Live data from Hacker News

GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices

twitter.com

841–850 of 907 posts

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

#841
post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> asking for us all to get paid less, or nothing at all because the job went to Europe or Asia. You don't think it might be reasonable for the term "us all" to include people in Europe or Asia?

It is. Sloppy language. Should have said people working in bay area offices for FAANG companies.

Y'know, some time I'd really like to see a poll about where people on HN are located, because honestly, I doubt more than a modest plurality are actually in the Bay Area, or working for FAANG.

And yet, it's generally so easy to detect the ones that are, because so many of them have the same attitude you do: that you're the only ones who matter on this site, or even the only ones who matter at all.

It gets to be pretty disgusting at times.

- A programmer who's never come anywhere near San Francisco

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

#842

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose you've got an average, B-grade engineer who has been doing this job for 3 years. They should have all the technical knowledge tuned to do this job, connections to all the right people they need to work with, and all kinds of institutional memory about why everything is the way it is. You let that person go, and bring in an objectively better, A-grade worker. It's going to take months to find that person, more…

Yes, exactly, employees may not actually be like virtual servers that you can spin up and shut down at will, but some employers will think of them that way.

>but some employers will think of them that way

Employers quite clearly already think that way.

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

#843

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…

> 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".

I never thought of it that way, but it does makes sense. Companies will OPENLY espouse the "treat your employees like cattle, not pets" mantra (I assert many do that now, just not openly.)

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

#844

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 n…

It's not like everyone is the same. Having the freedom to work from home (or anywhere) whenever you need or want to is amazing. Working in the office to brainstorm, see friends, get a change of pace or scenery is also great. Commutes are killer when they're long and you have little choice but to do it.

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

#845
post #822

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The World Economic Forum have stated in a white paper that Corporations and Governments will be expected as part of climate action to help move more people into cities. So that "15 minute cities" legislation can be implemented world wide. This appears to be nothing but a long term climate lockdown. I personally think that to have everyone working locally in these 15 minute zones in each major city and to have them ne…

This is nonsense. What they're saying is that we need to start designing habitation to be more localized and less dependent on commuting and endlessly expanding suburbia. Suburbs, particularly the US variety (and Australia) are terrible because of the lack of local facilities, hospitality and retail. Cities need to downsize but at the same time regionalize. Smaller cities with HSR and equivalent will work to reduce t…

Everything you said is correct and I would agree with - but under the presumption that the climate emergency is genuine and that the individual contributors in the agencies responsible for the models and predictions have not been compromised, coerced, baited, led by funding into agreeing with corporate and governmental agendas, interests.

Is it not odd that we have traditional liberal activists and corporate/government on the same side also?

I agree wholly with you regarding how it is better for everything to be community based, with people working in a local community, that cities need to downsize, that manufacturing is better to be localized, all of these things move us closer to a much better world and I would even be happy if the government used its power to force the change on the population ... but if you study the groups behind this they are international socialists, the presentations they have given quite clearly outline malicious intentions when you look at other movements and ideas the same groups are lobbying for.

Regarding the WEF point you made. I point you towards the case of Oxford City in the UK , which as of last month has already implemented a 15 minute city without any dialogue with its citizens.

The communist china style tracking camera and permit system has been created in their city and it is likely by next year its citizens will start to be fined 70 pounds sterling whenever they go to a neighboring zone without a permit.

It was reported this week 100 councils (local governmental planning agencies) have signed up to implement this in the UK in their jurisdictions own cities. This is without any dialogue or permission with their citizens.

Does the speed of this being rolled out not frighten you enough to question what is going on? It is such a drastic change. Taking a trip in a car from one part of the city to another is such a small journey, such a small cost to the environment. It is not like a cross country trip, I understand the distances between points in the USA is larger but they are planning this for the cities in the USA too, not longer journeys, but god knows where this will end.

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

#846
post #798

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems alluring. I wonder how large of a percentage of employees would, if prompted directly, opt to have company funds directed to have "ports" in major cities, if it was entangled with their salary. Would you choose an additional 600$ a month and remote only, or would you vote for permanent variable spaces in major cities for events and team building?

