Business Big Tech Layoffs Megathread - Techbros... we got too cocky...

Since my previous thread kinda-sorta turned into a soft megathread, and the tech layoffs will continue until morale improves, I think it's better to group them all together.

For those who want a QRD:


Just this week we've had these going on:

1706112535506.png

1706112610401.png

1706112702576.png

But it's not just Big Tech, the vidya industry is also cleaning house bigly:

1706112854585.png

All in all, rough seas ahead for the techbros.
 
Contrator gigs are the only work right now, at least in tech/media. Same as working 2-3 part time jobs because no one wants to pay benefits for full time. Any job advertising a $40K - $70K salary (not to mention $100K+) is showing a ghost job to give the illusion of growth.

Slight PL: I got cut and replaced by gig workers and pajeets.

Talent doesn’t matter when you’re disosable. So long as hiring takes 1 1/2 months or longer (if anyone’s hiring at all,) freelancers will fill the gaps, without training, benefits, or stability.

There is no full time work. You will own nothing and be happy

What kind of tech are you talking about? I'm not familiar with IT, but its not true for software engineering. I recently just got a senior level full time offer from a start up, and have been interviewing only for full time positions. Its a tough market, and junior level has always been a mess, but even more so now. I've seen the contact/ temp agency/ contract to hire positions for junior positions earlier on in my career, but they aren't really worth it unless you have no other options. Any company looking to hire contract or contract to hire isn't going to be a good experience for the developer. I don't think there are any companies that were hiring full time that shifted to contract. Having been on both sides of the hiring process, there isn't any reason to hire contract if you want to build up your in house engineer team unless there are legal implications with hiring out of state or out of country.
 
We had a 10% layoff at my tech company. A private company with some hundreds of millions in revenue. We are profitable.

Not a single actual technical person was laid off. Not a single developer. It was all Sales, Administration, and Customer Experience.

If you are an actually technical person not just someone who happens to work at a tech company you honestly don't have anything to fear. Getting hired on sucks dick right now, make no mistake about that.
 
Contrator gigs are the only work right now, at least in tech/media. Same as working 2-3 part time jobs because no one wants to pay benefits for full time. Any job advertising a $40K - $70K salary (not to mention $100K+) is showing a ghost job to give the illusion of growth.

Slight PL: I got cut and replaced by gig workers and pajeets.

Talent doesn’t matter when you’re disosable. So long as hiring takes 1 1/2 months or longer (if anyone’s hiring at all,) freelancers will fill the gaps, without training, benefits, or stability.

There is no full time work. You will own nothing and be happy

This is simply not true if you are a programmer, network guy, or anything that requires actual presentable skills with any experience. I work strictly in backend development. Once you get a good amount of institutional knowledge about some company's architecture. It is very hard to fire you because they would have to train someone on that same infrastructure. Which would take year(s). Being able to navigate and setup shit in AWS is in itself a marketable skill that people would hire you for. Just as an example.

Web developers or others who only know a single thing might be let go quick but front end is gay and gay frameworks are discarded and adopted like every year. Friends don't let friends be frontend developers.
 
We're in a bust cycle but it'll be back to boom soon, because unprecedented opportunities have opened up. It always, always takes a couple of years for people to figure these things out, but someone will, and they will become endlessly rich.

Google has absolutely dominated the search engine market for 20+ years, with no meaningful competition.

10 years ago, if you said "Google search sucks so bad, we need a replacement right away," you were probably talking about privacy and tracking.

Fundamentally, privacy concerns motivated only a small number of people. Privacy was not close enough to the core value proposition of Google for normies to care. The core value was being able to find what you wanted to find on the internet, and Google would do that for you very competently (for the low, low price of all your data).

Today, if you say "Google search sucks so bad, we need a replacement right away," you're talking about the fact that the search results you came for are terrible, irrelevant, and low-quality. The core value of the product has been hollowed out.

One of the core pieces of knowledge they impart to startup founders is this:

Fall in love with the problem you are solving, not the solution you are designing.

Google fell in love with its own way of doing things, because so much was invested in it that they couldn't see another way to do search. Now, they find their search results simply cannot stop being filled with garbage, because they stopped caring about the actual problem search solves (finding what you want on the internet) and became married to their solution (spidering every possible web result and listing as much as possible).

