4 ms·

What is your fear exactly?

Avicebron 3y ago
I'd imagine the fear is they get crushed, replaced with the cheapest option available located in a place with even less rights. And everyone moves on with the narrative and another move towards labor rights dies with a whimper
- zajio1am 3y ago
  > replaced with the cheapest option available located in a place with even less rights Cheapest is not equal to less rights. Compared to US most developed countries are cheaper, but with more labor rights. So it would make sense to outsource it to, say, CEE EU countries.
  - pylua 3y ago
    Why outsource to Europe at all at this point — many cheaper options.
    - ben_w 3y ago
      If you outsource to anywhere, including within your own country, you've always got a game of telephone going on. If you outsource to anywhere with a different language (which, from the US PoV kinda includes much of Europe, but less than you might expect from the national languages), what's lost in translation is comparable to the impact of machine natural language processing — so you get the same quality from ChatGPT etc., which is cool, but not quite good enough. (And when LLMs become that good, it will make a lot of people very sad). If you outsource to poor countries, you also have to worry about the stability of the power grid and telecoms impacting your ability to communicate with the reliability you expect in corporate circles. There's also a lot of variation in online security by nation, which forms part of the remote working rules in some companies: https://ncsi.ega.ee/ncsi-index/?order=rank&archive=1 https://ncsi.ega.ee/ncsi-index/?order=rank&archive=1
    - snovv_crash 3y ago
      At least in the software business, the cheaper options than eastern Europe usually have such broad cultural differences that the management overhead doesn't offset the cheaper cost.
    - BehindBlueEyes 3y ago
      Fear of leaks, dealing with timezone differences that slow down the work, cultural differences leading to misunderstandings, or generally requiring more iterations to get the same result. Sure it might be cheaper even if it takes 10x as long, but games have tight roadmaps and hard deadlines so in some cases time may matter more than money.
- stefan_ 3y ago
  This line of thinking makes no sense. Dare we upset the corporate overlords with unionizing or they outsource our jobs! The reality is, if it was cheaper, it would have been done yesterday. You are not saying anything.
  - bmicraft 3y ago
    A unionized work force might cost more and tip the balance the the other way, for better or for worse. But mostly the problem here is probably retaliation.
    - BehindBlueEyes 3y ago
      Either way, some work conditions are so bad that it is a risk work to taking over a status quo that harms workers in a way they can’t stay in the industry very long regardless. QA are certainly treated the worst in an industry that already has poor work conditions while representing more $$$ than the movie industry.
mysterydip 3y ago
Probably something like this: https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-music-layoffs-google-alphabet-workers-union-2024-3?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-music-layoffs-google...
ldoughty 3y ago
It's not uncommon for businesses to "realign their business strategy" in a way that fires everyone in the union... In this case, as the parent stated, outsourcing would be a likely outcome
- b800h 3y ago
  Yes, it's not like there aren't already third-party games testing companies in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. I'm not sure to what degree games companies use agile and devops practices though. Working with an outsourcer for QA is a sure-fire way to increase your lead times and slow down development.
  - pylua 3y ago
    I feel like qa is generally the easiest thing to outsource and will have the least impact.
    - rileymat2 3y ago
      Working at a very small place in house QA was absolutely impactful in being subject matter experts on what the software actually did and was supposed to do. I am not sure how you measure that.
      - Ekaros 3y ago
        A good QA might be even the folks that know most how system actually works and what are all the features. Your developer can end up easily work in single corner, with few happy paths. Where as QA should touch nearly all surfaces of product. And even have idea what are most of the specs.
        rileymat2 3y ago
        Exactly, we had 1 to 2 QA people compared to 6 to 8 developers, roughly speaking the developers knew more about particular details of like a third of the system where QA knew all the interactions.

I'd imagine the fear is they get crushed, replaced with the cheapest option available located in a place with even less rights. And everyone moves on with the narrative and another move towards labor rights dies with a whimper

zajio1am 3y ago
> replaced with the cheapest option available located in a place with even less rights Cheapest is not equal to less rights. Compared to US most developed countries are cheaper, but with more labor rights. So it would make sense to outsource it to, say, CEE EU countries.
- pylua 3y ago
  Why outsource to Europe at all at this point — many cheaper options.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    If you outsource to anywhere, including within your own country, you've always got a game of telephone going on. If you outsource to anywhere with a different language (which, from the US PoV kinda includes much of Europe, but less than you might expect from the national languages), what's lost in translation is comparable to the impact of machine natural language processing — so you get the same quality from ChatGPT etc., which is cool, but not quite good enough. (And when LLMs become that good, it will make a lot of people very sad). If you outsource to poor countries, you also have to worry about the stability of the power grid and telecoms impacting your ability to communicate with the reliability you expect in corporate circles. There's also a lot of variation in online security by nation, which forms part of the remote working rules in some companies: https://ncsi.ega.ee/ncsi-index/?order=rank&archive=1 https://ncsi.ega.ee/ncsi-index/?order=rank&archive=1
  - snovv_crash 3y ago
    At least in the software business, the cheaper options than eastern Europe usually have such broad cultural differences that the management overhead doesn't offset the cheaper cost.
  - BehindBlueEyes 3y ago
    Fear of leaks, dealing with timezone differences that slow down the work, cultural differences leading to misunderstandings, or generally requiring more iterations to get the same result. Sure it might be cheaper even if it takes 10x as long, but games have tight roadmaps and hard deadlines so in some cases time may matter more than money.
stefan_ 3y ago
This line of thinking makes no sense. Dare we upset the corporate overlords with unionizing or they outsource our jobs! The reality is, if it was cheaper, it would have been done yesterday. You are not saying anything.
- bmicraft 3y ago
  A unionized work force might cost more and tip the balance the the other way, for better or for worse. But mostly the problem here is probably retaliation.
  - BehindBlueEyes 3y ago
    Either way, some work conditions are so bad that it is a risk work to taking over a status quo that harms workers in a way they can’t stay in the industry very long regardless. QA are certainly treated the worst in an industry that already has poor work conditions while representing more $$$ than the movie industry.

mysterydip 3y ago

Probably something like this: https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-music-layoffs-google-alphabet-workers-union-2024-3?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-music-layoffs-google...

ldoughty 3y ago

It's not uncommon for businesses to "realign their business strategy" in a way that fires everyone in the union... In this case, as the parent stated, outsourcing would be a likely outcome

b800h 3y ago
Yes, it's not like there aren't already third-party games testing companies in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. I'm not sure to what degree games companies use agile and devops practices though. Working with an outsourcer for QA is a sure-fire way to increase your lead times and slow down development.
- pylua 3y ago
  I feel like qa is generally the easiest thing to outsource and will have the least impact.
  - rileymat2 3y ago
    Working at a very small place in house QA was absolutely impactful in being subject matter experts on what the software actually did and was supposed to do. I am not sure how you measure that.
    - Ekaros 3y ago
      A good QA might be even the folks that know most how system actually works and what are all the features. Your developer can end up easily work in single corner, with few happy paths. Where as QA should touch nearly all surfaces of product. And even have idea what are most of the specs.
      - rileymat2 3y ago
        Exactly, we had 1 to 2 QA people compared to 6 to 8 developers, roughly speaking the developers knew more about particular details of like a third of the system where QA knew all the interactions.