htkibar

They are monetising by tapping into "hidden gamblers".

Tests tend to exist so that you can be rejected. Let's not kid ourselves - most of the time people hire based on feelings; and not only about you but also about how they feel at that specific moment.

MARV-el, dis-NEY

Increased shareholder pressure.

Chance to reset salaries within the company without losing out much on the market (doing layoffs in a similar time frame with others will pretty much leave you with options when you all start hiring again)

Showing the whip to their remaining work force, as the power dynamic becoming even slightly more equal is unthinkable.

Turkish did that. In my childhood bread was 200.000 liras for example.

About a decade ago they renominated it. "New Turkish Lira" was born, where 1.000.000 Old Lira = 1 Lira.

So as another comment has mentioned, probably that would happen.

They will be made to allow it. And hopefully that guys reign is nearing its end.

The way the article is written is a reorganisation almost, normally you are supposed to let your workers move into other roles, if they are willing. Not the same as reduction in force.

End goal seems to be the eradication of newly emerging middle class, and to tilt the scale to workers' disadvantage.

Huzzah. /s

Inflation is a thing you know?

Dystopias happening right in front of us!

Or… am I hearing a new web3 startup?

(If I ever end up doing this; this comment will age super well)

Your argument is flawed. Reactionary firing tends to be inefficient, but makes shareholders happy on the short term.

Should a company prioritise shareholder happiness over efficiency is the real question here. Their losses don’t originate from these employees nor initiatives; it originates from market conditions.

Total cost to the company may not be. Employees are costlier to the companies in Europe.

Allows competing implementations and saves TS from MSFT

It has value in terms of being an example of how old these institutions are, not to mention how trustworthy and with lasting power they are.

Administrative effort + 10 bucks is _nothing_ compared to that.

SEEKING WORK

Location: Netherlands Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: No

I am a senior engineer, experienced in frontend with React ecosystem (React, TypeScript, React Native, NextJS) and some exposure to backend via Rust. I've worked as a lead engineer before, and can provide both builder and organisational skills. I've also worked in the crypto world before and have some understanding of it.

If there is potential for this, feel free to reach out to me via LinkedIn down below.

LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/htkibar

Bad take regarding black mark.

Fintech and swinging for the fences is not a bad thing per se. As long as you aren’t an executive for a scam or something; I have never seen in my career experience being treated as a bad thing. Might perhaps get some added questions to get you, but it is also a unique selling point.

Crypto essentially allows you to make trust less systems with tokens, what those tokens mean or not depends on the situation. Writing that off as purely speculative isn’t necessarily fair. Utility tokens are a thing after all.

Just dumping my thoughts on the topic in general;

H1B is quite problematic in its design for sure, a sensible approach would be to determine the need for a certain job group / skill set and give people relatively long residence permits (i.e. 5 years) to come and build a life with the option to naturalise at the end. A skilled worker won’t change professions usually as that is a huge undertaking.

Instead you have company controlled visa structures where market swings can result in quite a bit of losses.

Almost anything can be seen as wage suppression, however creating a healthy market for both parties is much more important than some people significantly earning more at the expense of unfulfilled need.

It brings money, and spreads influence. Solves a different type of problem.

Finally I know the name now - thank you!

In other words, water is wet.

Virtually all companies are struggling with the crisis. A ton of them are going under. It is only logical tech has a similar issue.

More than likely we'll end up seeing a reallocation of engineers across different sectors, most likely a bit more into traditional companies which should drive a good wave of digitalisation. The doom and gloom is unfounded.

Make sure to talk to your kid about everything all the time. Even stuff they may not get even when they are babies.

More exposure to different experiences and even just different things you say the better their chances for cognitive development.

It is an ecosystem by this point which does store value as things stand. That is different than MySQL.

Once it matures enough to merge with the “real world” so to speak possibilities are exciting. For this to happen a lot of regulation and effort is needed not to mention skilled, critical thinking folks from non-crypto world to join and help.

Trusting an entity is different than trusting the specific process / people within it etc. not to mention being able to create an ecosystem.

Crypto by this point is a type of platform so to speak. Actions are verifiable; and of course you need to interact with the real world. However; this doesn’t mean you have to say fuck it; just trust fully.

If we can limit the parts we need to trust; idea of auditing / verifying etc. also becomes easier. I no longer need to trust what the bank will do to let me have a transaction for example; even though I may need to trust them to verify my ID. Off the top of my head, “Are they being racist about giving me a loan?” becomes as simple as “can I get onboarded without prejudice (obviously need auditing) and is their system to allow me to get a loan look at my race (verifiable based on code.).”

I know it is popular to hate on this at the moment however as far as democratising finance and access to it goes crypto is a marvellous tool. Both sides just need to realise that the correct answer is a combination of two worlds, not either or.

This is extremely pessimistic. Same comment could have been made ages ago about internet businesses as well.

The issue is that there is significant amount of money in the space, relatively little regulation making it attractive to scammers. It will be solved.

I sincerely hope people stop investing in things because it is crypto. However, investing in a good project with decent chance for the future will bring along a healthy ecosystem; coupled with a bit more of a decent regulation around it.

Rings so true and close to my heart. I have been saying the exact same thing for a couple years by now. Very tiring as well - it is not like I can change the colour of my skin for god's sake.

Tech is much more integral to our lives than ever. I think what we might see instead is earning decreasing to a certain extent though. Non-FAANG type of companies still need plenty of tech; and they tend to pay decent enough.

Granted, we will all have trim the fat moment but I doubt the level of doom and gloom is warranted, as we are not in a "massive, massive tech bubble". If anything, tech hasn't penetrated enough into our lives yet.

Most likely; these services will evolve into a format where it is financially more viable - which might even allow them to reach larger audiences.

Ideally, this should happen in a slow fashion (which it seems to be happening). A sudden crash would be more chaotic, but on the long term I doubt we have much to worry about as a sector; there'll still be plenty of jobs for tech workers.

This is a personal pet peeve of mine.

Workers react to the environment they are in. Calling it a "graph algorithm / hot potato" is belittling, especially in the sense that most people who switch jobs; don't even want to do so in the first place.

However, as a company, if you are unwilling to stay in line with the market; worst yet hand out relative pay decreases (2% raise with 12% inflation anyone?) then obviously people will leave. If you have a culture with issues that everyone and their grandmother know on your company, and can't even give hope that it'll improve even the slightest bit; people will leave.

The issue is, it is far too common for what I just explained to be your 1st, 2nd, 5th company and so on. If you want long term commitment & loyalty from workers; you better make sure to give them something, anything that they can at least sleep well at night and not feel royally f'd & bitter.

And if you are a hiring manager who passes on people because the environment in general is this way; then you are delusional. Glad we are not working together in the first place; you aren't looking for people who can commit, you are looking for subservience.

This is a ridiculous idea; if anything goes on to show how random hiring processes are imho. Check the contributions obviously but why flat out say "you joined a hackathon we don't like your kind here"?

On a side note - how does one get involved with the project should they wish to do so?