This presents untold opportunity to anyone who wants to take on the challenge of providing valuable search results.

What AI really means (and Google hasn't figured it out, and probably won't until the first next-gen competitor gets big enough by 2027 or 2028 ) is that the era of searching "the whole internet" is coming to an end. When most of the internet is garbage AI content, and AI can't be reliably scanned for by other AI tools (many researchers claim accurate AI-scanning-for-AI is mathematically impossible), this is an inevitability.

The Library of Alexandria notoriously was on a mission to collect every text in the world. If you were on a ship that docked in Alexandria and had texts onboard that they did not already have, you were required to relinquish them so they could be hand-copied and returned to you. They could persist in a mission this broad because the number of texts being created in the world was so low.

Trying to have a library with every text in the world would have become near-impossible within a century or so of the movable type printing press. By the time self-publishing houses existed that could put any old crap into the world with a near-zero barrier to entry, such a mission would have been not only difficult, but foolish: you'd probably be adding 10 terrible texts for every one that had value.

We've hit the same point in search, but so far, Google remains ignorant, trying to be the Library of Alexandria in an era where that mission simply means they are a garbage dump with occasional valuable content sprinkled in amidst the trash.

Generation is no longer valuable in an era of generative AI. The only thing that matters is curation, just like with the libraries.

Soon enough, a competitor will show up who curates search results with an actual human process for approving/rejecting search results, including forcing anyone submitting potential pages for curation to sign an agreement not to directly use generative AI for content creation or change the content significantly without resubmission.

The internet will become a village of walled gardens, each used for specialized searches about a specific area of knowledge, with people venturing into the untamed Google swamp only when they're willing to wade through hundreds of dull AI retreads in hopes of finding buried treasure. The first person to make a really good walled garden village will become one of the first tech billionaires of the new web era.
To channel my inner Betty White....

"Oh poor naive Mary..."

If we have learned nothing with the Twitter clone wars, Big Tech like Google have such a iron grip monopoly on the internet that NO ONE will be allowed to ever really replace the woke elite who have a stranglehold over the internet. Any upstart will be kneecapped and marginalized as inferior at best and at worst, straight up blood libeled and purged and you won't even be allowed to download them off of Google Play Store or Apple App Store.
 
If you are an actually technical person not just someone who happens to work at a tech company you honestly don't have anything to fear.
6446feac120cd7001865edc5.jpg

Source
It is very hard to fire you because they would have to train someone on that same infrastructure.
Since when do executives give a fuck? Also, who says you're being replaced? Universally the strategy is increasing revenue through the reduction of projects and/or workforce expenses.



Screenshot 2024-02-27 231158.jpg

https://techcrunch.com/2024/02/27/apple-cancels-electric-car-project-titan/
Apple is scuttling its secretive, long-running effort to build an autonomous electric car, executives announced in a short meeting with the team Tuesday morning. The company is likely cutting hundreds of employees from the team and all work on the project has stopped, TechCrunch has learned.

Some remaining employees will be shifted to Apple’s generative AI projects, according to Bloomberg, which first reported the project’s cancellation. Others will have 90 days to find a reassignment to other roles inside the company, or they will be let go. The car project still had around 1,400 employees working on it, according to one employee who was granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about their work.

Screenshot 2024-02-27 231212.jpg

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/27/bumble-layoffs-350-employees-or-about-37percent-of-workforce.html
Bumble on Tuesday announced plans to lay off about 350 employees as part of a restructuring plan. A company spokesperson said the cuts amount to about 30% of Bumble’s workforce.

Screenshot 2024-02-27 232506.jpg

https://www.geekwire.com/2024/exped...500-roles-this-year-more-than-8-of-workforce/
Expedia Group expects about 1,500 roles to be impacted, primarily in its Product & Technology division, under an operational review announced in an internal memo to the online travel giant’s employees from CEO Peter Kern today.
 
Fellow wagecucks, that article is pretty good advice. Start getting used to going back to the office now. Let management know you’re happy to do more days in the office.

