oofta-boofta

> Does anyone know if this idea is one of those terrible ones or is genuinely feasible?

They've done it India, a country notorious for red tape. Which begs the question: how long will it take California's bureaucratic ineptitude take to screw this up.

Good! A massive win for moving away from a throwaway society.

Are banks pulling back on lending or are their customers pulling back on applying for credit? I think that's an important distinction, and I really believe it's the latter.

Also note that US housing inventory is incredibly low at the moment: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/ACTLISCOUUS

This was the whole point of raising rates, why are people freaking out?

Anyone comparing sales/growth/general economic measurements from COVID until now is running a fool's errand. Compare metrics w/Fall of '19 and use the average from the past decade to really gain insight.

> The racialization here is so silly.

That's exactly the point: big tech's silly tokenization/racialization only provides superficial diversity. They almost exclusively hire people of means.

I love how tech claims to love diversity among it's employees but then they snatch up the Asian, White, African American, etc, students who also just so happen to be all be wealthy and go to the best CS schools.

Same, bought an M1 16" MBP w/the Max chip, basically all the best specs. Unless there's a titanic shift in performance I probably won't be buying any new laptops for a while.

Your classist rant is dumb, bad, and so poorly thought out I don't even know where to begin other than possibly accusing you of being a shill bought and paid for Starbuck's PR team to astroturf anti-union sentiments.

You sound like someone who's either never had to do a hard job, like food service, or your a fellow worker so inculcated with corporate propaganda you come across like a Clayton Bigsby-esque caricature.

All workers should be treated fairly, paid a living wage, and not be treated like robots to be thrown away at the slightest inconvenience. This is what a union does.

You could just not have the expectation that people are robots who are the corporate definition of productive, 24/7.

Whether or not you should be concerned is really dependent on where you sit in the industry.

Former barista who did a 90-day bootcamp and trying to find a job? Oooof, good luck.

Have a BS in Comp Sci and work on backend/distributed systems with several years of experience? You'll have no problem finding a gig.

The vast majority of over-hiring was with engineering-adjacent roles, think project managers, recruiters, hr, etc.

I think it doesn't nearly tell the story though, the tech market is highly stratified and specialized.

Was there an over-hiring of sales people, hr, middle managers, and underqualified engineers? Yeah, definitely. I saw bartenders becoming "tech recruiters" or "front end engineers" overnight with no formal technical education. I'm not a credentialist, but I am a realist, and the safer bet is someone w/a BS in CS to most companies.

Is there still massive demand for experienced and qualified engineers? Absolutely. I'm cautiously optimistic about the future of tech, there is a massive flee to value that usually accompanies turmoil in the markets and it' time that tech focused more on value.

If you're a new grad or an intern applying for a "brand name" tech company, you're gonna have a rough time.

There's lots of companies out there that pay well, offer far better wlb, and aren't nearly as "picky" as FAANG.

This was the most obtuse portion of the entire diatribe, and further cements my rather low opinion of Meta leadership; they have all the data in the world, but have no idea how to make proper conclusions from it.

This just reinforces what I've been saying for years: seeking promotion is for chumps.

You'll make far more money and advance far quicker from job-hopping between companies than you will trying to seek internal promotion.

Google, and pretty much big tech as a whole, is completely aimless at this point and has no real plan to provide new value to customers. They just jump from shiny thing to shiny new thing. Big tech has only been able to maintain it's recent dominance through monopolistic practices, and now they've mismanaged themselves into decline. Good.

"Did you see what she was wearing?"

>Our findings reveal that when organizations hire employees from other, unhealthy organizations (those with a high prevalence of mental disorders), they “implant” depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders into their workforces. Employees leaving unhealthy organizations act as “carriers” of these disorders regardless of whether they themselves have received a formal diagnosis of a mental disorder. The effect is especially pronounced if the newcomer holds a managerial position.

This sounds sort of like victim blaming to me. I've worked in a couple of bad environments and felt outright relief when I was able to go somewhere much better.

The answer is to do away with toxic work environments, not blame the person who suffered under them.

> People will crap on Google or Salesforce "why did you hire so much?" - but during the great resignation - what were they supposed to do?

Gee, I dunno, maybe NOT double in size like Salesforce did?

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/CRM/salesforce/num...

Because Starbucks corp owns the Starbucks brand, they're not going to let just anyone operate under that brand.

Stop being obtuse.

I don't think tech companies and "the market" even looked that far ahead.

Whew boy you hit the nail on the head. Google just seems to be aimless at this point, and now with the layoffs (despite their immense profitability) they're going to have a much tougher time hiring and retaining top talent.

It's mostly sales, hr, and lower level managers.

Here's the number that I keep tossing around: in June of 2019, Microsoft had about 144k employees. In 2022, they had about 221k employees. They're laying off 10k, which still makes a net gain of almost 70k. It's pure optics for wall street.

I'm not particularly worried but this is why you should always be applying and looking for another gig to have in your back pocket. Or, even better, be overemployed and work multiple gigs at once.

These companies will toss you out like an old shoe, so f*ck 'em.

The day I opened my own business and started doing C2C work was the day I was able to deal with the whole "red tape" thing.

Burnout doesn't come from working hard, it comes from there being a dichotomy between the level of effort you're putting in and the reward you get back. Programming itself is very rewarding but dealing w/pedantic micromanaging bosses, writing emails, etc sucks.

As a consultant, I bill by the hour and I get to command a certain rate within my niche. My employers can inhibit my progress as much as they like, I'm going to bill them either way. The amount of fun drives I've taken in my Porsche while waiting for a blocker to get unblocked or a product to compile is hilarious.

How much do you want to bet the employees working on this were apart of the anointed 12k that just got laid off

Especially given the strong economic numbers that just came out, yeah I don't buy the "bad macro climate" argument anymore. It's really plain as day: these CEOs make some cuts of 5-15%, their stock price goes up. This is a pattern we'll likely continue to see through this year.

Honestly, the tech industry was due for some churn from an employer perspective, and all this talent circulating is going to up the competition for company's products.

One of the best lessons I ever learned about the stock market, and economics in general, was that markets are a measure of human sentiment, NOT actual value.

See: Richard Thaler.

> Almost seems like they're sticking up their middle finger to "the man" for making them post pay ranges.

Attempting to portray Netflix as anything else other than a conglomerate doing it's damnedest to pay as little as possible is disingenuous at best, and astroturfing at it's worst. Since when was Netflix the little guy sticking up to "the man"? Netflix IS "the man".

Lack of pay transparency only benefits one side: the company's.