11 ms·
Their old CREDIT values: Collaboration, Results for Customers, Efficiency, Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging, Iteration, and Transparency. New values: Spe
by Animats 5mo ago
Their old CREDIT values: Collaboration, Results for Customers, Efficiency, Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging, Iteration, and Transparency.
New values: Speed with Quality, Ownership Mindset, Customer Outcomes.
In other words, work harder, not smarter, and no more DEI.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- guelo 5mo ago[flagged]
- malfist 5mo agoDon't think I will
- IshKebab 5mo agoI'm firmly not in Trump's anti-DEI camp but I have seen what can happen when you make it one of your core values. You can end up with a lot of people talking about it a lot, lots of meetings and initiatives rather than doing actual work. And usually those don't go anywhere because the people doing it don't have any power to actually change things. It's unlikely that a company like Gitlab really needs anything changing anyway. It doesn't make sense for it to be 40% of their values, especially if they're losing money (or very close to it).
- tdb7893 5mo agoPlaces I've worked that actually seem to have inclusion as a core value are great places to work and seem to have high functioning teams. My impression mostly though is more that it was never really a value for management but they wasted a bunch of time talking about it. In general any mismatch between stated values and actual values has been awful to deal with and is a red flag for places to work.
- madamelic 5mo ago> Places I've worked that actually seem to have inclusion as a core value I am not sure if you had implied it but that would align with my experience as well: places that tout diversity were the worst places to work (as someone who is seen as 'diverse') while the ones that treated everyone the same and had the expectation everyone pulls their weight. I absolutely despise people treating me differently because of who / what I am rather than doing good work. I will take mildly inappropriate good-nature jokes over head pats every day of the week.
- mathgladiator 5mo agoI love wildly beyond mild inappropriate jokes as they are a litmus test for a thinking person. The people that take things way too sensitive are a net drag and buzz kill for doing the grinding required. It goes both ways too. I love it when people are agressive with me. So, by freedom of association, cliques form and I have no problem with nepotism because the ultimate currency in life is trust.
- itsdesmond 5mo agoEmbarrassing.
- mathgladiator 5mo agoI lost shame a long time ago. I am not even sure what reality is. Like, am i a computation within this meat brain? Or is the brain a two way transceiver to the real dimension and this body is just an avatar a mech that im piloting for a few years. It seems like a cosmic joke. And then think about the sheer obsurdity of sex ... yeesh
- LastTrain 5mo ago> I love it when people are agressive with me. I highly doubt it considering that you can’t even spell it right you incompetent pillar
- dsl 5mo ago[dead]
- whimblepop 5mo ago> You can end up with a lot of people talking about it a lot, lots of meetings and initiatives rather than doing actual work. And usually those don't go anywhere because the people doing it don't have any power to actually change things. Someone I'm close to is going through this right now. They work at a place that officially highly values "inclusion", and their employer's website is dripping with virtue-signaling language related to it. But that someone is disabled, and in fact there's nobody at the organization who owns accessibility issues. Disability accommodations are haphazard, and often not timely. Why? Because no one owns them. They just get punted to an internal employee affinity group of disabled people who don't have a real chain of command, a real budget, or even a real prerogative to do accessibility work, let alone meaningful power— many of its members are routinely chastised by their bosses whenever they dedicate any time to solving access problems within the company. "That's not what we pay your for", "that's not your job", "I need you on this other thing", etc. Meanwhile the organization receives public accolades from meaningless business press organization as a "great place to work" or even "great place to work for people with disabilities". I think it's fine for companies to value diversity, and to value it publicly. A little virtue signaling is fine, as a treat; it may actually repel nasty people, encourage good behavior, or make employees feel more welcome sometimes. That stuff is good. But there's also a real possibility that a company making diversity an explicit value results in lots of energy going into activities that let that company's executives pat themselves on the back about how good they are without actually doing much for inclusion. I wouldn't take any sizeable company's stated values too seriously, including that one.
- esafak 5mo agoYou need audits and Blind-like channels to augment self reports.
