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

Oracle slashes 30k jobs

rollingout.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 890 posts

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#561

Post by jjav »

kyledrake wrote: post #157

The bulk of the comments in here are focused on comparing Larry Ellison to a lawn mower, so I'll try a new tack and say that I'm genuinely confused at what the value prop of Oracle is. Given the history of their business model being licensing of important databases that are hard to switch off of, I've actually made a point to avoid using Oracle as much as possible (even so far as to leave MySQL when they acquired it,…

In a world of continuous change, at least we can always rely on oracle being consistently evil.

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#562

Post by renewiltord »

triceratops wrote: post #477
renewiltord wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the ideal things that companies can do is not hire people. A company that never hires someone will never let anyone go and consequently is the only ethical company. The worst thing that a company could do is pay someone to do a job for a while. In fact, one thing we could do is make sure that all jobs should be perpetual. If someone hires you, they can't stop paying you until they die or declare bankruptcy. Th…

> One of the ideal things that companies can do is not hire people This, but unironically. Companies that make money without hiring anyone provide the most "value". Simultaneously we should stop calling business owners "job creators". They're actually "job minimizers". They only hire people when there's no other choice.

Make money? Seems kind of corpofascistic. That’s profit that should be shared with workers. If no employees it could be distributed to unions.

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#563

Post by HomeDeLaPot »

dpark wrote: post #333
zerr wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Job hunting takes time. Also, they won't be deported in 30 days, along with their families.

I can do a lot of job hunting with a year of severance. Valid point about employees on visas though.

Maybe they could be kept on the payroll without access to actually work.

But the real problem is any law that would deport someone 30 days after they were laid off, even if they had been working for years. That should be 6 months minimum.

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#564

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

bix6 wrote: post #47
raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So exactly what for profit company is on the side of the angels?

Many of the startups I work with. We’re helping save the oceans and land. Purpose and profit are dream scenarios for me. It’s difficult in a capitalist economy but it exists.

Are those startups self funded or funded by VCs? If they are funded by VCs, it doesn’t matter what your company wants.

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#565

Post by HDThoreaun »

dominotw wrote: post #505
HDThoreaun wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tech shareholders want executives to take risks building new products. Of course they’d prefer the products be successful but if the options are “hire 30k people 50% chance we have to lay them all off” or “don’t build new products” most tech shareholders want option 1.

where do you pull 50 percent number for oracle?

Even if the number is 10% they want the company to take risks. Big tech shareholders number one goal is not becoming IBM

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#566

Post by roncesvalles »

kyledrake wrote: post #157

The bulk of the comments in here are focused on comparing Larry Ellison to a lawn mower, so I'll try a new tack and say that I'm genuinely confused at what the value prop of Oracle is. Given the history of their business model being licensing of important databases that are hard to switch off of, I've actually made a point to avoid using Oracle as much as possible (even so far as to leave MySQL when they acquired it,…

Also, their inability to make a NewSQL DB rivaling Spanner or Cockroach (they basically just had to clone one of these or acquire Cockroach) puts them out of any serious competition for the future of databases. Their "Oracle Autonomous DB" ain't it.

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#567

Post by Rapzid »

whatisthiseven wrote: post #531
prepend wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree as I was running clustered sql server 6.5 and 7 in 1998 for hundreds of concurrent users doing millions of reads per hour on NT basically commodity boxes. Replaced it with Oracle for 100x cost and lost performance. I think even back then you were usually better off with distributed databases running mysql or postgres over Oracle. Although people liked to think a giant Oracle db was better.

For others like me who might be skeptical to hear throughput in any metric other than seconds (and is used to large numbers in hours/days being used to inflate), I think millions per hour is actually quite high for 1998. Assume that means 5_000_000/hour. 5M/hr => 83k/min => 1400/s. That is impressive for late 90s. I was generous on what "millions per hour" meant, but even if its 2.5M/hr that would be 700/s, which is…

Those are big numbers especially for non-enterprise DBs in the 90s.

MySQL's big breakthrough(not specifically talking about perf) was innodb in 2010.

Just 15+ years ago Postgres had major issues with concurrency as we think about it today.

And just 10+ years ago a LOT of DB drivers weren't thread safe and had their own issues dealing with concurrency.

So nearly 30 years ago? Fuhgeddaboudit.

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#568

Post by renewiltord »

zulux wrote: post #141
renewiltord wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the ideal things that companies can do is not hire people. A company that never hires someone will never let anyone go and consequently is the only ethical company. The worst thing that a company could do is pay someone to do a job for a while. In fact, one thing we could do is make sure that all jobs should be perpetual. If someone hires you, they can't stop paying you until they die or declare bankruptcy. Th…

My only problem with this is: Some of my best people are those that "I gave them a chance." I'd only hire perfect people from my tribe if I had to have them forever.

And what about those who you have a chance to and they didn’t cut it? Their life is ruined by being fired.

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#569

Post by turtlesdown11 »

Aurornis wrote: post #460
jimkleiber wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if companies understand the emotional impact on the laid off and the layoff survivors. It almost seems like a terror campaign, whether intended or not.

One of my past employers tried to give laid off employees a dignified send offs including not immediately revoking their access. The number of people who snap and make rash decisions to try to exfiltrate data, plant backdoor logins for themselves, or sabotage company work in those hours was a much larger number than I would have guessed prior to seeing it.

Yeah, I'm confident that didn't happen

Re: Oracle slashes 30k jobs

#570

Post by triceratops »

renewiltord wrote: post #562
triceratops wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the ideal things that companies can do is not hire people This, but unironically. Companies that make money without hiring anyone provide the most "value". Simultaneously we should stop calling business owners "job creators". They're actually "job minimizers". They only hire people when there's no other choice.

Make money? Seems kind of corpofascistic. That’s profit that should be shared with workers. If no employees it could be distributed to unions.

Ok go for it.
Post reply on HN