4 ms·
Update: duplicate, the original WSJ article discussed here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33497012 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33497012 The or
by gregdoesit 4y ago
Update: duplicate, the original WSJ article discussed here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33497012 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33497012
The original article is from The Washington Post [1]. In this article, it is not linked, but mentioned. This dw.com article describes what The Washington Post reported.
I'm unsure why so many publications don't directly link the article that they effectively are re-wording in parts?
FWIW I also cover Meta every now and then in The Pragmatic Engineer. After reading The Washington Post article, I reached out to engineering leaders working at the company who basically confirmed what the Washington Post wrote. Layoffs are to be expected, likely this week. Also, some other signs pointed to this, like Meta having people return from business trips by the weekend (so by now everyone is in their primary work location), cutting them short if need be [2]
[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/meta-is-preparing-to-notify-employees-of-large-scale-layoffs-this-week-11667767794 https://www.wsj.com/articles/meta-is-preparing-to-notify-emp...
[2] https://twitter.com/GergelyOrosz/status/1589504531804876802 https://twitter.com/GergelyOrosz/status/1589504531804876802
- the_mitsuhiko 4y agoFor what it's worth the reason I posted the dw.com article was that it did not have a paywall. As to why they are not directly linking to sources I assume it has to do with advertisement traffic.
- pvg 4y agoIt's a dupe for now anyway https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33499366 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33499366
- seydor 4y agodw is a public service. most likely they dont want to link to paywalls
- gregdoesit 4y agoAh, got it. I still find it just weird practice to not link to the source, making it harder for people reading articles to find them.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]