Hard times are coming and the people crying about coming into the office will be the first to go.

source: someone who is already compiling a list of the wankers who are crying about doing the job they are contracted for and waiting for the inevitable review of headcount due to less cash flowing in.
Late reply, but... yes, obviously. If you're telling people you can't make the time to sit your ass in an office chair for 2-3 days a week for people who pay you thousands of dollars a year, you're communicating you're either extremely lazy or you've got social issues. Which is at least one point against you compared to those who would, and can act as a shitstorm multiplier for things like not being able to make progress on a project.

If you're getting defensive about not coming in, you seem like you're actively abusing it. Whereas, I've found that with any hybrid position, as long as you're generally agreeable to whatever days the company decide it wants you there, you'll get a lot of leeway whenever you need it. I'll be wfh for a week soon, because the boss knows i'd try to make any schedule he set if i could help it.
 
Late reply, but... yes, obviously. If you're telling people you can't make the time to sit your ass in an office chair for 2-3 days a week for people who pay you thousands of dollars a year, you're communicating you're either extremely lazy or you've got social issues. Which is at least one point against you compared to those who would, and can act as a shitstorm multiplier for things like not being able to make progress on a project.

If you're getting defensive about not coming in, you seem like you're actively abusing it. Whereas, I've found that with any hybrid position, as long as you're generally agreeable to whatever days the company decide it wants you there, you'll get a lot of leeway whenever you need it. I'll be wfh for a week soon, because the boss knows i'd try to make any schedule he set if i could help it.
The main benefit of remote work is not having to spend all your money on rent to live in a shithole. That’s why people are defensive about it, not because they’re afraid of seeing other people or lazy.

The main reason why executives want people back in the office is to protect their corporate real estate holdings. Many large tech companies spent billions buying office buildings instead of leasing them (which used to be standard practice). They also weren’t buying buildings in convenient locations for their workers but rather in trendy areas with high property values; i.e. they were speculating. That’s not even getting into the dystopian urban design plans that companies like Google and Amazon were planning for their “office” complexes (which included onsite micro-apartments with no parking for the workers and a private runway for the executives), all of which are on hold now.

It was a dumb financial decision and the CFOs who pushed for it deserved to be fired.

Smaller companies that don’t have that albatross hanging over their heads are still allowing remote work as it saves them a lot of money. They also collectively employ a lot more people than megacorps, which is why commercial real estate hasn’t recovered despite RTO mandates.
 
Last edited:
The main benefit of remote work is not having to spend all your money on rent to live in a shithole. That’s why people are defensive about it, not because they’re afraid of seeing other people or lazy.

The main reason why executives want people back in the office is to protect their corporate real estate holdings. Many large tech companies spent billions buying office buildings instead of leasing them (which used to be standard practice). They also weren’t buying buildings in convenient locations for their workers but rather in trendy areas with high property values; i.e. they were speculating. It was a dumb financial decision and the CFOs who pushed for it deserved to be fired.

Smaller companies that don’t have that albatross hanging over their heads are still allowing remote work as it saves them a lot of money. They also collectively employ a lot more people than megacorps, which is why commercial real estate hasn’t recovered despite RTO mandates.
The implications of this being the main reason is at least one of two equally deranged assumptions:
1: Companies who still had offices in valuable locations and wanting to get people back together for them paid absolutely no mind to where people lived when they were recruiting them during covid.
2: People assumed that Covid rules would last forever! And expected to be able to squat in the hills for the forseeable future. And were able to change their residencies en masse in such great numbers that by the time covid, a massive economic disaster, was on the back-burner all the companies had lost most of their staff to the wilds.

Just admit you like sleeping in, bro. Everyone does, that's why I hope for hybrid positions for the forseeable future, but saying that's less of a factor than companies coming out of covid to suddenly find their staff scattered across the stars is blatant bullshit. Everyone in a situation can be selfish at once, it's not always just the head honchos.

Besides, that still doesn't change the core point. People who are either willing or able to come into the office partially or fully are more valuable than employees who don't intend to wear work pants ever again.
 
