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

881–890 of 907 posts

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

#881

Post by readwriterick »

bsimpson wrote: post #779
phpisthebest wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laptops are not advancing that much yoy and a 3 year cycle is already aggressive. 4 years was the standard for a long time, these days many companies are moving to 5 or even 6 years for laptops. Hell right now I have employees at 4 years that refuse to change out their laptops because they have no problems with them and want to keep them longer

I was issued a 2015 rMBP and held onto it until the 2022 M1 was available to replace it. It was barely usable in the end, but I didn't want to be locked into years of crappy keyboard et al when the improvement was Just Around The Corner™.

Yeah but the 2015 rMBP was, like, the One True Laptop. I held until M1 as well, but I think the stars won't so align again any time soon.

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

#882

Post by wankle »

rswail wrote: post #817
wankle wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

How are Unions "organized Mafia" (btw, Mafia, by definition is "organized crime") yet organizations like the Chamber of Commerce and other "business associations" are not? Why are businesses allowed to "organize" and "influence politics" (Citizens United decision anyone?) yet when a union does it, it's considered somehow theft from workers and "socialist". If capitalism is about regulated free markets, then why is a…

Here is an example full of answers relating to my comment above:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Mafia#:~:text=In%20th....

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

#883

Post by throwawaylinux »

Aeolun wrote: post #861
throwawaylinux wrote: post #769

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't sound like it to me. There's a reason why more responsibly run companies don't blow money on crap like this. There were similar stories during the dot com bubble, companies and people with more money than sense wasting it. Going on hiring sprees, building opulent abominations of offices, buying toys they don't use, overpaying for celebrity/rockstar employees. Might be easier to bush off as no big deal when…

I’m mostly convinced that is more about signaling than actual inability to do so. If I can spend a few percent of my net worth on random crap for the fun of it, and not be materially affected, that must be true for people/corporations with a million times more money as well.

A few percent on crappy overpriced office amenities, a few percent on superbowl ads, a few percent on hiring famous bands to play at work parties, a few percent on hiring poorly performing "rockstar" programmers because of their twitter following. Pretty soon it adds up.

You don't think these companies waste all this money on offices and office toys but all their other spending is straight laced and responsible do you? And even if it was just the office crap, that's still irresponsible and reckless spending no matter how large or small the expense is.

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

#884

Post by [deleted] »

guhidalg wrote: post #478
serf wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Which is it? I think it's fair to say that people would like to work remotely while also not being converted into a commoditized faceless resource; and I think that it's clear to anyone at the moment that we haven't quite worked all the kinks out of total remote work , yet. An ideal remote environment would be one where the human at the other end of the line is still remembered as being a human and cherished rather…

That's never going to happen. Most people (maybe not you, you savant) need someone's physical presence to see them as a real person. The phrase "Out of sight, out of mind" did not become irrelevant just because I can email someone across the world.

[deleted]

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

#885

Post by the_only_law »

guhidalg wrote: post #478
serf wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Which is it? I think it's fair to say that people would like to work remotely while also not being converted into a commoditized faceless resource; and I think that it's clear to anyone at the moment that we haven't quite worked all the kinks out of total remote work , yet. An ideal remote environment would be one where the human at the other end of the line is still remembered as being a human and cherished rather…

That's never going to happen. Most people (maybe not you, you savant) need someone's physical presence to see them as a real person. The phrase "Out of sight, out of mind" did not become irrelevant just because I can email someone across the world.

> Most people (maybe not you, you savant) need someone's physical presence to see them as a real person.

In that case, I’ll just assume you’re a bot and simply parroting what you’ve been programmed to say.

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

#886

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

Myrmornis wrote: post #729
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail is so much better than outlook it's honestly insane. The way it handles email chains is infinitely better than outlooks, which often leads to responses just getting lost when someone replies all to a message that wasn't the most recent. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if this is 'our' fault, as I'm sure someone will point out. But in the years of using Gmail at my last employer, it just worked.

I would honestly like to know more about how to make it handle email chains. My work is happily quite email free but recently I've been involved with a company in my private life and I'm finding the email chains in Gmail incomprehensible -- the old emails aren't folded; I seem to have to scroll past millions of copies of the same email signatures with images in the signatures, as well as tons of quoted text from rand…

Probably just one person using an email client is breaking its ability to collapse emails? In my experience it was perfect at collapsing emails.

Maybe it's a setting an admin disabled, if it's literally every email chain.

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

#887

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

Philadelphia wrote: post #873
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #664

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure why you would say that. I mean it is true, but I am not sure how it is relevant here. If one avenue is not there, ones that crave it badly enough will venture forth. If I don't go to work and WANT to engage with others so badly, I will. And besides, meaningful relations is a meaningless term. Example. My parent has neighbors. They have lived closely to one another. So closely and long, in fact, they had…

If your health limits your active hours to barely more than you can work, you won’t. In that case, you get very lonely, from my experience.

You have a point and I actually understand that rationale. I have no real argument against it beyond general question of whether individual loneliness should be solved with my forced presence.

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

#888

Post by achenet »

oblio wrote: post #581
jjeaff wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, just do some socializing outside of work.

People keep saying that. Humans don't work like that. Almost all meaningful relations are based on prolonged proximity.

that's why I show up to my olympic weightlifting club, and music shows, and acroyoga jams regularly.

I do like my co-workers. A lot. But if seeing them in the office was my only social life I'd die. I can't speak for everyone, but personally the time/effort invested into forming meaningful relations by regularly showing up to places where I can engage with others who have similar interests (oly lifting, music, acroyoga) has probably been the best thing I've done for myself.

And being able to work remotely greatly facilitates that.

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

#889

Post by JenrHywy »

palata wrote: post #810
JenrHywy wrote: post #696

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be a terrible business decision, because the company would have no employees.

You missed part of the idea: "if you accept to work for free". The parent was saying (if I understood correctly): "stop complaining, you should accept the business decision, because that's what a company does: optimize the profit without caring about how the employees feel". I was just saying that as an employee, you have the right to negotiate your working conditions. If you accept all the "business decisions" becau…

If I accepted to work for free, I would be absolutely fine with the company taking me up on the offer. I'd be shocked if they didn't.

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

#890

Post by ReflectedImage »

WoodenChair wrote: post #711
simplicio wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but that works both ways. Employees are often reluctant to leave jobs where they have a lot of personal relationships, or if getting a new job would entail moving to a new city/state/country, even if jumping ship would entail a sizable payraise or other improvement in working conditions. In an industry where remote work is the norm and changing jobs doesn't even require changing offices, people are much less l…

> Employees are often reluctant to leave jobs where they have a lot of personal relationships, or if getting a new job would entail moving to a new city/state/country, even if jumping ship would entail a sizable payraise or other improvement in working conditions. Yeah you know I’d much rather work in a place where I have a very limited relationship with the people I spend at least 8 hours a day with. That was sarcas…

It depends on the company. Some places are very social others not so much.
Post reply on HN