IBM is mandating US sales staff to relocate closer to clients and requiring cloud division employees to return to the office at least three days a week. This move aims to improve client relationships and collaboration. Concurrently, IBM is reportedly reducing its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) workforce, although the company claims these are performance-based decisions and not tied to any specific program reduction. These changes come amidst IBM's ongoing efforts to streamline operations and focus on hybrid cloud and AI.
Robin Sloan reflects on the evolving nature of online stores, arguing against the prevailing trend of mimicking large marketplaces like Amazon. He champions the idea of smaller, more curated shops that prioritize a unique browsing experience and foster a direct connection with customers. These "shopkeepers" should embrace the web's potential for individual expression and build digital spaces that reflect their own tastes and passions, rather than striving for sterile efficiency. He encourages creators to consider the emotional impact of their shops, emphasizing the joy of discovery and the personal touch that distinguishes a truly memorable online retail experience.
HN commenters largely agreed with the author's premise that "shopkeeping" tasks, like managing infrastructure and deployments, distract from product development. Many shared their own experiences of getting bogged down in these operational details, echoing the frustration of context switching and the feeling of being a "glorified sysadmin." Some suggested various solutions, from embracing serverless platforms and managed services to hiring dedicated DevOps engineers or even outsourcing entirely. A particularly compelling comment thread discussed the "build vs. buy" dilemma, with some arguing that building custom solutions, while initially attractive, often leads to increased shopkeeper duties down the line. Others emphasized the importance of early investment in automation and tooling to minimize future maintenance overhead. A few countered that small teams and early-stage startups might not have the resources for these solutions and that some level of shopkeeping is inevitable.
The blog post "Do you not like money?" argues that many open-source maintainers undervalue their work and fail to seek appropriate compensation. It points out the discrepancy between the significant value open-source software provides to companies and the often negligible or non-existent financial support offered to the individuals creating and maintaining it. The author urges maintainers to recognize their worth and explore various avenues for monetization, such as accepting donations, offering commercial licenses, or finding sponsorships, emphasizing that getting paid for essential work is not greedy but rather a sustainable way to ensure the health and longevity of vital projects.
Hacker News users generally agreed with the premise of the article – that many open-source maintainers are leaving due to burnout and lack of compensation – and shared similar experiences. Several commenters pointed out the difficulty in monetizing open source projects, especially those used by hobbyists or small companies, and the pressure to keep projects free even when facing increasing maintenance burdens. Some discussed the efficacy of various monetization strategies like GitHub Sponsors and dual licensing, with mixed opinions on their success. Others highlighted the broader issue of valuing free labor and the unrealistic expectation that maintainers should dedicate their time without compensation. A few commenters offered practical advice for maintainers, such as setting clear boundaries and communicating expectations to users.
The blog post "Ask for no, don't ask for yes (2022)" argues that when seeking agreement or buy-in, framing requests negatively—asking for objections rather than approval—can be more effective. This "opt-out" approach lowers the barrier to engagement, making it easier for people to voice concerns they might otherwise keep to themselves. By explicitly inviting dissent, you gather valuable feedback, uncover hidden obstacles, and ultimately increase the likelihood of genuine agreement and successful implementation down the line. This proactive approach to identifying and addressing potential problems can lead to more robust solutions and stronger commitment from all involved parties.
Hacker News users discuss the nuances of the "ask for no" strategy. Several commenters point out that it's not about literally asking for "no," but rather framing the request in a way that makes it easy for someone to decline without feeling guilty or pressured. This approach is seen as particularly useful in sales, negotiations, and managing teams, fostering better relationships by respecting autonomy. Some argue it's a form of manipulation, while others defend it as a way to create psychological safety. The discussion also touches on cultural differences, noting that the directness of "asking for no" might not translate well in all environments. A few users share personal anecdotes of how this strategy has led to better outcomes, emphasizing the importance of sincerity and genuine respect for the other party's decision.
Postmake.io/revenue offers a simple calculator to help businesses quickly estimate their annual recurring revenue (ARR). Users input their number of customers, average revenue per customer (ARPU), and customer churn rate to calculate current ARR, ARR growth potential, and potential revenue loss due to churn. The tool aims to provide a straightforward way to understand these key metrics and their impact on overall revenue, facilitating better financial planning.
