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

Waymo Layoffs

sfstandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 130 posts

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#31

Post by adolph »

bryant wrote: post #25
IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend of mine convinced me this was the FB strategy to get people to resign instead of needing to fire them (a costly, legal.minefield). As a founder, the act of paralizying the company to effectively "bleed the fat off the bone" while cost effective, is insane. Because nothing gets done during those low morale months. I refused to believe this could be a valid strategy. Then I was countered with: this org is alre…

I mean, I imagine the risks from insider threats (selling or dumping secrets etc) would be heightened in this environment. Especially if two layoffs already happened. They'd need to have a bulletproof insider threat program, one they're not laying anyone off from to mitigate the risk of their own team becoming a threat. --- Tldr: once you've had two layoffs back to back, the risk isn't low morale, it's animosity.

Given the long term lack of success of the firm and the rapid incremental success of other tech lineages, what secrets would be worth dumping? Here’s not how do it?

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#32

Post by dixie_land »

dheera wrote: post #6
duxup wrote: post #5

I can’t imagine three layoffs in a year is great for morale. Is there a reason they chose this sort of trickling layoffs approach?

Every time you all drive prices of stocks down, layoffs happen. Think twice before you drive the prices of a stock down again, you're part of the cause. Consider selling at a higher price than you bought the stock for. If you drive stock prices down three times a year, layoffs will happen three times a year. If you drive stock prices up, they'll go on a hiring spree. It's that simple.

Apes together strong!

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#33

Post by duxup »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #10
duxup wrote: post #5

I can’t imagine three layoffs in a year is great for morale. Is there a reason they chose this sort of trickling layoffs approach?

A friend of mine convinced me this was the FB strategy to get people to resign instead of needing to fire them (a costly, legal.minefield). As a founder, the act of paralizying the company to effectively "bleed the fat off the bone" while cost effective, is insane. Because nothing gets done during those low morale months. I refused to believe this could be a valid strategy. Then I was countered with: this org is alre…

You don’t get to pick who leaves too, I gotta think the proactive self starter types are more likely to leave.

Folks resigned to whatever / want to be laid off stay.

Heck I was the latter once, stayed for a while waiting for my payout.

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#34

Post by janalsncm »

foxandmouse wrote: post #13

To anyone following this space, this was inevitable. Also, What is going on at google these days, I don't see them having a competitive advantage in any industry after this decade..

In some sense, everything that has happened was inevitable. We colloquially speak of the “possible but didn’t happen” as if it’s very different from and the “impossible” but in fact those things which didn’t happen were impossible in retrospect. Maybe there is only the “actual”.

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#35

Post by Tempest1981 »

smcin wrote: post #24
rnk wrote: post #3

Is there a conclusion that the taxi service kind of works and just needs to fix a few minor issues around the edges fixed to work in limited city use in many cities, or is it so far away it's not even close?

Translation: "limited city use in [selected] cities" seems to mean: - no driving on freeway with passengers (that alone is a huge limitation. You couldn't get to most major airports (in any sensible time) under that limitation. Add in trucks, rush-hour, ripple congestion, lane-splitting motorcyclists.) But presumably also, Waymo and Cruise don't want to pick an all-out war with human drivers working for Uber. Not yet…

> southwestern and southern US (SF, ...)

I never considered SF as southwestern, but Wikipedia says you're correct

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#36

Post by xnx »

Does Waymo still have two CEOs? Seems like an unusual situation that isn't sustainable if tough decisions need to get made.

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#37

Post by dmead »

rnk wrote: post #3

Is there a conclusion that the taxi service kind of works and just needs to fix a few minor issues around the edges fixed to work in limited city use in many cities, or is it so far away it's not even close?

It's not even close. This era of AI is an adventure in scale and compute density.

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#39

Post by Uehreka »

dheera wrote: post #6
duxup wrote: post #5

I can’t imagine three layoffs in a year is great for morale. Is there a reason they chose this sort of trickling layoffs approach?

Every time you all drive prices of stocks down, layoffs happen. Think twice before you drive the prices of a stock down again, you're part of the cause. Consider selling at a higher price than you bought the stock for. If you drive stock prices down three times a year, layoffs will happen three times a year. If you drive stock prices up, they'll go on a hiring spree. It's that simple.

> you all

Who all? This isn’t exactly a short-selling subreddit.

Re: Waymo Layoffs

#40

Post by xnx »

bryant wrote: post #25
IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend of mine convinced me this was the FB strategy to get people to resign instead of needing to fire them (a costly, legal.minefield). As a founder, the act of paralizying the company to effectively "bleed the fat off the bone" while cost effective, is insane. Because nothing gets done during those low morale months. I refused to believe this could be a valid strategy. Then I was countered with: this org is alre…

I mean, I imagine the risks from insider threats (selling or dumping secrets etc) would be heightened in this environment. Especially if two layoffs already happened. They'd need to have a bulletproof insider threat program, one they're not laying anyone off from to mitigate the risk of their own team becoming a threat. --- Tldr: once you've had two layoffs back to back, the risk isn't low morale, it's animosity.

I imagine Waymo is very sensitive to this after having literal blueprints and other intellectual property stolen by Anthony Levandowski.
Post reply on HN