@catfeeder mastodon has a much larger community, so people that find their way through contribute here. It’s a one-way street though. You can’t contribute to mastodon from you threadiverse account (mbin/kbin community so small that it’s not worth the mention).

@inari I think it’s a masto-piefed federation issue. Here it is again https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2026/05/14/the-ai-layoff-bill-is-coming-due-and-ctos-are-going-to-pay-it-twice/

@Schal330 I guess it differs case by case, but generally in IT it is a well known fact that changing jobs is a faster way to get a pay rise. Combined with the fact that rehires happen in a context of urgency, I’d make a guess that people re-enter at a better rate. Of course that’s quite optimistic and supposes that employees are good at negotiating.

@iocase it does help developers ship faster… So much faster that attention slips away from what needs to be shipped… And the story develops as we speak.

>I am not anti-AI. I build and ship AI products every day. What I object to is the pattern where a CTO wins applause in Q1 for bold AI-driven headcount cuts, and then in Q4 is quietly rehiring those same roles through an offshore agency while attributing the reversal to “integration challenges.” That is not progress. That is a career arc dressed up as transformation. And it is costing shareholders, employees and customers at the same time.
@artificial_intel

>Here is what makes this worse than a normal bad tech bet. Most of these decisions were not made by people who understood the limits of the technology. Visier’s head of research, Andrea Derler, put the problem bluntly, noting that senior executives have not taken the time to understand what AI can and cannot do, according to PeopleMatters. IBM’s CEO survey confirmed it. 64% said the fear of falling behind drives them to invest in technologies before they understand the value.

@artificial_intel

@ekZepp @matdevdug “Instead it became the only place consistently posting trustworthy information I could actually access. This became personally relevant when Trump threatened to invade Greenland, which is the kind of sentence I never expected to type and yet here we are. It would be funny if I wasn’t a tiny bit concerned that my new home was going to get a CIA overnight regime change special in the middle of the night.”

@ekZepp @matdevdug “So in this complete breakdown of the press came in the Fediverse. It became the only reliable source of information I had. People posted links with a minimal amount of commentary, picking and choosing the best content from other social media networks. They’re not doing it to “build a brand” because that’s not a thing in the Fediverse. It’s too disjointed to be a place to build a newsletter subscription base.”

@ekZepp funny, I thought this is what Google search is nowadays:
“Threads was worthless because it’s the most boring social media website ever imagined. It’s a social media network designed by brands for brands, like if someone made a cable channel that was just advertisements and meta commentary about the advertisements you just saw. Billions of dollars at their disposal and Meta made a hot new social media network with the appeal of junk mail.” @matdevdug

@swlabr
What’s with this fascist language:
“What are you even doing here? How does boot taste?”
I’m gonna leave you to your own hate.

@swlabr heh, that’s a bit too much of generalisation for my personal taste. How many CEOs did you speak to in the last 5 years to make you so confident about their “state”?

Here’s one about “jumping ships”:
“world’s best-performing CEOs demonstrate remarkable longevity. They’ve held their jobs for an average of 15 years, more than twice the average tenure of an S&P 500 CEO”
https://hbr.org/2019/11/the-truth-about-ceo-tenure