A Meta employee gets real about the horror of working there(sfstandard.com) |
A Meta employee gets real about the horror of working there(sfstandard.com) |
Look, I want everyone to be happy, but if you’re working at the addiction factory, I mean, let’s not kid ourselves about how much Meta cares about people.
Also, if you promise to put everyone out of a job with AI, it's only logical to start with your own employees. Give everyone a preview of what's coming for them if the promises hold.
If you’re looking for a job with similar pay, sure.
But if you’re willing to accept that maybe you were making over market and your next job will be more of a paycheck reality check, then it should be easier to find work.
Instead of insisting that more businesses should share enough profit to enable more people to live the Little American Dream (have a small home, small family, somewhere reasonably nice), we say the opposite, "No. People currently achieving that need to give it up." The bar is so low that this is what counts as "spoiled".
Companies in this stage default to exactly what Meta is doing, pound their employees with pointless initiatives and programs that just grind people to the bone and ultimately go nowhere.
It was a bet. It didn’t pay off. His billions might be tied to the value of the company but his millions are safe and secure. He can keep taking bets for a long time.
Meta is just an investment vehicle for him at this point.
It's like you are saying you worked at Microsoft, Oracle, HP or Cisco. Who wants to hire such people?
1) I know from an internal source that impact is known by now (this week) by the local leaders. There's a very specific criteria. This has been "socialized" with some survivors, but not all.
2) The Capex in building AI is what's causing this wave. That's not surprising.
3) The AI buildout caught a lot of companies with their pants down without financial firepower to make investments. People are surprised by new tech paradigms all the time, it's a permissible mistake. What's crazy is, why were these people hired in the 1st place. There would have been no bloodbath if that salary money was sitting in the balance sheet, as a muscle ready to be flexed. Instead, they just ate fat and now it needs to be trimmed.
4) >>> personal sacrifices you are willing to make
This strikes as very hollow. The very last thing anyone thinks about is personal sacrifices, when thinking about working at meta. Unless you are a paladin and you think selling people ads or getting them addicted to apps is some sort of an unholy dark spell, what's there not to like?
5) >>> fresh out of college came to expect six figures, free food, gym memberships, laundry services, and company stock that only went up. It seemed less like a job market and more like winning a particularly nerdy and privileged lottery. That’s not what it feels like anymore.
None of those things actually changed, except of course they expect you to do the work 24/7. Before it may have been 25/4. So the bar has been raised a little, yes, but the people working there still winners of "the nerdy and privileged lottery"
I think we should put behind us any discourse about companies risking their hiring pool by being hostile to the society or their own employees. People will definitely try to be hired at $company if it means six figure pay, doesn't matter the sector. We have plenty of examples for this.
I guess a response at the industry level would be not hiring ex-FB people etc, treating it as a red flag.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.The music has stopped and is now leaving people playing the musical chairs game without a chair (job) to sit on as the companies are literally taking away the chairs.
Reminds me of 2008, and 2000 but this time the 'new jobs' are not there and the game is global and affects every knowledge worker and it doesn't matter if you're "senior", "junior" or "staff" or whatever.
Nothing lasts forever. Better build something instead of expecting employers for free lunch and daycare-like benefits.
So like 2000 and 2008 if you worked in heavy industry.
Ouch. Great point.
Realistically, you hit the lottery and had (still have?) it better than most. I'm not at faang, but I do pretty well at a tech company myself, and I've never thought of any of it as permanent, and I arrange my life accordingly.
Such a nice euphemism for data grabbing / social graph building / spying / AI training machine!
> You’ve been at Meta for more than a decade.
It seems to be about someone who probably makes >$200K/year and should be set for life with stock options.
They also seem to have adopted a no-remote hire policy and are in an extreme high CoL location. It’s a truly awful mix for trying to attract outside talent. I don’t know why they even bother.
This is a convenient strawman for companies but I think it's no longer true that the people being layed off stem from that time: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/META/meta-platform...
Someone made a great post about other companies who have shed their 'covid excess' but are still citing that period as a motivation for their decisions.
Sure but that's just because there are now different companies (AI labs) on this list instead
Whoever chose to work for them in the last 15 years really made a conscious choice. They chose money over ethics and anything else. And don’t tell me about student loans, there are other companies hiring (well, at the time anyway) engineers that would let you make your payments comfortably.
I am much happier not working there though, getting laid off was a relief. Things changed a lot after the first layoffs and when the stock was around $90!
But who in their right minds trusts the people in Meta?
People out of work don't either.
Even people with jobs don't go to FB or Instagram hoping to read AI-generated slop.
Meta is about to find out all the above the hard way.
> Our new X users saw double the amount of right wing content than left wing content
> And right-wing content was shown most prominently, regardless of users' political leaning.
> Left-wing users saw almost the same amount of left-wing and right-wing content, even though they only followed left-wing accounts. But only 14% of the political content sent to our right-leaning users was left-wing.
> The neutral users saw twice as much right-wing content as left-wing content. And barely any of the political content shown to our X users was non-partisan.
https://news.sky.com/story/the-x-effect-how-elon-musk-is-boo...
Maybe the bias just aligns with your personal one now?
Just thinking about it some more, maybe "womplaining" is pithier and has a better ring to it.
No. I’m an Obama era left leaning person, the same positions Obama had (illegal immigration is bad, if you don’t feel like a man don’t cut your penis off) are now considered right wing.
There are absolutely hard left positions on X - Israel should be destroyed, ICE must be dismantled, - but they’re not banned like right leaning content was in the Twitter era.