Incremental improvement was rewarded through the regular stock and pay process.
Thus no one cared enough to quickly switch to LLMs.
Suoer interesting how org design - even when brillaint can be severely lacking.
We use both azure ans AWS at my current org. We recently had an internal 'hackathon' to try Llms in both orgs (Claude for AWS, ChatGPT4 for Azure) on our knowledge bases.
Clearly, we couldn't differentiate them on response quality, not in 3 days, but on how easy and integrable the LLM was, AWS was superior, even for our mostly Azure teams, weirdly.
In NYC they do this all the time. They'd also nitpick the hell out of your work.
You'd feel like a complete loser after your review. Pretty hilarious when thinking back about it.
So if you do mediocre one year and get a mediocre grant, then kick it into high gear next year, but the stock grew in the meantime, you're told "tough luck" and not rewarded for the extra effort. Or at least stock growth is deducted from your effort reward.
It's absolutely insane, but Amazon is the easiest faang to get into
They basically set aside your stock when you start, and you the employee absorb all the risk of downside and get punished for upside.
I work very hard but I would need to be compensated or given other perks.