https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=47057908&goto=item%3Fi...
Called it. This will be for every single software company. Maybe all companies.
Layoffs at Block
691–700 of 1001 posts
Re: Layoffs at Block
#692This is one of the best (if not the best) layoff letters I've seen online (no affiliation, don't know anyone working there, purely outsider perspective). * Severance packages upfront because realistically that's what everyone worries about first. * Reasoning second. I appreciate the one clean cut vs prolonged bleeding. * Owning the decision and respecting the people that got you there. Opting for an awkward allhands…
I wonder if the lack of capital letters is a clever trick to make this whole annoucement look more humane and natural. Surely it's intentional: only "U.S" deserves capitals, not even his own name in the signature.
It's just a Shibboleth used by SV types to signal their disdain for convention. Altman is also a fan.
Re: Layoffs at Block
#693Anyone who has worked in the big tech industry knows that probably more than half of the workforce performs tasks that, in essence, are superfluous. But these things happened: 1) Musk has shown that Twitter can operate with 5% (approximately?) of the workforce he inherited; 2) laying off a lot of people was seen as a sign that the company was in trouble, but not now because; 3) artificial intelligence makes point 2)…
> Musk has shown that Twitter can operate with 5% (approximately?) of the workforce he inherited Is X profitable? I don't think the argument was that Twitter couldn't _operate_ with 5% of the workforce (i.e. skeleton sysadmin crew), the issue was whether Twitter could make money and remain a viable business. It seems that Twitter is no longer a viable business (i.e. less advertising spend, decline in users - especial…
X has added more useful functionality in the last year or two than twitter did in their entire existence, it is also much snappier and reliable, that's with 5% of the workforce. I don't put this down to AI though it's more like a very lean, talented and motivated teams without layers of pointless middle people. Add AI into the mix and it's naturally going to be the way forward. Companies that stay bloated and not utilising AI will die.
Re: Layoffs at Block
#694We'll see how much the AI aspect is true by whether they're thinning out teams equally, or just axing whole initiatives. My impression of Block was that it was mostly a one-trick pony (okay, two if you include CashApp) with a bunch of side initiatives that never seemed to pan out, so I'm expecting it to be more of the latter, with this being more of an admission that they're now in "maintenance mode". Either way, I t…
I'm convinced that these "AI Layoffs" are these companies trying to save face from the absurd overhiring that they did in 2022 and 2023 because apparently they thought that these no-interest loans/free money would just last forever. No one really "knows" how to grow businesses so the easiest way to spend a lot of money quickly is hiring lots of people, whether or not they are "necessary". Then this free money dries u…
> the absurd overhiring that they did in 2022 and 2023
The overhiring took place from mid 2020 through mid 2022. The reversal into layoffs started in late 2022 and was in full swing in 2023. While the overhiring problem was real, the correction was largely complete over a year ago. The layoffs we're seeing today have nothing to do with overhiring and everything to do with managing earnings to sustain equity valuations.
Re: Layoffs at Block
#695I had never heard of Block before, but I visited their website and downloaded one of their open-source projects, Goose (an OpenCode alternative). I ran a very simple prompt on one of the projects I’m working on to implement a small feature. It ended up going into what seemed like an infinite loop and consumed three-quarters of my monthly Poe subscription on a single prompt. I uninstalled it immediately.
Re: Layoffs at Block
#696If the cuts were not due to AI, what benefit does it provide to claim that it was?
To be clear I’m not saying it was AI. I just wonder, why come out and say it like that? What’s the incentive vs. other reasons?
Re: Layoffs at Block
#697Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm convinced that these "AI Layoffs" are these companies trying to save face from the absurd overhiring that they did in 2022 and 2023 because apparently they thought that these no-interest loans/free money would just last forever. No one really "knows" how to grow businesses so the easiest way to spend a lot of money quickly is hiring lots of people, whether or not they are "necessary". Then this free money dries u…
> I'm convinced that these "AI Layoffs" are these companies trying to save face from the absurd overhiring that they did in 2022 and 2023 because apparently they thought that these no-interest loans/free money would just last forever. Partially. The first nail in the coffin was the change in assumptions around output. Before 2023, there was an assumption that more bodies means more output. After the massive X/Twitter…
Sure it is not a smoking crater in the ground but outages are frequent, multi-media content loads about 50% of the time and search is basically non-functional at this point.
Let us never forget the "tweet reading limit" incident
Re: Layoffs at Block
#698Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you do now?
Being rejected every day, thus subjecting myself to the humiliating ritual of modern times, by companies that I believe could make the most of my talent (my last title was Director of AI, before I was a Staff ML Scientist at a FAANG and an award-winning scientist). They all seem rather disappointed, at least in the automated rejection emails (mailboxes not monitored, of course) they send me, that they have found othe…
Which companies are you applying to? Even in this new world, titles still matter a great deal. A former “director of AI” and FAANG data scientist is valuable even before considering whether you are competent.
The part that stands out is that you are getting rejection emails from automated systems. With your pedigree, you should be talking direct to whoever is hiring — you’ve earned the right to bypass the automated system in the eyes of most people hiring.
When we are hiring and receive hundreds of applications, we only manage to review a few and send the same rejection to everyone else — even though we haven’t read their application.
At a minimum, you should be getting conversations with the teams you are applying to and then a personal rejection. If you are not getting beyond screening, with your credentials, it is a process issue.
Have you tried going direct to the teams? For larger companies, that can be via LinkedIn, and for startups / smaller companies you should be able to find their email.
If I were in your position, I would be identifying companies I want to work at that are hiring, and then send an email to their most senior technical person (probably CTO). You are talking senior-to-senior, and if they are interested, you will bypass the whole automated system. I can think of a couple of companies that regularly post in the HN hiring threads that would be a great fit for you.
Any suggestion that you are too expensive or over qualified sounds like a nice explanation but even if those things are true, you should still be getting interviews and personal rejections. Hiring is a painful process for most companies, the chance to talk to someone qualified is a nice treat.
Re: Layoffs at Block
#699> i had two options: cut gradually over months or years as this shift plays out, or be honest about where we are and act on it now. Sounds like a false dichotomy. The third option is that he could have kept them around. It would be financially feasible given that "our business is strong. gross profit continues to grow, we continue to serve more and more customers, and profitability is improving.".
If AI was that much more productive, then Block would be able to take on much bigger challenges and expand their revenue even faster. The AI explanation doesn't add up.
Re: Layoffs at Block
#700This is how I see this and most other "AI layoffs".
The company is going through a hard time, and we need to let people go. So how do we explain it in a way that isn't gonna scare investors away?
Do we admit that we overhired, or that we're running out of money, or that we couldnt find the right markets? No, we don't. Instead, we explain the layoffs as AI.
This way, investors will think we are innovating, and may not think to look deeper to see the actual issues.