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

Changes at YC

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 562 posts

Re: Changes at YC

#331

Post by sokoloff »

bko wrote: post #323
EngManagerIsMe wrote: post #306

> Unfortunately, this means we will no longer need some of the roles on the late stage investing team. Seventeen of our teammates are impacted today. I hate this passive voice. It implies there was nothing that could be done, that this was just a force of nature. That it wasn't an active choice by YC, but rather just some eventuality. Most of us understand the necessity of hard decisions. Own the outcomes. It's ok to…

> If you think that looks too bad, then don't do the thing -- find other opportunities for the people in the company. The needs of a business change. Sometimes roles are eliminated and other times roles are added. This is normal and healthy process of every business. Can we get away from infantizing the individuals affected like they're some children whose family disowned them? It's unfortunate and you can certainly…

"As a result of this, we eliminated the roles of 17 people." is also fine, shows more ownership, and is therefore better (IMO) than "Seventeen of our teammates are impacted today."

The way they phrased it is entirely standard in the industry, so it isn't exactly a mark of shame to conform with that (IMO poor) standard. (At least they avoided using an MLK quote.)

Re: Changes at YC

#332

Post by musicale »

bradrn wrote: post #327
EngManagerIsMe wrote: post #306

> Unfortunately, this means we will no longer need some of the roles on the late stage investing team. Seventeen of our teammates are impacted today. I hate this passive voice. It implies there was nothing that could be done, that this was just a force of nature. That it wasn't an active choice by YC, but rather just some eventuality. Most of us understand the necessity of hard decisions. Own the outcomes. It's ok to…

> I hate this passive voice. To be pedantically clear, the first sentence here is not passive! Both clauses there have an explicit subject (‘this’ and ‘we’ respectively) and neither verb (‘means’ and ‘need’) is passivised. I like Geoffrey K. Pullum’s article on what is and isn’t passive: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~gpullum/passive_loathing.html (Not that this means the announcement isn’t problematic, mind you. It still…

Impacted, while passive, seems like a fairly good metaphor for being fired because it calls to mind being hit and possibly crushed to death, as in

"The bicyclists were impacted by the truck."

Re: Changes at YC

#333

Post by [deleted] »

dvt wrote: post #293
Zetice wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...that's not what "bailout" means, a "bailout" can only happen before a bank collapses; SVB already collapsed, it cannot be bailed out, definitionally. It's not a shell game, it's a fundamentally different situation where real people who are not billionaires are directly and immediately effected. Further, there is not financial assistance in the form of "free money"; at best what will happen are loans to cover the d…

> real people who are not billionaires are directly and immediately effected Hard disagree on this. Startups die literally every day, not to mention that we just had tens of thousands of layoffs by big tech companies. In my view, this was a targeted bailout, meant to primarily protect the investment (into startups) of many Silicon Valley investment firms. > only then will investors be given a chance to recoup some of…

[deleted]

Re: Changes at YC

#334

Post by Zetice »

dvt wrote: post #293
Zetice wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...that's not what "bailout" means, a "bailout" can only happen before a bank collapses; SVB already collapsed, it cannot be bailed out, definitionally. It's not a shell game, it's a fundamentally different situation where real people who are not billionaires are directly and immediately effected. Further, there is not financial assistance in the form of "free money"; at best what will happen are loans to cover the d…

> real people who are not billionaires are directly and immediately effected Hard disagree on this. Startups die literally every day, not to mention that we just had tens of thousands of layoffs by big tech companies. In my view, this was a targeted bailout, meant to primarily protect the investment (into startups) of many Silicon Valley investment firms. > only then will investors be given a chance to recoup some of…

These aren't "startups that die" they're "businesses that did absolutely nothing wrong that die". Americans do not want to live in a world where a business can die through picking the wrong bank, full stop. Just because the investors in those startups don't get fleeced by a bank doesn't mean they're "bailed out".

And "startup" here is not "craps shoot on if it exists in a week" it's "a substantial percentage of businesses with VC backing in a general California geographic area but also across the country."

And yes, your point is flat wrong because you don't understand that a bailout is exclusive to investors in the direct company receiving financial support, which does not apply to the already failed SVB, nor does it apply to any depositors who are not receiving any additional money at all, just regaining access to their already existent funds.

You are misusing the word, so of course your point isn't making sense with the real definition of the term. I am convinced you don't actually grasp that.

