That's 2 major layoffs this week (Coinbase being the other). Is there an underlying common reason for this? And is it indeed AI-driven productivity as both companies claim?
Welp, looks like I’m affected. If anyone is looking to hire a systems engineer with distributed systems and load balancing experience, shoot me an email at <anything>@piperswe.me :/
The level of group think here is unbelievable. Any opinion other than this is down voted immediately.
A whole page of people bargaining and not wanting to face reality.
At my work, our healthcare plan renewed May 1st. We have great insurance. The CEO told us that the healthcare premiums just went up 50% so enjoy this year because it is going to be less great next year.
It doesn't matter how many people have a type of religious faith that this has nothing to do with AI and is all posturing.
The reality is AI is going to get cheaper in the future and I am just going to keep getting more expensive as an employee as we circle the drain in this health care and debt death spiral that everyone is also in complete denial of with no political will to do anything about.
S&P 500 is at an all time high. The real layoffs haven't even started yet.
I dislike the title because it doesn't clearly state it's a layoff. "Building for the future" gave me the impression that it's about some major new initiative with a roadmap outlining plans.
Cutting salaries to pay the AI costs for the remaining engineers. Going to be rough as this trickles through the entire economy over the next 10 years.
It looks like they are using the "agentic AI era" as an excuse to restructure in order to boost margins. GAAP gross margin dropped ~5 points YoY (76% -> 71%)
> The packages for departing employees will include the equivalent of their full base pay through the end of 2026. Healthcare coverage is different across the globe, and if you’re in the United States, we’ll continue to provide support through the end of the year. We are also vesting equity for departing team members through August 15th, so they receive stock beyond their departure date. And, if departing team members haven’t hit their one-year cliffs, we are going to waive those and vest their pro-rated equity through August as well.
The announcement reads as pretty heartless to me, but this is a very, very nice departure package
These relative figures mean nothing. Your usage of one specific ultra-new model went from one hour a month to seven? congrats to the 600% increase. Your use of a widespread common model went from 1M tokens to 7M tokens ? Also a 600% increase. Your spend on AI from 1M/month to 84M/year ? ditto.
Other than the latter, I'd read all this as meaningless. Am I wrong?
I'm going to start calling these "Canary" moments.
Assuming we take everything at face value for these sorts of cuts, it creates the following scenario:
A company finds itself with surplus labor capacity due to the efficiencies in AI while also posting substantial profit or revenue growth. The company could downsize the workforce to capitalize on short-term efficiencies and increase margins, though this will come at the cost of long-term reputational harm due to posted profits/health as well as burning out staff who must do the same (or increasingly, more) work with less headcount, leading to attrition when the market shifts in their favor. Alternatively, it could leverage this surplus labor for a period of moonshot R&D or paying down technical/process debts while they have the capacity and the profit to pay for it, which harms short-term share price relative to their competitors slashing jobs, while improving the company's capabilities in the marketplace in the long-run, potentially through mastery of these AI tools or the creation of new product lines.
The fact so many orgs opt for immediate greed over long-term growth really is its own canary that leadership and governance both has failed the marshmallow test.
This was kind of my read as well. We are increasing our AI usage but not in a way that meaningfully affects our ability to deliver on our product roadmap, so the solution is to cut opex on people so we can devote more to compute. The last bit is obviously speculation but it doesn’t feel like a far leap.
My charitable company strategy take: this is companies skating to where they think the puck will be
Given the rapid progress in LLM capability in recent history, it's reasonable to expect that continues... at least to some degree.
Consequently, companies are going to need to continue to cut, and delaying those cuts will only leave them in a worse position.
Devil's advocate counterpoint: it's currently unclear where AI does and doesn't provide efficiency gains in a business, so some companies are making headcount reductions without knowing where they should target them
I know it's probably automatic because of the similar titles, but hitting the bottom of the layoff announcement only to be recommended that article about hiring 1,111 interns in 2026 is a reaaal bad look
With the hiring 1111 interns thing, I think these companies (amazon as well) need to realize this is doing anything but inspiring confidence in those interns. Instead of being excited about going there, more of them would opt to go elsewhere instead of returning full time, or if they do return full time they'd be in fear of being let go next.