1: Companies who still had offices in valuable locations and wanting to get people back together for them paid absolutely no mind to where people lived when they were recruiting them during covid.
They did not. They hired remote and allowed people to switch to remote. RTO mandates mostly meant that people who did not apply for permanent remote status had to come in and all further requests would be denied. That still means people now are faced with ridiculous commutes due to the cost of housing and poor infrastructure in places where these offices are (e.g. Bay Area, Seattle, NYC, etc.).
2: People assumed that Covid rules would last forever! And expected to be able to squat in the hills for the forseeable future. And were able to change their residencies en masse in such great numbers that by the time covid, a massive economic disaster, was on the back-burner all the companies had lost most of their staff to the wilds.
There were several years between the start of remote work and the return to office mandates. Plenty of people make important life decisions over a time period that long.
Just admit you like sleeping in, bro. Everyone does, that's why I hope for hybrid positions for the forseeable future, but saying that's less of a factor than companies coming out of covid to suddenly find their staff scattered across the stars is blatant bullshit. Everyone in a situation can be selfish at once, it's not always just the head honchos.
I'm not. I moved to a nice city that doesn't deliberately drive up the cost of living and make it difficult to get around while letting criminals roam free. Why do all you boomers want to prop up failing cities that hate you?
Besides, that still doesn't change the core point. People who are either willing or able to come into the office partially or fully are more valuable than employees who don't intend to wear work pants ever again.
No, if you're actually valuable the company comes to you. Many companies have offices that were created purely to hire a specific person or group of people. A famous example is Google's Denmark office which was created in 2004 to hire the team behind the V8 JavaScript Engine who refused to move to California. If they have to do something similar again, they'd hire remote instead.

The layoffs these companies are doing are purely random because they're petrified at laying off proportionally more "diverse" people than "non-diverse" people. Remote status or even performance isn't a factor in layoffs from large tech companies. I know someone who got laid off who was promoted only a couple months before.
 
Last edited:
Yes big tech that cut entire divisions of dead weight also laid off lots of engineers. I communicated it poorly but the actual good engineers will find other jobs and it won't be a problem for them.

What is actually happening is when a big tech company wants to get rid of some unprofitable app or project. They usually just dump the entire division they had working on it and then rehire the best of the lot. This is extremely common in big corporate and I've been through it 4 times during the 10s when I worked at a Fortune 50 company.

Not once did I get one of those sweet ass severance packages. The final one before I quit was a 90% salary lump sum payment. Which would have been dope as fuck. You also got to keep the insurance for the rest of the year so it had zero downsides. Other than not having a job I guess.
 
Why do all you boomers want to prop up failing cities that hate you?
Mate, I'm not a boomer, I'm just used to taking the trains, been going on them since primary school. Certainly playing the hand on your own generation, though.
Average commute to work from my last job had me leave at 7 in the morning and get to work at 9. Current is more like 7:30 to 9. I just diddle about on my phone.

I'm not. I moved to a nice city that doesn't deliberately drive up the cost of living and make it difficult to get around while letting criminals roam free.
And yet you didn't think that there might be better jobs more local in your new city than working at a company you obviously hate even getting near? if your new city is significantly cheaper, you could even have taken a less well-paid job and still been net profiting.

The majority of people who are protesting coming in to work still live close enough to get in to work if they have to, they just don't want to. In my own current job, there's one person who lives in a different state. He still comes in to the office, it's just a few days every month rather than a couple days every week. I'd give a more detailed criticism, but fortunately there's a self-awareness gremlin you haven't quite snuffed out in the back of your head:
No, if you're actually valuable the company comes to you. Many companies have offices that were created purely to hire a specific person or group of people. A famous example is Google's Denmark office which was created in 2004 to hire the team behind the V8 JavaScript Engine who refused to move to California. If they have to do something similar again, they'd hire remote instead.
Firstly, this is a false equivalency to my original statement. My original statement was that people in an actual office are more valuable. Your counterpoint was that if people were valuable enough, they'd make actual offices local to them. IDK man, kinda seems like being in the office is still valued, just that the people in question were numerous and valuable enough to make an office for them. Which brings me to that little worm of doubt in your head.
No, if you're actually valuable the company comes to you.
And yet the company is dragging your ass back in?

Apparently they do not see you as valuable.

