411–420 of 531 posts
“We will also keep Slack and internal email open today for everyone so we can share farewells.” That’s drastically different. Most orgs that’ve run layoffs over the last few years have terminated access immediately, or even before informing those losing jobs. This feels more human, and I hope it goes well for them.
I worked at Shopify until the Fall. Shopify was just a really fun place to work. And in part this was because they did a really good job of interviewing. Technical, yes, but in particular behaviorally. So I can honestly say that many of the colleagues I know being let go are truly great colleagues. They were some of the most impactful people I worked with in my org (discovery) and they are a great get for any company…
I'm still at Shopify (even after today). I can confirm that the colleagues I'm losing are just all around great humans—in addition to having good technical chops. The hiring process optimizes for nice colleagues, and it seems to have worked quite well.
People who mentored me, who work hard, and do high quality work, and people who really carried the best of culture of the company (both technical and personal culture).
Really a shame to see this happen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For hundreds of thousands of years, pre-historic man became very skilled at cutting rocks in order to make stone age tools. Generations upon generations of early humans learned, worked on, and passed down to their children the way to perfectly smash rocks against each other in order to cut them into pointy shapes. In this way they made arrow heads, knives, axes, and so on. It's hard to believe, but this primitive tec…
> I don't care one iota about craftsmen who can no longer conduct their craft in the way they want because a better technology came around. You'll care when they actively subvert the rollout of the new technology. If the technology truly benefits society more than it hurts the craftsman then you can share some of the gains with them so they too can benefit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lutke's not a hero, he's a mini-Zuckerberg: he still runs the company he founded as CEO, but he has already made more than enough money to comfortably retire. Also like Zuckerberg, his company might be better off without him at this point, since being practically unaffected by success or failure makes continuing as CEO something of a vanity project.
Virtually anybody else who they'd hire as a CEO would also have more than enough money to comfortably retire. Lutke has more reputation/passion/history/identity tied up in the company than anyone else would - where money isn't a driving factor, deep connection to the thing you're working on is probably the most important motivation.
But they also captain their first large enterprises: do they know what they're doing? Can they transition these firms into businesses that will endure? Or will they capriciously chase shiny objects while they waste the trust and goodwill of investors, the people who work there now, and the people who will want to work there in the future? They might have seeded the garden, but it took thousands of smart people to build it up, and it takes a constant supply to maintain it.
A new CEO will probably be rich, sure, but not "endow a historical dynasty" rich, and might know how to take a successful company and reposition it for the long term. Maybe the younger guys can do it. But it would just be for vanity at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not so simplistically true. This is what Reaganomics will want you to believe. Examples abound of companies that did not prioritise shareholder returns over everything. Companies are organisations that operate within a society and therefore have a role to play to keep that society together. There are (very limited) lawful structures that try to make this happen, but much more is down to culture. In many (most?)…
It’s actually hilarious people still believe more political bureaucracy is the answer. Fortunately, US culture is taking over. Companies are formed by shareholders to make money in some venture for the shareholders. People can pursue their social objectives through other types of organizations. Perhaps governments that impose regulations and taxes. I myself support moderate taxes and light regulations. To the extent…
So you would have no issue with owners lobbying to change the law so they make even more money, right? As you said, more money is the only goal.
What would you say if it's you who is worked to death? See, everybody thinks they will be an owner, a master if you will in this system. But it's more likely you would be another sla.... ahem... valued employee.
Expected: 'Shopify lays off 20%'
Actual: 'Shopify will be smaller by about 20%'
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Too high" = one of the only careers that wasn't completely soul crushing left.
In this case, "too high" = "we haven't figured out how to commoditize it well enough yet because the skill floor/ceiling is too high to scale with cheaper talent." This was one of the primary reasons I began to specialize partially in tech domains that are regarded as "hard" (compilers/perf): much smaller market means employees have a bit more leverage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shopify calls its first interview the "life story" interview, and (in my experience) it was a great place for me to talk about my career, reflect on past successes and mistakes, and demonstrate empathy and self-awareness.
Uh. I hope this was for a non-technical role. Otherwise, it sounds like a bad idea and best and a torturous thing that filters out a lot of non-native, non-extroverted people. But then again, that's probably why the environment seems 'fun'
> The balance of crafter to manager numbers is a tricky one to strike. Too few and you risk misalignment on the most important things, too many and you add heavy layers of process, approvals, meetings and… side quests. Our numbers were unhealthy, just like it is in much of the tech industry. One of the insidious consequences of this is that it leads to the company increasingly celebrating activities rather than craft…
Yet they're not offering those managers IC positions, they're just cutting and targeting managers with higher salaries for the most part. Also heard of a few staff engineers that went.
https://shopify.engineering/shopify-ruby-at-scale-research-i...
“We will also keep Slack and internal email open today for everyone so we can share farewells.” That’s drastically different. Most orgs that’ve run layoffs over the last few years have terminated access immediately, or even before informing those losing jobs. This feels more human, and I hope it goes well for them.
Frankly, this sort of open-access to terminated employees is irresponsible.
Right now I can't access any Slack channels, I can't access Google Drive/Docs, I can't send an email to an external address. I can only DM people and email people in the company.
In about 15 minutes I'll be shut out entirely.
As far as such things go it seems like a reasonable balance of humane consideration and legal prudence.