the morning of.

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#33
post #15

Why would you fire people on such a short notice? No need to hand over things? No interest in providing at least some time to look for a new job? EDIT: To clarify that a bit, I am interested in what the upsides are except for possibly saving some money. An orderly shutdown usually seems preferable to me over quickly killing the process, for both sides.

Why would you give notice? Leaving people dangling for weeks while you figure out who will be cut is worse than making the decision, telling them it's effective immediately and giving a fair severance package so they can immediately start looking.

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#34

If SO and its related network sites die, what's going to happen to the millions of questions and answers their users contributed? Is anyone archiving them and making the archives available in any useful way?

I don't know, but you guys remember the dark times before SO?...omg.

Now let's see.. we had Usenet news groups, mailing lists, IRC channels, and eventually web forums on every programming language, operating system, and software package under the sun. You could ask questions and get them answered. What was so cringeworthy about this exactly?

That's not to say that SO doesn't bring value. It has nice tagging and discoverability through search engines, good moderation, and an achievement and reputation system that encourages people to make quality contributions. But the days before it existed weren't so dark.

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#35

It's been interesting watching SO try to monetize. I wonder: How would people feel if they went the Wikipedia way? It's obviously a very beneficial site, but not as widely applicable as Wikipedia. I personally prefer the Wikipedia model of being ad-free and having no additional product and doing a fundraising drive every so often. PBS as well. That said, I certainly think given the audience of SO that there are sever…

I remember seeing an article here these past few weeks talking about the business model of Wikipedia and how it's supposedly inherently flawed. Wikipedia doesn't bring in a lot of cash, but it rather sets a sad tone for itself how unfortunate that may seem. Personally I'd be more interested in seeing StackOverflow branch out. What have they done these past few years? It seems like StackOverflow has remained stagnant,…

Wikipedia doesn't have a business model. It's not a business.

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#36

I remember reaching out to them a bunch of years ago (2012 or so) in order to ask them to host a stack overflow sub-site for our product (from a sizeable company). We were willing to pay quite a lot (because they had the premier UX for this kind of thing), but they weren't at all interested. They just told us to try to grow things "organically", because they had decided to focus 100% on open stuff. We weren't really…

Considering there are companies that are completely based around selling private StackOverflow clones, I agree.

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#37

It's been interesting watching SO try to monetize. I wonder: How would people feel if they went the Wikipedia way? It's obviously a very beneficial site, but not as widely applicable as Wikipedia. I personally prefer the Wikipedia model of being ad-free and having no additional product and doing a fundraising drive every so often. PBS as well. That said, I certainly think given the audience of SO that there are sever…

Most of SO's operations are something I would not like to fund. I'd be happy to donate for their core service, but that's really only 10% or less of their headcount. Who funds the other 90% and why would they want to?

SO is too big to go for a Wikipedia style model unless they strip off just the core SO part and relevant engineers and make only that part donation based. And I'd guess the other 90% would end up in layoffs anyway.

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bahahaha. That wasn't even the worst of it. Imagine this scenario, you have to install linux on a pc. There's no stackoverflow, there's no google. The linux distro you're using doesn't even have a package manager. And currently it doesn't have a working ethernet driver either. Also, it's the only computer that exists in your entire house.

Connecting to whatever internet connection I had at the time was always the hardest thing (if all of the other basic hardware was supported). Maybe I was better off in that I was getting my distro (Slackware) along with the giant 'Linux for dummies' book in which it was included. It still never got me far enough to be able to remove my Windows partition.

I remember installing an early version of Red Hat on a machine that only had a Winmodem, not a real hardware modem that would just work in Linux.

Getting a Winmodem to work in Linux was possibly, but not exactly easy. I couldn't afford a better modem at the time, so I just kept hacking away at it and booting back into Windows and searching the web to try to figure it out. This was 1996 or so; there was far less information on the web than there is today, and search engines weren't exactly great at finding what you needed.

I think I finally got online from Linux after a week or two. :)

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't possible to give more notice? Do you know why?

I've never heard of a company giving advanced notice of layoffs. Its always just an email the morning of.

Usually you will get at least a 4 week notice in Germany and this increases to up to 7 months when you worked for more than 20 years for the company. That you get fired effective immediately usually only happen if you really fucked something up.

Re: Stack Overflow reducing headcount by 20%

#40

I remember reaching out to them a bunch of years ago (2012 or so) in order to ask them to host a stack overflow sub-site for our product (from a sizeable company). We were willing to pay quite a lot (because they had the premier UX for this kind of thing), but they weren't at all interested. They just told us to try to grow things "organically", because they had decided to focus 100% on open stuff. We weren't really…

I'm doing project in a similar vein right now, but in a totally different space. We call it the "Spotify model" where you host your stuff intermixed with ours, with the option to query just ours or just yours.

Good times - having to write a huge authentication / middleware layer to make sure everything is correct.

Post reply on HN