Even without the presumed capable A.I. A company like Meta could shed 60% and if done with precision and not suffer greatly. Twitter showed that many companies were running bloated workforces. They have slowly shed some of the excess over the last few years. With the right decisions they could "right-size" the org down by 60% without affecting products and services much. There might be some transition where adjustments take place, but it's not like they'd collapse.
zhivota•14m ago
I agree, my experience working in large organizations is that there is a ton of bloat everywhere you look.
I also think it would be good for the industry, too many really talented people are tied up in these super high paying jobs at the top companies, when they could be contributing elsewhere (the "golden handcuffs" effect).
In fact it was always my assumption that companies with basically unstoppable revenue streams (Google, Facebook, Visa, etc.) were, in part, overpaying and over-hiring just to remove the top end of talent from the market completely, and reduce the risk of being disrupted from startups and smaller competitors. It's interesting that they are finally backing away from that - I imagine that the AI boom has made them feel threatened for the first time in a long time.
mc32•30m ago
zhivota•14m ago
I also think it would be good for the industry, too many really talented people are tied up in these super high paying jobs at the top companies, when they could be contributing elsewhere (the "golden handcuffs" effect).
In fact it was always my assumption that companies with basically unstoppable revenue streams (Google, Facebook, Visa, etc.) were, in part, overpaying and over-hiring just to remove the top end of talent from the market completely, and reduce the risk of being disrupted from startups and smaller competitors. It's interesting that they are finally backing away from that - I imagine that the AI boom has made them feel threatened for the first time in a long time.