Mark Zuckerberg: We’re ‘turning up the heat’ at Meta so employees will quit | Hacker News Reader

Mark Zuckerberg: We’re ‘turning up the heat’ at Meta so employees will quit

nypost.com

141 pointsmikece25 comments

Open articleView on HN

Duplicate. Discussion thread..

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31941777

Comments moved thither. Thanks!

This article is basically blogspam of this Reuters piece:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-meta-girds-fier...

That's generally the case for the NY Post, where you'll usually find a better source linked within the first few grafs of their stories.

Thank you. The Reuters article is much better.

Most of the comments here are debating the heavily editorialized NY Post headline which implies that Zuckerberg said something that he did not say at all ("...so employees will quit" was added by the NY Post).

I mean he did basically say that: “Part of my hope by raising expectations and having more aggressive goals, and just kind of turning up the heat a little bit, is that I think some of you might decide that this place isn't for you, and that self-selection is OK with me," he said.

Obviously he wants underperformers to quit and not his best people.

And also buries one of the most interesting points: they need 5 times their current number of datacenter GPUs just to power their current plans for ML expansion!

I’m surprised that’s just to surface recommended posts and not for some deeper new ambitious products:

“to support the "discovery" push, which requires extra computing power for artificial intelligence to surface popular posts from across Facebook and Instagram in users' feeds.”

because of this comment I actually read the reuters piece lol

Right, and that's already been submitted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31941777

This (NYPost) thread is a dupe

Not to mention the toxic comments at the bottom of the NY Post article.

As an European I'm curious about such management ideas: I work to live, not the contrary, so if a company try to stress me to munge better performances that company it's better to fail.

Emergency are emergency and during them stress is part of the game, artificially created stress to whip workers is, at least here, a good way to get only desperate workers who just need keeping their source of income, talents knows they can get better jobs or makes their own activity if needed. Maybe the recent "unionization rush" in the USA should remember such concept to employers: people do not work FOR a company for the company success as a personal success, but for money to do something, and that means work as relaxed as possible. People who work for company success are entrepreneurs and they got no salary but profits. They can't be workers in a company with more than few people.

The New York Post is a tabloid rag. Are there any legitimate sources for this quote?

The tabloid rag cites Reuters as a source : https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-meta-girds-fier...

It's not a valid source if the New York Post cites it as one /s

Churnalism at its' finest

So you asked for a better source, got one, then don't like the source? Would you prefer having heard it first-hand from Zuckerberg himself?

It is, but they don't tend to outright fabricate quotes (they aren't Breitbart or something). Their source for the quote seems to be this Reuters article: https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-meta-girds-fier...

The tabloid rag that publishes stories that the NY Times (and Washington Post) acknowledges as truth more than a year later. What does that make the NY Times and Washington Post?

https://nypost.com/2022/04/01/new-york-times-finally-admit-h...

According to the "tabloid rag" themselves. That's really not the best way to back up your point.

The links contained in that article referencing an "admission" just go to another NYPost article referencing the same "admission". Those links then go to other NYPost articles doing the same...

I finally got to a link that took me to a NYTimes article[0] that did reference the laptop and e-mails. Those references also contained a link to a NYTimes article[1] from more than a year ago referencing the existence of, and analyzing what was known about, the laptop and emails in question.

What a conspiracy. What a miscarriage of journalistic integrity!

0. https://archive.ph/Z2yeW 1. https://archive.ph/NsVQ9

But Hunter Biden owned a laptop! And Hillary had an email server! And they both contained files! Files with things in them!

Which things you ask? Click this link to see the top 7 theories!

If you want to make an argument that the contents of that email server or Joe Biden's laptop were of no interest, actually do it. I'm open to persuasion. Mocking, on the other hand, I find unconvincing.

The facts aren't really in dispute. The NY Post got kicked off of twitter for running stories that were deemed misinformation and which subsequently proved to be true. This didn't happen to the NY Times because they dropped the story like a hot potato. There was no actual evidence that it was misinformation, that was just a presumption by various 'experts' not directly involved. The Post is in fact mostly a tabloid but even tabloids can print the truth and this incident was a particularly egregious example of mainstream media not doing their job. They deserve to be called out for it.

Uh I think it makes them hesitant to jump on stories with no sources. Publishing something before it’s ready is exactly what a tabloid rag does.

That’s fair.

A touch indelicate, but fair.

In the third sentence you'll find a source link to the Reuters' article.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com