Can't imagine why, you took a pandemic as a chance to fly out of town and either went without a plan to be available or flat-out planned to be unavailable to come local again.

Which circles back to my original post being about what you're communicating to your boss. You want your boss to see you as someone at least agreeable to what have been the bare minimum expectations for the majority of your adult life. We are currently in a time where everyone's cutting ballast, and anything that makes you better for the boss than your coworkers is something you should cultivate. Even if you believe that you should be allowed to sit at home in pajama pants all day, and that your work isn't impacted by it, you should still come in if the boss tells you to. Because that could be the difference between you and agreeable Jim for who gets to keep their job.

When a company needs to cut ballast, who are they gonna pick? The person they actually know more of than their head and shoulders, or someone who fiercely defends their ability to not go near them?

You are trying to change the course of a sinking ship in the way that most benefits you above anyone else. Your ass is going overboard first pretense they get.
 
When a company needs to cut ballast, who are they gonna pick? The person they actually know more of than their head and shoulders, or someone who fiercely defends their ability to not go near them?
Thanks to DEI, Big Tech cuts randomly. Can't use performance reviews or anything quantifiable because that may have "racist" implications. Managers are not asked about layoffs and they find out about them after their reports do. Work location is not taken into consideration at all.

In Indian Mafia run companies, they cut all the non-Indians, then all the low-caste Indians, then the high-caste Indians with green cards/citizenship, in that order. It doesn't matter what you do in those companies; your performance review will be changed to failing if your manager doesn't like you (mainly due to your ethnicity) and they need to get rid of someone.
Average commute to work from my last job had me leave at 7 in the morning and get to work at 9. Current is more like 7:30 to 9. I just diddle about on my phone.
Ever worry that they're going to get rid of the guy who spends four hours a day playing on his phone?
 
Yes big tech that cut entire divisions of dead weight also laid off lots of engineers. I communicated it poorly but the actual good engineers will find other jobs and it won't be a problem for them.

What is actually happening is when a big tech company wants to get rid of some unprofitable app or project. They usually just dump the entire division they had working on it and then rehire the best of the lot. This is extremely common in big corporate and I've been through it 4 times during the 10s when I worked at a Fortune 50 company.

Not once did I get one of those sweet ass severance packages. The final one before I quit was a 90% salary lump sum payment. Which would have been dope as fuck. You also got to keep the insurance for the rest of the year so it had zero downsides. Other than not having a job I guess.
The current job market for techies is not the same as the circular layoffs during the '10s.
For one thing, the sheer amount of fake job postings where recruiters ghost on you the millisecond they send your resume up the chain so corporate can pretend they tried to hire Americans for the role before importing a bunch of H1-Bs has skyrocketed compared to the '10s.
 
24/7 round the clock issues all over the world
let's be real... it's a fucking dating app ran by women (because they, aside from troons and SJWs are the only ones that give a shit about "Personal Pronouns") that outsources their support to third worlders like every company these days. They don't need 1000+ people running it.

It's not even a good dating app either. Out of all the ones I've used (and trust me, I've used almost all of them at this point), it's the ONLY one where I've never gotten a message from any of the women there.
 
Late reply, but... yes, obviously. If you're telling people you can't make the time to sit your ass in an office chair for 2-3 days a week for people who pay you thousands of dollars a year, you're communicating you're either extremely lazy or you've got social issues. Which is at least one point against you compared to those who would, and can act as a shitstorm multiplier for things like not being able to make progress on a project.

If you're getting defensive about not coming in, you seem like you're actively abusing it. Whereas, I've found that with any hybrid position, as long as you're generally agreeable to whatever days the company decide it wants you there, you'll get a lot of leeway whenever you need it. I'll be wfh for a week soon, because the boss knows i'd try to make any schedule he set if i could help it.
yeah I have a pretty nice thing with my work no set schedule I come in most days but I usually can get 1-2 WFH days a week if I got stuff going on like doc appointments or even longer for special situations like I had weeks where I needed to be WFH to take care of my old cat who needed our care in her old age. I give off the impression I prefer being in the office and try not to kill the golden goose so I can enjoy those comfy cozy wfh days and not have it taken away or put under greater scrutiny
 
Back