- whimblepop 5mo agoI think internal organizations of employees of various shapes (unions, affinity groups, "employee resource groups") can be useful for diversity and inclusion issues. But you also need budgets and power and integration with other departments. HR needs to care about non-discriminatory hiring practices in a first-class way. Legal needs to see ensuring good-faith legal compliance with the requirements of the ADA before anyone brings a lawsuit as part of their mandate. Anonymous, third-party outlets for complaints like Blind can also likely be useful. Even at companies that never punish anyone for criticizing the company, participation rates in internal surveys are typically atrociously low, and people stop speaking up even informally if it's clear to them that nobody actually acts on employee feedback. Most companies probably perceive such channels of communication as threats, though. Idk about audits. I worry that it's easy for them to become their own circus and overhead without materially improving things. But you may be right.
- janalsncm 5mo agoOn the one hand, yeah, you should respect people who are different from you. On the other hand, this is really so obvious that I doubt elevating it to a “core value” makes much of a difference. Are there marginal people who wouldn’t respect diversity unless it was a core value? Then again I don’t even know what it means for something to be a core value. What is the practical upshot of “collaboration” being a core value of a company? Were people not collaborating before?
- IshKebab 5mo ago> Then again I don’t even know what it means for something to be a core value. Yeah I think they're mostly useless. At least you definitely don't get core values by just declaring that they are your motto. For example Amazon is pretty widely agreed to have customer satisfaction as a core value. They didn't get it by saying "Our core values are customer satisfaction...".
- bigstrat2003 5mo agoI think "inclusion" is fine as a value. "Diversity" is not, because it is an outcome and not an action one pursues. What matters is that all have equal opportunities to participate, and perfectly fair opportunities can create unequal outcomes through no fault of anyone's. Moreover, I think that fixating on the demographics of who joins the company is morally misguided. I want my teammates to be capable and enjoyable to work with, not to check someone's "we must have X number of minorities checkbox". Diversity initiatives always turn into the latter in my experience.
- bombcar 5mo agoIf the only metric for your initiative is disastrous; you WILL work toward that metric and ensure disaster.
- dangus 5mo agoI will push back on what you are saying here. I think this idea that DEI becomes "yet another annoying meeting" has been amplified by political media. This political media has successfully grown the seed of this idea in our heads that DEI is just useless nonsense, and it's associated with those "liberals who want to take your freedom and guns and tax money and jobs." Essentially, what's happening here is that this right wing political media saw an opportunity to latch onto resentment of employees whose companies were just trying to change employee behavior for the better. Companies are well aware that implementing DEI successfully will financially outperform other companies who don't. McKinsey has found this to be true repeatedly. But of course, people don't really want to hear these kinds of things and a lot of socially conservative people don't like being told that they need to learn how to interact with that queer looking person they'd rather just avoid. When Jim and Bob want to hire a new employee they just want to hire another Jim or another Bob and be left alone. You know how your company puts meetings on your calendar where they preach about wellness and exercise and stuff like that? Just because they are annoying meetings doesn't mean they're wrong. You should focus on your wellness and exercise. Same deal with DEI: it's obviously beneficial to everyone, but America has a whole lot of people who really don't want it. We are within the same lifetime as full blown segregation, redlining, of women being disallowed from opening bank accounts without spousal approval. There are people still alive from that era. Your great-great-grandparent may have been alive during legal racial slavery.
- jrochkind1 5mo agoAlso no more Transparency.
- echelon 5mo agoIf they're asking you to do more for less pay and with fewer coworkers to help, don't feel bad if the company code turns into unmaintainable, unintelligible garbage. They can't really stop you. It's just AI. Something is going to have to give. Every IC ought to use the present day as the opportunity to build a nimble competitor to their old employer (or whatever industry incumbents they want). They're literally setting themselves up for this.
- darkwater 5mo agoWhich I wonder if it will end with closing up their own public Gitlab instance for their bugs/features, their open operations manual and the generally transparent culture that for example brought us the live streamed fix of the infamous "I dropped the database" situation. Well, actually looks like the live stream was made already private, but I don't know when, I just discovered it now: https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/5rfvpd/live_stream_of_the_gitlab_recovery/ https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/5rfvpd/live_strea...
- jrochkind1 5mo agoI expect the operations manual, employee handbook, internal documentation like that will be first to go. I wouldn't necessarily expect any public gitlab instances to go.
- Trasmatta 5mo ago> Ownership Mindset Every company I've worked at hammers the "ownership" idea and I hate it so much. It's how they drive a culture where employees are expected to invest themselves into "owning" a problem space that can be taken from them at any moment. It's how they trick you into doing extra work that's not in your job description. Unless you're ACTUALLY an owner, don't be fooled by an "ownership" value.
