I know one insider at Meta that I could ask about this. I suspect they can't really retain talent like they used to.

The only other anecdote I have is an acquaintance who was early (i.e. the first web-dev) at YouTube. He _hated_ working for Google and left as soon as his shares vested. That was my first experience with someone simply rejecting a fat paycheck because _Google_ was to buttoned down for them.

People are strange (and software engineers are a whole different level of people).

> He _hated_ working for Google and left as soon as his shares vested. That was my first experience with someone simply rejecting a fat paycheck because _Google_ was to buttoned down for them.

It's easier to reject a fat paycheck after your shares vest, I imagine.

Yup. He's now a "gentleman" blueberry farmer.

It's a bit of both I imagine. And without stock-based compensation, Twitter is likely to become much less competitive in terms of pay than its peers.

Working under Zuck I would imagine is much different than working under Elon.

The bulk of the best brains left FB 4-6+ years ago after the 2016 political shenanigans. It's a mercenary shop now, except for junior NCG hires.

I think I will disagree here. Admittedly, I base this on anecdata only, but among my work colleagues, political affinity got weirdly important. To me it is odd, because I genuinely doubt that outside outliers like Ben and Jerry, companies care about anything other than their specific bottom line ( and policies supporting it ).

Still, no real data to back that claim up though.

The companies might not care, but the perception of working for them might matter. I wonder if your colleagues would care if nobody knew who they worked for, when it's "do I want to work for this company", not "do I want my neighbors to know that I work for this company".