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

Meta tells staff it will cut 10% of jobs

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 923 posts

Re: Meta tells staff it will cut 10% of jobs

#91

Post by vostrocity »

kbar13 wrote: post #74
thewebguyd wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correction, the layoffs will be followed by massive re-hiring overseas in 6 to 18 months. The domestic jobs aren't coming back.

why do we feel that way? it's becoming more and more likely that developments in AI lead to a K graph in experience / value - senior / self sufficient workers will be significantly more valuable than ever. unless you mean that the quality of domestic workers is declining, which i'd agree in most things (tho for some things like software i think still has a chance)

I don't think the quality of US workers has to decline. The quality of workers in lower CoL places like India simply has to increase, and it has. Both of the companies I've worked for have opened India campuses in the past few years.

Re: Meta tells staff it will cut 10% of jobs

#92

Post by teaearlgraycold »

booleandilemma wrote: post #63
teaearlgraycold wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internally they operate like a government or military and less like a normal company.

As someone who has only worked for a company with maybe a thousand people, can you elaborate on this a bit?

I've never been in the military but I'm told they work this way. You often have interactions with people across the org chart (which is a massive tree with >100,000 nodes on it). If there's a dispute over resources or requirements that can't be resolved you need to find the lowest person that is above both of you to settle it. The depth of the org chart is a key similarity here as well. I think I was ~10 degrees from Sundar when I worked for Google. A soldier in the US military is a similar distance from the president. Also the financial numbers that are thrown around are larger than what most governments deal with and on par with even large nations. The US military might get a $100B influx for some war. Google/Amazon/Meta/etc. spend similarly on AI initiatives.

Re: Meta tells staff it will cut 10% of jobs

#95

Post by vonneumannstan »

BurningFrog wrote: post #43
Ancalagon wrote: post #4

Re: > If America’s so rich how’d it get so sad > https://www.derekthompson.org/p/if-americas-so-rich-howd-it-...

It's well known since ancient times that money doesn't buy happiness.

Not really the standard line anymore. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/does-money-buy-h...

Re: Meta tells staff it will cut 10% of jobs

#96

Post by operatingthetan »

matchbok3 wrote: post #59
trjordan wrote: post #20

It's an honest surprise that this isn't spun as "internal AI efficiency gains." They want the efficiency, of course there's AI component, but they're not pre-claiming victory. Neat. It's worth remembering that there's an _actual_ underlying economic problem here. Interest rates are up. AI spending is expensive. A dollar invested in a company needs to do _more_ than it did 5 years ago, relative to sitting in treasury…

Layoffs are a very normal thing for businesses to do. There is nothing "cowardly" about it. Would you rather them never hire them in the first place?

Exiting low performers is one thing, but using layoffs as tool to put pressure on your workforce to extract more labor and keep them busy is a toxic culture.

Re: Meta tells staff it will cut 10% of jobs

#97

Post by sdevonoes »

matchbok3 wrote: post #77
sdevonoes wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With that kind of mindset… man, so sorry for you

Care to explain? Rather than these jugemental one-offs?

You are normalising layoffs in companies that are not losing money. If you are a regular employee, this kind of behaviour affects you, but hereyou are saying “it’s alright folks, it’s just business “. Sure thing these kind of layoffs are not illegal, but there must be something else in life than raw corporate behaviour when it comes to work, don’t you think?

The other scenario is that Meta doesn’t layoff people. The big fishes will make less money, but won’t affect their lives in the minimum. What about that? That’s not illegal either, but ofc, “that’s not how businesses work!”. So brainwashed. We are the frogs, they are boiling us and you don’t care

Re: Meta tells staff it will cut 10% of jobs

#98

Post by dboreham »

JeremyNT wrote: post #73
swader999 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing a lot of these large companies will have massive layoffs followed by slightly less massive re-hiring in 6 to 18 months.

Not buying it personally, I think this is the start of a slow unwinding. AI won't replace everybody overnight, but it'll make 10% layoffs year after year a real possibility. Either people are simply made redundant because bots in the hand of a bot wrangler can do much of their work, or people are relatively less efficient than their peers because they refuse to adapt to a world where AI is a force multiplier.

Also doesn't help that nobody can say how many people it needed to develop and maintain software even before AI. Elon declared the emperor had no clothes.

Re: Meta tells staff it will cut 10% of jobs

#100

Post by mr_toad »

rishabhaiover wrote: post #34

I have a genuine dislike for all Meta products now. With time, their intentions have become much more clear and it was never to bring people closer or whatever.

> With time, their intentions have become much more clear

Wasn’t the original intention behind facebook to accumulate a directory of hotties, probably with the aim of bringing them ‘closer’? They pretty much put it on the label; it’s not called personality book.

Post reply on HN