- arcticbunny 5mo agoYou need to take the mercenary mindset and look after You Inc. first
- saganus 5mo agoConversely, you have "full ownership" and have the ability to decide the direction, as long as it's the same direction as your higher-ups have decided. All the responsibility is still yours though.
- Trasmatta 5mo agoYeah that's the rub. You have the responsibility for the thing you "own" but not true choice or control. Responsibility without authority. It sucks.
- zelphirkalt 5mo agoAll the talk about higher-ups taking the big paychecks for "carrying so much responsibility" is in most cases just complete horseradish. When something goes wrong or doesn't run well, suddenly none of the higher-ups are taking the responsibility. Hmmmm it's strange, innit?
- wiseowise 5mo agoThey carry the responsibility of collecting the paycheck. Stop complaining, there’s another night incident – no sleep for you today.
- trhway 5mo ago
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoBasically "screw any part about employees working together do what I say fast". What a shame. I love the AI bros who think utopia is coming, 4 day work weeks, etc. more like "get screwed, work more, for less, in worse environments".
- echelon 5mo agoThe code and product will turn to shit, and the company won't be able to extract itself from the mud. Employees tasked with doing 10x more work with less help don't even have to feel bad about it happening. It'll also create employment opportunity in disrupting their old employer. These companies are willingly signing up to become IBM.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoIt looks like they are switching to ai only code review. It will go to shit for sure lol
- datadrivenangel 5mo agoAI code review with code ownership is fine. If people have to build working software, they'll do that, or you hold them accountable. Modern software dev at most organizations has far more code review than is needed outside of soc2 purposes. Of course, once you have a big incident, then the value of more human review becomes obvious.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoIt's an important touch point for other code owners. I guess if no one is looking at the code anymore why even do an AI code review. It's kind of theatrical? I seriously don't know how people are working like this now. I'm on my ass looking for work and in the last month it feels like everyone has completely lost their minds.
- wiseowise 5mo ago
- torben-friis 5mo agoThere's a 'github down' post here every other day. The ball is right there, bouncing alone in front of the goal, and they just have to position themselves as "we're the stable ones" to score that market when the exodus inevitably happens. Nope, full throttle and stimulants, just because.
- walrus01 5mo agoTBH the open source nature of gitlab means that any sufficiently large and clued-in hosting company (think: servercentral/deft/summit, whatever it's calling itself these days, or one of its competitors) could put up gitlab instances for people to use and meet more nines of uptime than github. It doesn't have to be the gitlab company itself running servers with the httpd and back-end database. I understand the meaning, however, in that they're well positioned by having the company name and domain name, same general way that non-technical people will pay wordpress.com to host their blog/small website because it's very easy, rather than DIYing it or paying a 3rd party.
- whimblepop 5mo agoGitLab isn't open-source. It's "open-core". Third parties hosting GitLab instances don't have access to the same range of features that GitLab-the-company does.
- walrus01 5mo agoYes, copy and pasting from the gitlab site: "Editions There are three editions of GitLab: GitLab Community Edition (CE) is available freely under the MIT Expat license. GitLab Enterprise Edition (EE) includes extra features that are more useful for organizations with more than 100 users. To use EE and get official support please become a subscriber. JiHu Edition (JH) tailored specifically for the Chinese market." Personal opinion, but I think a great deal of the people who are presently overloading github with one person created vibe coded projects would be just fine with the "CE" feature set.
- 5mo ago
- kelvinjps10 5mo agoI thought that the GitHub degrading would be an opportunity for them to be an alternative more focused in stability and a customer centric approach . But it's just more slop
- u_fucking_dork 5mo agoWhy would they want to become the target for free users vibe coded slopware? I don’t think many of them are converting to paying customers.
- crote 5mo agoThey don't need to be. GitHub is already the main platform for random open-source projects, and that's unlikely to change any time soon. GitLab's selling point is essentially "Github, but not by Github". They would do Just Fine offering a highly-restricted free account for the handful of hobbyists who care enough about leaving GH but don't care enough to go to Forgejo & friends and for the people doing evaluations, offering free credits to the few high-profile FLOSS projects who accidentally end up on GL-the-SaaS instead of self-hosted GL, and for the rest just focusing on paid corporate customers.
- zelphirkalt 5mo agoThey could easily impose usage limits for such no cost users, which disable abusive usage.