Re: Changes at YC

#335

Post by emmelaich »

voz_ wrote: post #46

> Seventeen of our teammates are impacted today. Never allow corporations to speak in passive, weak, blameless terms. Use direct, honest, language, and force them to do the same. "Seventeen of our teammates are impacted today." - > "We laid off 17 employees today" "I was impacted by layoffs" -> "Google laid me off" etc

> Never allow corporations to speak in passive, weak, blameless terms.

And yet, when they don't they tend to be excoriated for being harsh and cruel.

So whaddya do?

Re: Changes at YC

#336

Post by ttymck »

musicale wrote: post #332
bradrn wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hate this passive voice. To be pedantically clear, the first sentence here is not passive! Both clauses there have an explicit subject (‘this’ and ‘we’ respectively) and neither verb (‘means’ and ‘need’) is passivised. I like Geoffrey K. Pullum’s article on what is and isn’t passive: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~gpullum/passive_loathing.html (Not that this means the announcement isn’t problematic, mind you. It still…

Impacted, while passive, seems like a fairly good metaphor for being fired because it calls to mind being hit and possibly crushed to death, as in "The bicyclists were impacted by the truck."

The truck was in the bike lane, and they needed to use caution when going around?

EDIT: alright, go ahead and change your comment entirely

Re: Changes at YC

#337

Post by curiousObject »

winphone1974 wrote: post #311

Man, total amateur hour. A layoff post without talking about how it's the hardest thing the CEO has ever done, or saying the responsibility lies with me? No mention of how deep he cares about those departing? And delivered on a Monday? Why didn't they use ChatGPT to compose this like everyone else?

Yes, the proper style is:

Leading venture capital innovator, YCombinator, is delighted to announce that over 80 percent of our team remain unimpacted by recent employment-related issues, while other team members will be exploring exciting new opportunities going forward

Re: Changes at YC

#338

Post by yencabulator »

bink wrote: post #69
bradleyjg wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laid off is itself a less harsh version of fired.

Fired -> Let go -> Laid off -> Impacted I'll be curious to see what comes next.

Hard to get more vague than impacted, that could mean anything. I was impacted by reading this bland PR release.

Impacted still implies some causal connection, so the next level of doublespeak must avoid that, then. John was affine to the event.

Re: Changes at YC

#339

Post by idlewords »

bradrn wrote: post #327
EngManagerIsMe wrote: post #306

> Unfortunately, this means we will no longer need some of the roles on the late stage investing team. Seventeen of our teammates are impacted today. I hate this passive voice. It implies there was nothing that could be done, that this was just a force of nature. That it wasn't an active choice by YC, but rather just some eventuality. Most of us understand the necessity of hard decisions. Own the outcomes. It's ok to…

> I hate this passive voice. To be pedantically clear, the first sentence here is not passive! Both clauses there have an explicit subject (‘this’ and ‘we’ respectively) and neither verb (‘means’ and ‘need’) is passivised. I like Geoffrey K. Pullum’s article on what is and isn’t passive: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~gpullum/passive_loathing.html (Not that this means the announcement isn’t problematic, mind you. It still…

The parent cited a sentence in the passive voice; why not just leave it be? Why 'pedantically' correct things that aren't wrong?

Re: Changes at YC

#340

Post by UncleOxidant »

slt2021 wrote: post #242
UncleOxidant wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked with a guy who came up as an engineer in the Soviet Union. Back around 2014 he was laid off from a US tech company that had moved him over from Russia. He couldn't wrap his head around it. Said that in the Soviet Union there was no such thing as a layoff. If they needed to shut down some program they'd move you to another one. The whole layoff was just extremely disorienting for him - especially since the co…

highly educated engineers were paid like 100 rubles/mo, which is slightly above minimum wage. Why lay off people, when state can afford to keep them on minimum wage? and reap the benefit of their work (rockets, weapons, tanks, nukes, etc)

Exactly, the state spent a lot of money (and/or resources) to train an engineer it would be best to keep him/her working as much as possible. Here we lay highly trained engineers off and they could be idle for several months. Lots of disadvantages to central planning, but realizing that it's expensive to keep highly educated resources idle they would try to maximize their usage.

" highly educated engineers were paid like 100 rubles/mo, which is slightly above minimum wage."

I think it's kind of hard to quantify based on salary alone in a system like that. People in more prestige positions like engineers & scientists had access to things that others might not have: a better apartment, better schools for their kids, shops that had a better supply of goods.

Post reply on HN