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

GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 907 posts

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#431

Post by jsnell »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #351
yohannparis wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see where is that a problem? People who will be using Teams are people using Office 365 daily. Having a cohesive ecosystem makes complete sense. From a UX too.

The problem is that Teams is used by companies who have IT departments that do absolutely insane things like DELETE THE CHAT HISTORY AFTER 24 HOURS because of some sort of perverse, contrived "security" issue. These are the morons that Microsoft is selling to, and giving advice to as on how to configure it. So you wind up with a system that's almost worse than not having anything at all. Our Sharepoint installation w…

> DELETE THE CHAT HISTORY AFTER 24 HOURS because of some sort of perverse, contrived "security" issue.

Seems much more likely to be due to legal reasons than for security. If the chats are not retained, they can't be found in discovery. (And given chat is even more informal than email, people probably say a lot of things they shouldn't in chat).

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#432

Post by CamperBob2 »

rossdavidh wrote: post #420

Closing all offices, I have to say, makes it way easier to do more layoffs. Having been through layoffs in semiconductor manufacturing in the 90's, when you had to, you know, get the people from work and take them to a place and all that, it involved paying a lot of money for extra security and such. With no offices, it's a lot easier, and you never have to meet the person face to face. Five years from now, I think w…

Five years from now, I think we will not see "remote only" for a large company and think "ooh, they value their employees I guess", but rather, "uh oh, they like to think of their employees as being like virtual servers, easy to spin up and easy to shut down the moment you don't need to pay for that capacity".

That's basically how the movie industry has always worked. Why keep people on your books when you're not actively in production? It's one of those cases where organized labor seems to work out well for all sides. The unions provide talent and craft support when/where it's needed, then they go away when the work is done.

It'll be interesting to see if more industries are able to adopt a similar model. Similar incentives exist, but a company that makes software or hardware isn't an on-again, off-again concern like film production.

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#433

Post by eschneider »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #351
yohannparis wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see where is that a problem? People who will be using Teams are people using Office 365 daily. Having a cohesive ecosystem makes complete sense. From a UX too.

The problem is that Teams is used by companies who have IT departments that do absolutely insane things like DELETE THE CHAT HISTORY AFTER 24 HOURS because of some sort of perverse, contrived "security" issue. These are the morons that Microsoft is selling to, and giving advice to as on how to configure it. So you wind up with a system that's almost worse than not having anything at all. Our Sharepoint installation w…

That seems like a more reasonable policy if you've ever had your email/chat logs subpoenaed. If that stuff's auto deleted, then it's easier to have open discussions there, but yeah, no history.

It does change one's usage model.

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#434

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

galkk wrote: post #130
romellem wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not kidding, one of the reasons I left my last job was when our parent company forced Outlook, Sharepoint, and Teams on us (vs. Google mail, Google Drive, and Slack). That change on its own isn't the worst thing of course, there were other reasons why I was considering leaving, but it was definitely one of the last straws. Those MS solutions are just worse than the competition, and getting frustrated at your bugg…

Outlook is more or less fine, but share point and teams are abominations

I want whatever you're smoking. Outlook is the poster child for overengineered software. It's the pointy end of Microsoft's attempt to make their software be all things to all IT department buyers' checklists.

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#435

Post by brookst »

relaxing wrote: post #308
brookst wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also confused because almost all of my company's Teams usage happens in unthreaded chats.

The unthreaded chats are all private, no? If you want to use the group chat it forces you into threaded (or is there a way to switch out of that?)

In chat, just go to New Chat and add as many people as you want. Boom, unthreaded group chat. You can rename it to a topic or group name.

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#436

Post by JW_00000 »

harveywi wrote: post #241
fnordpiglet wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh wtf I want to have something more useful to say to contribute meaningfully here. But my brain segfaulted.

They got angry when Trump was elected so they forked the Oval Office.

This is a photo from March 2016, while Trump was only elected in November 2016.

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#437

Post by ryanwinchester »

mardifoufs wrote: post #25
jiocrag wrote: post #7

Fortune now confirming: https://fortune.com/2023/02/09/github-is-laying-off-10-of-st...

>i) Effective immediately, we will be moving laptop refreshes from three years to four years. ii) We will be moving to Microsoft Teams for the sole purpose of video conferencing, saving significant cost and simplifying cross-company and customer conversations Layoffs and having to use teams? Talk about a morale hit

I worked at a company that used Teams for video conferencing and Slack for chat. The fact that they specifically said "Teams for video conferencing" reminded me of that.

To be honest, it's not awful if you're only using it for that.

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#438

Post by jrochkind1 »

tracker1 wrote: post #421
chris222 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true! I worked at what some would consider one of the top offices (Dropbox). They went remote and the polling was something like 70% support 30% oppose. There were some vocal supporters of in-office (mostly due to the perks like food) but they gave a generous stipend instead to satisfy most people.

I find I work better in an office myself... been remote for about 3 years now, and I've gotten used to it. I miss lunch with coworkers, etc... and some of the more spontaneous discussions don't happen nearly as much... Also, I like a relatively short commute (around 30m) long enough to clear the mind before/after work.

Same.

But I used to have a walking commute, which I also miss. Certainly I wouldn't miss a commute longer than 30 minutes. And I'd probably miss it less if it were in an office park somewhere, rather than a city I could walk to lunch at various places.

But yeah, I have a remote job because that's the job I have that I'm well-suited for that was available. (And sure, ability to work from one 1 or 2 days a week or as needed would certainly be convenient regardless). But I don't actually prefer working remotely, and also think there are real losses to quality of collaborative work, as well as quality of life. I know this is heretical to say these days in these circles.

Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

#439

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

jobs_throwaway wrote: post #11

wild how so many companies are laying off 7-15% of their workforce in such quick succession

Corporations all over the country have figured out that there's some fat to skim off the top, and give to the execs and investment banks, and they're all doing it at the same time so that they can't get singled out for criticism in the WSJ. It's bandwagoning for the absolute worst of all reasons, to the detriment of everyone else in the 99%.
Post reply on HN