- mrbungie 5mo agoInvestors actually want slop-branded AI on everything right now, so it checks out for companies to maximize for it. We are so fucked.
- PradeetPatel 5mo agoThere seems to be a massive push against DEI over the last few years in the tech industry globally, despite it being one of the industry's greatest strength. Does anyone know what caused this?
- ARandomerDude 5mo ago[flagged]
- MayCXC 5mo agooutcomes
- walrus01 5mo agoUnited States domestic "politics" and just about everything adjacent to a certain well known public figure..
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- gsinclair 5mo agoI think you need to make a case for DEI being “one of the industry’s greatest strengths”. It’s not obvious to me.
- bmarnane 5mo agoIf your product is used bya cross-section of society, then having a cross-section of society build it should lead to a better product no?
- userbinator 5mo agoA million monkeys will never equal a single Einstein.
- noitpmeder 5mo agoIf a qualification for the role is "appreciation for certain less represented cultures/ideas/..." then sure. Otherwise, for a backend c++ engineer the benefits are significantly less obvious, to the point it's really hard to make a case for why DEI concerns should trump traditional evaluation metrics for skill. The goal should be to hire the best team for the use case, regardless of gender/race/culture/background.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- NewJazz 5mo agoAlso stop talking to your colleagues and start talking to "ai".
- digitaltrees 5mo agoI think you mean no more humans. Gross
- LastTrain 5mo agoSo, SQUOMCO?
- x0x0 5mo ago"Speed with Quality" Having been in some of these values meetings, I really imagine it went like this: someone wanted speed, and someone else wanted quality. Sorry, I mean Speed and Quality. Many people said there is a tradeoff between those two things, and only one thing can be first. Some brilliant businessman: "I know, we'll combine them. We want Speed _and_ Quality." Thus, "Speed with Quality." Tada! Values are a tradeoff: only one thing can be first. Trying to duck that is stupid.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- p1necone 5mo agoThe funny thing is you absolutely can do things which improve both speed and quality at the same time (basic good engineering), but they're like 3 or 4 orders of effect removed from those outcomes and impossible to do when you have someone breathing down your neck asking "does this make us go faster" at every step of the way. Also "our velocity is 3x higher than it would be in the imaginary invisible universe where we made worse decisions 6 months ago" is impossible to measure, whereas "we cut a bunch of corners and shipped a piece of garbage on an arbitrary deadline" is very measurable.
- vlod 5mo agoSpeed-Quality-Price. Let's pick: Speed-Quality Errrh... Let's forget about: Price
- 5mo ago
- anal_reactor 5mo ago> Ownership I've noticed that the more a company pushes on ownership the more difficult it is to actually execute it.
- lorecore 5mo agoWhenever someone at work tells you to take more ownership, the correct response is: "Sure, I'll take more RSUs". Of course, that's never what they mean. Ownership for me, responsibility for thee.
- threecheese 5mo agoIt’s there, at the end, -ish: > Interpersonal excellence: individuals who are good humans, embrace diversity, inclusion and belonging, assume good intent and treat everyone with respect
- perching_aix 5mo agoI thought GitLab was a bit more respectable than this LinkedIn style slop. I cringe less at horoscopes than this.
- fyrn_ 5mo agoYeah, I had thought so as well. Lots of big Linux projects use them. Very brand damaging post in my opinion
- tjpnz 5mo agoSQOMCO?
- kunley 5mo agoIt was just buzzwords from the beginning, so at least now it's less pretending to make any sense
- blindriver 5mo agoI don't understand why companies are abandoning DEI so quickly and so decisively. What happens if/when a Democrat president is elected that mandates DEI and ESG all over again, are they going to add them back into their core values as swiftly as they abandoned them? At least companies like Coinbase made principled stances against forced DEI and employee activism earlier than everyone else. Doing it now seems weird because if it does become mandated again, they're going to look so phony.
- scarmig 5mo agoIt always was unprincipled: regardless of whether someone's a fan of DEI or not, these companies are short-sighted, profit-driven, and at best reactive to trends. The only reason any person thought otherwise is that they were either desperately looking for a victory or desperately looking for an enemy to be angry about.
