911–920 of 923 posts
Let's be honest, Meta over hired. Big time. If anyone ever interviewed a few Meta engineers, he would easily see that a large percentage of them had really small, and sometimes bullshit scopes. As a result, such engineers couldn't articulate what they do in Meta, couldn't deep dive into their own tech stacks, nor could solve common-sense design questions when they just deviated a bit from those popular interview ques…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People bring up "overhiring" every single time. We've had like 3 years of these massive layoffs already. How many "corrections" do they need? I'm beginning to feel like the "overhiring" line is a concerted campaign
its not a 'concerted campaign'. meta laid off 4300 in 2025, but by the end of the year was actaully ~4800 higher than before. If that is not 'over hiring', i dont know what is. The headcount went from 74K in dec2024 to 78K in dec2025, even WITH the layoffs. There is no "workforce reduction". its just "we need new faces around here". Hire-to-fire.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People bring up "overhiring" every single time. We've had like 3 years of these massive layoffs already. How many "corrections" do they need? I'm beginning to feel like the "overhiring" line is a concerted campaign
Name one product that Meta created over the last 10 years that mattered - beyond adtech. They can fire everyone in every team and just retain ads (tech and sales) - and some minimal setup for instagram and whatsapp and facebook and their revenue will not take a dent. So, yes, they overhired.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No they couldn’t because the severance is paid out of the money the budget set aside for wages for the year. So out of the 12 months, they give 4 months to the laid off worker and Facebook pockets the other 8 months.
Facebook could give zero severance, "pocket the full year budget" to use your phrasing, and distribute it to owners as a dividend. The severance comes directly from cash that could have been distributed to owners, as GP originally said.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Enterprise methodologies like Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) are explicitly designed around managing that friction. Developers may complain about the additional toil and process overhead it imposes on them, but for the organization as a whole this is sometimes the least bad option.
None of the important projects or FANGs build with frameworks like that, sorry. Project management frameworks are all larp and mostly used by slow moving firms from the past.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have revenue breakdown. Where is the profit breakdown?
Ha, probably nobody at Google even knows the exact cost of each of those business lines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And just think how much more profitiable they'd be if they scaled up (◞ิ౪◟ิ)
You joke but they fund raise like they love money - lying to their users about needing donations...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not how it works in many countries. You can have regional governments that raise their own taxes and aren't beholden to the central government organizationally, just legally.
This is how it works in the US. Federal/State/County/City.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The missing bit is where you say "I take full responsibility for this situation" > Where's the active "taking responsibility" part? But what is the implication of taking full responsibility? What actions would he be taking for "taking full responsibility"? I don't think you meant you merely wanted the performative sound of "I take full responsibility for this situation" to come out of his mouth. Without actions, th…
> I don't think you meant you merely wanted the performative sound of "I take full responsibility for this situation" to come out of his mouth. Without actions, the words mean nothing. 100% agree, and that's precisely the critique towards Mark as those words presumably came out of his mouth. > So, what would be the actions you were looking for here? Claw back his executive compensation, forfeit bonuses for the fiscal…
This is actually very problematic that a company can claw back compensation that wasn't previously agreed upon (with the exception of crimes).
Companies could have put this clause in the job offer. Yet they don't. Why? Because no respectable person would have signed such contract.
You wouldn't sign such contract either.
> fund better severance / transition support?
To continue the analogy of the cleaners, you don't provide severance nor transition support either.
In FB, the severance of 4-month minimum seems good.
> Forfeit bonuses for the fiscal year
100% agree! If the company's or their performance is bad, they absolutely don't get bonuses. This is coded in their performance/compensation review criteria.
If your employee makes 10 successful things and fails 1 thing, how much would you punish that person? probably none.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's #3 - it's always #3. All of these tech companies (with perhaps the notable exception of Apple) massively overhired during the pandemic, and that overhiring was on top of a decade+ of the ZIRP era. So there are 2 main drivers of these layoffs: 1. Correcting pandemic overhiring 2. In the ~2010-2022 timeframe, tech companies poured all this money into speculative bets that never went anywhere, at least from a profi…
> Amazon's Alexa devices division Alexa devices had so much potential, if they'd only practised customer obsession like Amazon used to (still?) preach, and not stuff their products with ads.