> Isn't a lot of this silliness due to them feeling like they needed to "poach" talented developers, so that the competion wouldn't get them?
No! No one does this!
> Is Apple throwing enough money at key engineers to prevent defection to Meta?
https://www.idownloadblog.com/2021/12/29/apple-meta-poaching...
Poaching is a big part of the game. You can't get a raise compared to what you can playing the game.
Wait until we see the flood of ChatGPT-generated articles. Oh, wait...
I joke with people in another department that we're a poaching ground for TikTok. Mostly, I work with people who have been at the company many years and are senior production engineers, so I can't appreciate dotcom-style spending in non-engineering business units. For the same space, Alphabet has 10x headcount compared to us.
The data seems to suggest that for most companies the trend was constant, and they just reached a point where it was no longer economical, which was exacerbated by hiring freezes halting attrition.
https://stratechery.com/2023/tech-layoffs-big-techs-hiring-r...
And like VCs the math makes more sense when money is cheap and there's a bull market.
And to be fair, it's useful for incident mgmt since you don't know what you'll find, and will often have lots of people up your ass; having supernumerary bodies means I can throw them at something if I find an artifact or concern, and it also gives me a distraction-shield: I communicate only to Senior Engineer X, and all inquiries from Mgmt and Customers go to X; I only have to update X instead of 10+ irritated users/owners.
We do have other employees who maintain the hardware, on-call DBAs to manage issues, etc. I'm only speaking to the software engineers.
And we have lots of hardware and lots of open-source solutions that handle the actual calls.
I'm full-stack but lead on the front-end, a complex Angular application to manage everything from huge call centers to small restaurants.
We have C# for APIs, cloud Oracle for the database, and a whole slew of other software and services to manage the actual calls.
Each of us is specialized in specific parts. Our up-time is tremendous given the amount of code we've written. It's extremely stable.
I've been at this 20+ years, as have the other 2. We know enough between us to get this done.
I've never been called after normal work hours. We release the updated front-end every week and haven't had any issues. And a lot of changes/improvements go into that ... that's a lot of my job.
It's well-architectured, well-tested, fault-tolerant software.
Meta is very different from that, they build the products that users interact with, but also build things at the bottom of the tech stack. At their scale, this makes business sense to do so, and comparing your headcount with theirs makes no sense.
I don't really understand why software engineers keep dunking on each other like this. I get that people want to broadcast how smart they are, but in reality we're just giving the general public a warped sense of how much work is actually involved in building large-scale software systems, which is a bit of a dick move when people are getting laid off.
I'm not dunking on anyone, I'm explaining my day-to-day job with a very small number of senior engineers.
We run a highly complex system. There's no way we could handle millions of calls with five-nines otherwise.
I won't get further into the details because I don't want to reveal too much PII.
I fully understand how much "behind the scenes" work goes on at a place like Facebook. I'm not sitting here imagining rooms of graphic designers thinking what the CSS button radius should be (although I'm sure with 85,000 employees, those happen also).
But note that Musk walked into Twitter, fired en-masse, and it still seems the same to me.
Yes, there are senior engineers who keep the core functionality working.
That is still far less than 85,000 employees.
In our case, it's 3 of us handling all software development. And we write a lot of mission critical code.
That last one is I suspect what makes it so small scale operators can achieve “5 9s” with a fraction of the engineering of larger operators. You can get a lot of 9s most years because you dodge infrequent risks.
We have that in place. We run phone systems that businesses depend on, and we have SLAs that guarantee this uptime in order to secure customers. We have network engineers dedicated to everything from guaranteeing it on the cloud side to checking Wireshark traces for any hint of abnormalities, every day. When I say 3 people, I mean those of us writing the front-end, back-end, database procs, and code that the open-source libraries require, including forking and custom patches. We have other team members ensuring our HA pairs, load balancing, redundancy, fail-overs, and all the other associated technology is working as expected.
I won't get into the details, but we have not violated our SLAs, ever.
And you'd be surprised at what open-source software we are using to drive parts of this system. Kudos to them, they are helping us maintain this with some rock-solid software.
It can't. It depends on "software services" hosted and coded by "other software companies" so his infra's SLA is basically outsourced to either Amazon, Microsoft or Oracle.
It also depends on an incredible amount of in-house custom code.
If I deploy a change that breaks our Angular front-end, or a C# API change that has a typo that routes calls to the wrong places, or a configuration file for our open-source software that handles the phone systems, how exactly do we tell our thousands of customers they can't run their call centers? Or our restaurant customers can't take orders because their phone systems are dead?
Let's not be ridiculous. I'm not humble-bragging. I'm telling you what I do at my job.
> We release the updated front-end every week and haven't had any issues. And a lot of changes/improvements go into it
In 20 years zero issues? I don’t believe you.
I'm not sure what you mean. A page every few months will be considered world-class achievement in a FAANG-like company. Take Amazon for instance, the oncall is brutal and getting several pagers per day is normal. Other companies may be better, but not one pager per few months better.
> A page every few months will be considered world-class achievement in a FAANG-like company.
Except maybe it's a different beast entirely. At amazon, they're constantly pushing new features at most teams. A stable phone company may just be handling pages for when hardware fails. Presumably there's bugs in fast-moving new code more frequently than hardware failure of a tiny org.
Also, fwiw I've been at amazon and had on-call rotations where we didn't get paged monthly. Your manager/team isn't allowing you to allocate resources to fixing your alarms or bugs if you're getting paged that often and not a crazy critical service.
That's why we have so much churn in frameworks, etc.
If you're not "innovating" somewhere, you're not good enough to work there.
Traditional companies are more long term and stable with their tooling and decision making.
People say this from time to time, but have we ever got evidence from any company? A director or VP gave such mandates, a leaked email that discussed such strategy?
That, of course, is absurd on the surface. Hiring people for the sake of hiring ... so they can stand around the watercooler discussing the weather.
That led to double or triple the headcount! 85,000+ employees to work on Instagram, Facebook, and pet projects.
That number alone boggles my mind. I work with three other senior developers and we run an entire phone company with five-nines uptime. Yes, three.
And now suddenly everyone is shocked about layoffs!