- slg 5mo ago>What happens if/when a Democrat president is elected that mandates DEI and ESG all over again Mandates? There is this weird revisionist history that DEI was a Biden era invention that all these companies were forced to roll out in January 2021. These programs were simply the latest evolution of prolonged and steady cultural shifts. I remember attending events trying to promote diversity in the computer science department when I was in college 20+ years ago. Killing DEI isn't wiping out four years of progress, it's attempting to wipe out decades.
- userbinator 5mo agoYou mean decades of regression. The obvious decline started around 2010; coincidentally also the era of the rise of SJW-ism and nontechnical derailing drama. Once the diversity quotas started appearing, the inevitable results were obvious.
- rdevilla 5mo ago[flagged]
- OhMeadhbh 5mo agoI'm not even sure it even means "work harder, not smarder and wach yor seplling." In my experience it's more of a shibboleth to the new masters to let them know they're down with creating a top-down organization where information flows only one way. Were I to have crafted this post, it would have included things like "We ask our employees, customers and investors time to prove ourselves to you again as we re-commit to listening to our stake-holders and ensure our organization is properly re-positioned to execute our continued plans to deliver the best possible service..." But instead it comes across as "someone read an article about Amazon's two-pizza team rule and we figured there were worse things to try."
- DrewADesign 5mo ago[flagged]
- PyWoody 5mo agoAww, I was hoping it was going to be "Suck It Trebek." [0] [0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bEghu90QJH4 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bEghu90QJH4
- thin_carapace 5mo ago[flagged]
- DrewADesign 5mo agoAre you replying to the wrong comment?
- thin_carapace 5mo agoyou say suck it fascist in response to DEI being removed, i say DEI would get canned by communists and fascists both, autofill the rest of the argument with some prose
- Supermancho 5mo ago> you say suck it fascist in response to DEI being removed, Re-read the thread. They made a joke about acronyms.
- thin_carapace 5mo agoinitial comment - 'gitlab no more dei' secondary comment - 'suck it fascist' third comment - 'fascism and communism would both get rid of dei' whereabouts did the room get misread?
- DrewADesign 5mo ago
- xbmcuser 5mo agoWell under this administration even if you believe in DEI best not have it written anywhere
- overfeed 5mo agoCostco[1] is doing just fine. 1. https://fortune.com/2026/02/13/costco-defies-trump-on-dei-business-booming/ https://fortune.com/2026/02/13/costco-defies-trump-on-dei-bu...
- userbinator 5mo ago[flagged]
- shye 5mo agoIt’s a game of chicken, and we know the president folds like a soggy tortilla (aka TACO). It’s just that some executives are even soggier.
- copper-float 5mo ago[flagged]
- perching_aix 5mo agoI think the idea is that each letter in there is considered a merit, hence why it's always discussed under the "core values" section. That is to say, they're properties that they supposedly value, next to technical excellence, team fit, being a spitfire, whatever. And that the discussed-to-death diversity hiring quotas are not its entirety, or even necessarily a part, of it. Merit not being a threshold but a range in actuality probably also plays a role (along with how utter theater the typical job interview really is). > I wouldn't want to be hired based on something so meaningless. But that's kinda the point of it all, isn't it? That it's supposed to be empowering the disadvantaged / marginalized. If your background does not put you at a disadvantage, there's nothing to compensate for, then it would indeed be meaningless. But if there is, and you made it, then that is by definition extraordinary. So it is meaningful. There's definitely a question about whether they'd be stealing your thunder by this, but I'll leave that to an actual aficionado of the topic. Not exactly the expert on all this.
- rdevilla 5mo ago[flagged]
- perching_aix 5mo ago[flagged]
- rdevilla 5mo ago[flagged]
- perching_aix 5mo ago> It's worthless talking to whites. I am convinced racism is hardcoded into your genetics and culture. I don't know, looks like you're quite the natural yourself. You both manage to be ashamed of your ethnicity, and hate another.
- wayeq 5mo agoLong live "SQOMCO"
- thayne 5mo agoTranparency is also missing from the new values. Can't say I'm terribly surprised,but I am disappointed.
- swyx 5mo agois there a company that has kept DEI?
- Mashimo 5mo agoNon American here, but as I understood it DEI is an older and very broad framework, which includes handicap accessibility and hiring military veterans. There are probably still plenty of companies that support that.
- Lendal 5mo agoYep. These companies forget that we can use AI too, to unpack these ridiculous corporate statements in record time to get right down to the point: We're going to dump all our values, and not even going to pay lip service to things like integrity, transparency, or diversity anymore.