Any other engineers just living life frozen at this point. I am unable to make any life decisions because it seems like I won't have a career in the near future. I am unable to purchase a home to settle down for my family, because dad might not have a job next week. I know I am fortunate to have a job, many don't, but fuck if this career isn't the worse thing ever for my overall health and happiness.
> That means we have to be intentional in how we architect our company for the agentic AI era in order to supercharge the value we deliver to our customers and to honor our mission to help build a better Internet for everyone, everywhere.
There was an recent article on X with an interesting take - it could be that companies are doing layoffs not because AI is making them more productive but because it hasn't. Their costs have gone up paying for expensive AI but haven't seen any revenue benefits to offset it.
They are laying people off because the cost of financing have gone up. The risk free rate is now almost 5%. For equity financing you'd need to show revenue growth models that allows repayment at that rate plus equity risk premium (which is quite large for new growth companies).
So the CFO makes a model that allows for this and for sufficient ROI they need less people to be more productive. This mechanically forces them to lay people off.
Of course laying people off might actually not improve productivity, but they need this to have chance.
Letting go 1,100 people into a bleak job market. Absolutely awful.
It wouldn't shock me if people formerly in tech have changed careers entirely, seemingly every tech-focused company is laying people off in favour of AI.
215 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 101 ms ] threadI’ll update this with a resume link tonight…
At my work, our healthcare plan renewed May 1st. We have great insurance. The CEO told us that the healthcare premiums just went up 50% so enjoy this year because it is going to be less great next year.
It doesn't matter how many people have a type of religious faith that this has nothing to do with AI and is all posturing.
The reality is AI is going to get cheaper in the future and I am just going to keep getting more expensive as an employee as we circle the drain in this health care and debt death spiral that everyone is also in complete denial of with no political will to do anything about.
S&P 500 is at an all time high. The real layoffs haven't even started yet.
The announcement reads as pretty heartless to me, but this is a very, very nice departure package
is this really the future we want to build?
So did your outages...
Other than the latter, I'd read all this as meaningless. Am I wrong?
Assuming we take everything at face value for these sorts of cuts, it creates the following scenario:
A company finds itself with surplus labor capacity due to the efficiencies in AI while also posting substantial profit or revenue growth. The company could downsize the workforce to capitalize on short-term efficiencies and increase margins, though this will come at the cost of long-term reputational harm due to posted profits/health as well as burning out staff who must do the same (or increasingly, more) work with less headcount, leading to attrition when the market shifts in their favor. Alternatively, it could leverage this surplus labor for a period of moonshot R&D or paying down technical/process debts while they have the capacity and the profit to pay for it, which harms short-term share price relative to their competitors slashing jobs, while improving the company's capabilities in the marketplace in the long-run, potentially through mastery of these AI tools or the creation of new product lines.
The fact so many orgs opt for immediate greed over long-term growth really is its own canary that leadership and governance both has failed the marshmallow test.
Given the rapid progress in LLM capability in recent history, it's reasonable to expect that continues... at least to some degree.
Consequently, companies are going to need to continue to cut, and delaying those cuts will only leave them in a worse position.
Devil's advocate counterpoint: it's currently unclear where AI does and doesn't provide efficiency gains in a business, so some companies are making headcount reductions without knowing where they should target them
What they'll do instead is double down and start another 100 useless AI initiatives that no one wants.
What a load of crap..
Article https://x.com/championswimmer/status/2051807284691612099
So the CFO makes a model that allows for this and for sufficient ROI they need less people to be more productive. This mechanically forces them to lay people off.
Of course laying people off might actually not improve productivity, but they need this to have chance.
It wouldn't shock me if people formerly in tech have changed careers entirely, seemingly every tech-focused company is laying people off in favour of AI.