3 ms·

I can't take this article seriously. They are having a hard time hiring in 2022-2023 because of the scandal of 2016?? Facebook remains one of the TOP landing sp

I can't take this article seriously. They are having a hard time hiring in 2022-2023 because of the scandal of 2016?? Facebook remains one of the TOP landing spots for any engineer still. The rep might be tarnished a bit, but you would be doing yourself a disservice if your company wouldn't consider an engineer with 2-5 years of senior SWE experience from FB. EVEN after the stock downturn it remains near the top in prestige and compensation -- though admittedly they are hiring a lot less and firing a lot more. I think traditional journalism fails hard when covering tech because tech moves and evolves so quickly and this journalist in particular tries to weave a multi-year story that isn't as connected (or the threads they have chosen aren't) as it seems. Both with Google's "Don't be evil" and Facebook's "Move fast and break things" the media got what they wanted, a nice sound bite that was (at least for a time) the motto of the company. Things change, companies evolve, the "risky" projects are more expensive, the failures are magnified (Google+, FB Phone, etc.) so companies themselves change. I don't think its fair to keep holding them to an ethos that hasn't/doesn't scale. I don't know, I'm just tired of all these hit pieces on Meta/Zuckerberg. At least they have discipline (sharp revenue focus), conviction (betting on AI + metaverse), and focus (flatter structure than other peer companies even before the pandemic bloat) -- a lot more than I can say for a majority of tech companies these days...

dasil003 3y ago
Definitely agree that this kind of media narrative is ChatGPT-level of arbitrary free association that leads to completely nonsensical conclusions. You're also right that FB is still a strong resume signal. That said, I think FAANG reputation has been slowly diluting for a while, and significantly diluted from the over-hiring during the pandemic. The bottom line is the hiring process creates a floor in terms of raw coding ability, but says very little about their ability to drive impact in companies with a lesser warchest of technical talent. The average FAANG engineer is standing on the shoulders of giants at best, and coasting at worst. Being able to deal with a large technical bureaucracy is probably the most consistently reliable signal that a FAANG tenure gives you, but that's not what most hiring managers at companies with lesser tech brand recognition are actually looking for. They're probably imagining something like the scrappiness of folks that built Google from 2000-2005, or Facebook from 2005-2010. Of course those folks still exist, but they're a lot thinner on the ground relative to the massive headcount they have today.
- darkwizard42 3y ago
  100% agree that the gleam of a FAANG engineer is more lackluster these days. From the well-known bureaucracy, the wealth of internal tools, and slower release cycles, engineers from FAANG are sometimes a liability to a startup/smaller company. I think though they remain above average engineers who IF they are able to pivot back into execution mode and integrate well are still worth it (and by worth it I mean going a little above your comp band to hire them). +1 to your point that FAANG tenure is probably best for Series C/D startups who need someone who has experience in big teams.
leptons 3y ago
I've turned Facebook every time when they come calling for my engineering talents. I don't want to work for a person like Zuckerberg, and 2016 is one of many reasons why. I don't care how much they would pay me, other companies that aren't as evil pay as much. And no, I don't consider Facebook on someone's resume to mean anything. They hired too many inexperienced devs just like Google did, and then dumped them just as quickly. It doesn't mean as much as you think it does to work for FB. >I don't know, I'm just tired of all these hit pieces on Meta/Zuckerberg. If Zuck didn't suck so much, you wouldn't see all these "hit pieces". He's not a target because he's rich, he's a target because of the things he's actually done that are evil.
- uxcolumbo 3y ago
  I don't like Zuck - because he has no 'taste' and only cares about power - he even tries to model himself after Roman emperors. If we talk about VR, I would compare Zuck to Nolan Sorrento in Ready Player One. He's trying to build the next big (and only) platform and extract as much value out of it. Zero actual vision for a massive virtual world and what it could mean for society. He isn't a James Halliday. Do you have an overview of the top 'evil' things he / FB has done?

dasil003 3y ago

Definitely agree that this kind of media narrative is ChatGPT-level of arbitrary free association that leads to completely nonsensical conclusions. You're also right that FB is still a strong resume signal. That said, I think FAANG reputation has been slowly diluting for a while, and significantly diluted from the over-hiring during the pandemic. The bottom line is the hiring process creates a floor in terms of raw coding ability, but says very little about their ability to drive impact in companies with a lesser warchest of technical talent. The average FAANG engineer is standing on the shoulders of giants at best, and coasting at worst. Being able to deal with a large technical bureaucracy is probably the most consistently reliable signal that a FAANG tenure gives you, but that's not what most hiring managers at companies with lesser tech brand recognition are actually looking for. They're probably imagining something like the scrappiness of folks that built Google from 2000-2005, or Facebook from 2005-2010. Of course those folks still exist, but they're a lot thinner on the ground relative to the massive headcount they have today.

darkwizard42 3y ago
100% agree that the gleam of a FAANG engineer is more lackluster these days. From the well-known bureaucracy, the wealth of internal tools, and slower release cycles, engineers from FAANG are sometimes a liability to a startup/smaller company. I think though they remain above average engineers who IF they are able to pivot back into execution mode and integrate well are still worth it (and by worth it I mean going a little above your comp band to hire them). +1 to your point that FAANG tenure is probably best for Series C/D startups who need someone who has experience in big teams.

leptons 3y ago

I've turned Facebook every time when they come calling for my engineering talents. I don't want to work for a person like Zuckerberg, and 2016 is one of many reasons why. I don't care how much they would pay me, other companies that aren't as evil pay as much. And no, I don't consider Facebook on someone's resume to mean anything. They hired too many inexperienced devs just like Google did, and then dumped them just as quickly. It doesn't mean as much as you think it does to work for FB. >I don't know, I'm just tired of all these hit pieces on Meta/Zuckerberg. If Zuck didn't suck so much, you wouldn't see all these "hit pieces". He's not a target because he's rich, he's a target because of the things he's actually done that are evil.

uxcolumbo 3y ago
I don't like Zuck - because he has no 'taste' and only cares about power - he even tries to model himself after Roman emperors. If we talk about VR, I would compare Zuck to Nolan Sorrento in Ready Player One. He's trying to build the next big (and only) platform and extract as much value out of it. Zero actual vision for a massive virtual world and what it could mean for society. He isn't a James Halliday. Do you have an overview of the top 'evil' things he / FB has done?