4 ms·

It also makes logical sense. Why would you let go of a 10X engineer? You'd have to be an idiot.

by tapatio 4y ago

unity1001 4y ago
> You'd have to be an idiot. Yep. Like someone who could do it through an algorithm. Like how Google did...
- flavius29663 4y ago
  This is the first I hear of this, do you have a source for that?
  - unity1001 4y ago
    It was in one of the articles posted in HN. In the Open Source one I believe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34558576 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34558576 https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/27/google_open_source/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/27/google_open_source/
anthomtb 4y ago
>Why would let you of a 10X engineer? Because you axed a 400 person division and at least a few of those folks were the mythical 10X-ers. >You'd have to be an idiot. Maybe. There are plenty of idiots in upper management with the power to decide who stays and who goes. But back to the hypothetical 400 person division, the executive will see a spreadsheet with $$$ expenditure and -$$$ revenue and make the cut with little concern for individual abilities.
irrational 4y ago
This was decades ago, but my uncle has a PhD in chemistry and worked for a very large and famous chemical company. They had a round of layoffs and fired his entire division. Well, he had a bunch of patents in his name that the company suddenly didn't have access to. Someone realized their mistake and asked him to come back. He already had multiple offers from competitors so they had to pay him a huge increase in salary and a bonus to come back. Mostly he didn't want to move his family, so he was willing to stay. Bottom line, there are and always have been idiots at every company.
- buildbot 4y ago
  Were they from before working at that company? Pretty unusual for patents to not be assigned to the company they were working for though? If I leave Microsoft, my patents stay assigned to them while still authored by me/others.

It also makes logical sense. Why would you let go of a 10X engineer? You'd have to be an idiot.

unity1001 4y ago

> You'd have to be an idiot. Yep. Like someone who could do it through an algorithm. Like how Google did...

flavius29663 4y ago
This is the first I hear of this, do you have a source for that?
- unity1001 4y ago
  It was in one of the articles posted in HN. In the Open Source one I believe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34558576 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34558576 https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/27/google_open_source/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/27/google_open_source/

anthomtb 4y ago

>Why would let you of a 10X engineer? Because you axed a 400 person division and at least a few of those folks were the mythical 10X-ers. >You'd have to be an idiot. Maybe. There are plenty of idiots in upper management with the power to decide who stays and who goes. But back to the hypothetical 400 person division, the executive will see a spreadsheet with $$$ expenditure and -$$$ revenue and make the cut with little concern for individual abilities.

irrational 4y ago

This was decades ago, but my uncle has a PhD in chemistry and worked for a very large and famous chemical company. They had a round of layoffs and fired his entire division. Well, he had a bunch of patents in his name that the company suddenly didn't have access to. Someone realized their mistake and asked him to come back. He already had multiple offers from competitors so they had to pay him a huge increase in salary and a bonus to come back. Mostly he didn't want to move his family, so he was willing to stay. Bottom line, there are and always have been idiots at every company.

buildbot 4y ago
Were they from before working at that company? Pretty unusual for patents to not be assigned to the company they were working for though? If I leave Microsoft, my patents stay assigned to them while still authored by me/others.