Except that's a false dichotomy and that money would go to the shareholders instead.

Why would it? Even in the most cynical business sense, a business will spend as much money on employees as they must. Again, assuming maximal cynicism, they won't care if it's salary or "ports", as long as it's the most effective buck they can spend (think ROI).

What is effective in attracting employees depends, at least partly, on what employees want. That might be either some amount of money into ports or more salary. Paying shareholders more will not attract employees.

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

#847
post #428

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…

Look, you can't have it both ways. People on HN are always talking badly about companies that don't allow work from home, or require at least a couple days in the office. Then a company says it's going entirely remote (not including the layoff context) and people shit on that. Which is it? As for the layoffs, I don't have anything to add to that. There a Microsoft decision.

Well, you can have it both (or even more) ways: no matter what companies do, someone will crap on them! This can be universal (all companies) or particular (e.g., the company that overbilled me).

And that's w/o going into politics )(if you do, leftists will jump up and crap on capitalism).

Welcome to the crapnet.

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

#848
post #428

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…

Look, you can't have it both ways. People on HN are always talking badly about companies that don't allow work from home, or require at least a couple days in the office. Then a company says it's going entirely remote (not including the layoff context) and people shit on that. Which is it? As for the layoffs, I don't have anything to add to that. There a Microsoft decision.

> Look, you can’t have it both ways.

“You” can, especially when “you” are a diverse group of different people, not a single entity. But this isn’t even a “both ways” situation.

> People on HN are always talking badly about companies that don’t allow work from home, or require at least a couple days in the office. Then a company says it’s going entirely remote (not including the layoff context) and people shit on that.

You can, in fact, with perfect consistency criticize people for not allowing something while also criticizing other people for forcing that same thing and not allowing the opposite.

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

#849
post #824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remote means they trust their employees to perform without physical eyes on them. "Open office" layout is designed to have eyes on your screen providing constant pressure to actually work, nothing else. Market currently says that employees pay to work remote. When I was shopping around for jobs recently, every offer I got for remote work was less than a similar in-person job. At my current job, I got a pay cut for mo…

Open offices were designed to minimize the space per employee. A "happy side effect" is that it made it easier for micro-managers to micro-manage.

In my humble opinion open offices were designed so that employees would self police each other in order to minimize the need to micro-manage. If this is unethical is another matter , considering that most people are too lazy to work on hobbies outside of work and they prefer to be slobs watching TV... not much would get done leaving most people to their own devices in private offices....

Regarding the open office ... Everyone can see your computer screen. At any moment someone can be watching what type of face you're making and if you are working hard or dozing off.

Everyone is scared of raising their voice or talking in case you disturb others or others hear you.

Everyone can see when you arrive and what time you leave, what you wear.

Now if we lived in a land of plenty and profit did not matter, then it would be tragic that people are stuck in that hellish environment instead of having their own private office and peace of mind.

However.. when you consider why people do not have hobbies and are lazy... it becomes quite tragic in the here and now... because you have to think of Schools in our society and are they really for the benefit of children or to train them to work and to demotivate them towards life itself ?

People are forced to regurgitate things in a depressing, boring and oftentimes hostile environment (in the sense of their future being on the line if they do not submit to this torture) and in a place that resembles prison blended with an open office... from the age of five ... starting off fun with plenty of toys and play time in kindergarden club ... for most of their childhood becomes increasingly horrible when they are stuck in the grind. Does your own experience not make you feel rage at the time you lost ?

The tragedy of human effort as a whole is that 90% of corporate jobs in their current form are designed to exist in this way simply as a way to put humans into a hellish environment five days a week which they have been trained to accept and even expect all with plausable deniability for the elites who consider us nothing but their cattle. They made us slaves that compete against each other for them and police each other into doing it.

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

#850

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very few (but not zero!) of my meaningful relations have been through work.

This is so sad to hear and it's insane how many people on HN are against the idea of forming friendships at work. Ya'll really are socially inept.

I think you misunderstand. It's the opposite; it's that our non-work relationships are more meaningful, not that we are unable to form friendships at work.

Way too many people (mostly when young) fall into this trap of making their work their life. Don't be one of those people!

Post reply on HN