Amazon CEO Andy Jassy warns remote workers: ‘It’s probably not going to work out for you’::Amazon CEO Andy Jassy told employees who defy his edict to return to the office three days a week that “it’s probably not going to work out for you.”

  • fakero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    1 year ago

    The brain drain is real. Wonder how long before this boomer policy hurts Andy’s precious shareholders.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is it? Would be nice if it’s the case but I imagine they have some numbers making them feel content with this policy.

      • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They think they’re trimming the fat, but in reality all they’re going to have left is gristle. There was a massive brain-drain during and after the layoff craze & project cancellation frenzy, and this is just going to lead to another wave. Andy’s just trying to coast with AWS running on the shoulders of people who simply can’t get hired anywhere else, or are just planning to be comfortable in their rut until they retire.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I mean it’s technically possible. AWS works. Generally maintaining a well working system requires a helluvalot less talent than building it anew. So you might be right. At the same time, they could be counting on new grads not knowing the company’s internal history so they could lure the top with high salaries when they decide they need to fill up the brain. Top grads armed with decent documentation and stale brain support can get to from zero to high competency in a few years. Also they might be bending the rules in parts of the company where they see strategic advantage to keeping talent.

          • BobKerman3999@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            AWS works sometimes. It’s a horrible hodgepodge of half baked stuff that doesn’t make sense. Source: I was fighting with it for two years. Now I’m in an even worse place with Azure. I’m pushing for moving everything in house.

              • sheogorath@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s good for developing PoC where you don’t need to pay much to get going. But when you’re taking on a production level load it’ll be better to start thinking about having an on premise setup. BUT, if you’re scaling up to the point where you need to have your own data center with all of its baggage, you’re better off rolling with one of the cloud providers.

            • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It’s quite possible. That said, I’ve done DevOps in a large, in-house DC with OpenStack, another one with VMware, then Azure, AWS, as well as bare metal at mom-and-pop DCs. AWS has been the best of the bunch by far.

            • theragu40@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is way more true than people realize.

              AWS sounds amazing on paper and their marketing material is great. Once you get into the nitty gritty though things start to feel like everything is held together with string and chewing gum. Documentation is sparse, and often outright wrong. New services are implemented constantly but there is no one to talk to who can support them or knows anything about them. Features they claim are there simply…aren’t.

              It does indeed work, but it’s a frustrating service to use and it’s extremely expensive to boot.

            • Feyr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yup. The core aws services are solid and fucking impressive, but the only reason most of their value added stuff gets any customers is because they use the core stuff.theye mostly horrible and expensive.

              Souce:worked for aws

            • Chocrates@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Aws was amazing at first and the consistent UI makes it look clean, but it is a confusing mess imo.

              Azure came in and fixed some of the pain points but it is just as confusing and frustrating now. I think outsourcing the cloud still makes sense in a lot of cases but they really are nothing special these days.
              Serverless was a good step forward but had the same issues now that it is up and running.
              There are a ton of small competitors now that can have the same availability so the big players can gouge you less I think too.

          • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, you’ve got the idea. Oh, and don’t forget about offshoring entire product lines.

    • mwguy@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Amazon has a big moat. They could probably fuck up for another 20 years and make a profit.