Hacker News users generally reacted positively to Postmake's revenue calculator. Several commenters praised its simplicity and ease of use, finding it a helpful tool for quick calculations. Some suggested potential improvements, like adding more sophisticated features for calculating recurring revenue or including churn rate. One commenter pointed out the importance of considering customer lifetime value (CLTV) alongside revenue. A few expressed skepticism about the long-term viability of relying on a third-party tool for such calculations, suggesting spreadsheets or custom-built solutions as alternatives. Overall, the comments reflected an appreciation for a simple, accessible tool while also highlighting the need for more robust solutions for complex revenue modeling.
Trellis is a YC-backed startup building a platform to simplify and automate legal processes for startups, initially focusing on Delaware incorporations. They aim to make legal tasks like forming a company, issuing stock options, and managing cap tables as easy as possible, reducing the time and cost typically associated with these processes. Trellis is currently hiring engineers and designers to join their team.
Commenters on Hacker News express skepticism about the value proposition of Trellis, questioning whether automating social media for local businesses is truly a significant pain point. Some argue that the cost likely outweighs the benefits for small businesses, especially given existing free or low-cost scheduling tools. Others point out the difficulty in creating engaging, authentic social media content automatically, suggesting that genuine interaction is more effective than automated posts. The limited customization options within Trellis are also criticized. A few commenters offer alternative solutions like Buffer or Hootsuite, implying that Trellis doesn't offer enough differentiation to justify its existence. Finally, several commenters note the potential for abuse and spam if the platform isn't carefully managed.
Summary of Comments ( 56 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43727727
HN commenters are skeptical of IBM's rationale for the return-to-office mandate, viewing it as a cost-cutting measure disguised as a customer-centric strategy. Several suggest that IBM is struggling to compete in the cloud market and is using RTO as a way to subtly reduce headcount through attrition. The connection between location and sales performance is questioned, with some pointing out that remote work hasn't hindered sales at other tech companies. The "DEI purge" aspect is also discussed, with speculation that it's a further cost-cutting tactic or a way to eliminate dissenting voices. Some commenters with IBM experience corroborate a decline in company culture and express concern about the future of the company. Others see this as a sign of IBM's outdated thinking and predict further decline.
The Hacker News comments section for the article "IBM orders US sales to locate near customers, RTO for cloud staff, DEI purge" contains a lively discussion with varying perspectives on IBM's new policies.
Several commenters express skepticism about the effectiveness of forcing sales staff back to offices near clients. They argue that in today's digital age, relationships are often built and maintained remotely, and physical proximity isn't as crucial as it once was. Some suggest this move might be a cost-cutting measure disguised as a customer-centric strategy, pointing to the potential for reduced office space and associated expenses. Others speculate that this could be a precursor to further layoffs, making it easier to manage and dismiss employees in a centralized location.
There's a strong current of cynicism regarding the stated rationale behind the return-to-office mandate. Commenters question whether IBM truly believes this will improve client relationships or if it's simply a way to exert more control over employees. Some highlight the potential negative impact on employee morale and work-life balance, particularly for those with established remote work routines. The discussion touches on the broader trend of companies struggling to adapt to the changing dynamics of the modern workplace and clinging to outdated management practices.
The DEI purge mentioned in the title also draws significant attention. Some commenters express concern about the potential for discrimination and the negative impact on diversity and inclusion efforts within IBM. Others are skeptical of the information, calling for more evidence to support the claim of a DEI purge. There's a general sense of unease about the potential implications of such a move, with some commenters suggesting it could damage IBM's reputation and make it less attractive to prospective employees.
A few commenters offer a more nuanced perspective, suggesting that the effectiveness of these policies will depend on how they are implemented. They argue that if done thoughtfully, with consideration for employee needs and client relationships, a return-to-office strategy could potentially be beneficial. However, they also acknowledge the risks involved and the potential for negative consequences if the transition isn't managed carefully.
Finally, some commenters draw parallels between IBM's current actions and its past struggles, suggesting that the company is repeating past mistakes and failing to adapt to the evolving business landscape. There's a general sentiment of disappointment and concern about the future of IBM, with some commenters expressing doubt about the company's ability to compete effectively in the modern tech industry.