Last time I used Snapchat was in 2016 to send nudes. Pictures with a timer... You could see who took a screenshot... That was fun. But it only lasted for a summer, maybe 4 months... Then people in my friends group moved on to Instagram when they copied the "Stories" feature. Instagram did a better job at implementing it.
I had no idea people still use Snapchat to this day... I never hear about it. Crazy
Cuz you aged out bro lol it's very popular among teens and college students. They exchange snap versus numbers cuz in their words it's safer than giving a real number
Snap have had big layoffs pre AI as well. Simple truth is they are struggling for both market share and profitability. (I mean who still uses Snapchat?)
Pretty incredible that an app like snap needs 5000+ employees to start with. And without continual growth (which they didn't get) they were going to have to lay off eventually
"Pretty incredible that an app like snap needs 5000+ employees to start with."
Exactly. You gotta wonder how an app like Uber has national clones in every developing country, and they all work just as well with like 1% of the capital.
They don’t. Like with twitter after Elon, they can operate with something like 10% of the original staff. But when you are worth billions and interest rates are low, it’s relatively cheap to hire 1000 people for extra jobs. Things like office administrator, public relations, marketing, etc. At my job they got rid of OAs and while they weren’t business critical, it made a big difference for morale and job satisfaction. Now all the things like event planning and office organization are all half ass.
Capitalism -= cut down expenses and maximise profit.
you take 10 workers. Lay of 6 or 7 of them. and tell that 3 of them now do same work as what was done by 10 before.
can't do?? Lay off and hire cheaper labour ( immigrant). Can;t find? Look for solution to offshore task/work elsewhere. Or look way to automote tasks, to streamline work and need for having larger staff
And where AI get in this equation?? somewhere in middle.
The bottom line, it does not matter if AI or not, companies always look way to cut down expenses to maximise profit.
So instead 10 workers write happy birthday lettes. Now company use printer to do same thing..
And all complain/blame AI.. :)
Lets be real.. blame AI for cost increase and companies layoff for sake to cut down expenses. Thats same as guy would blame gold fish why he keep drunk every afternoon..
why are the companies who are supposedly doing layoffs due to efficiency, all the most shittiest companies whose business models were stagnant and shrinking?
Are we really taking Snap’s PR at face value? They’ve never been profitable, are under pressure from activist investors to slash headcount and adopt ai, and boom, they cut headcount and cite AI. I don’t question whether they’ve cut engineering and now prodice 65% of new code with ai. But this is fundamentally a cost restructuring framed as ai adoption, more than ai adoption leading an engineering revolution. I’ll wait to see their actual performance before taking too many lessons from this move.
This is the right skepticism to apply. "Cost restructuring framed as AI adoption" is probably closer to the truth for most of these announcements than the press releases suggest.
The 65% AI-generated code stat is real but it doesn't tell you whether cutting those engineers was necessary or just convenient cover. Both things can be true simultaneously — AI is genuinely changing engineering productivity AND companies are using it as justification for cuts they wanted to make anyway.
The actual test is 18 months from now. Does Snap ship faster and better? Or does technical debt and institutional knowledge loss slow them down? That's when we'll know if this was genuine transformation or expensive PR.
How many times are layoffs like this going to happen before Reddit stops being sceptical that AI is coming for their jobs?
Every single time a company lays off workers due to AI, there is invariably some person in the comments saying that the company is lying, and in fact, they’re just experiencing hard times. What would support this? Tech is getting more investment than it ever has in its entire history. If a tech company is saying that it’s laying people off due to AI there’s absolutely no reason to my mind to not believe that, unless the company itself is selling the AI solution that it claims is replacing its workers.
“Experiencing hard times…”. Snap has never been profitable, they are carrying a ton of debt competing against much bigger rivals, and they have massive tech debt to overcome. They have an activist investor pressuring them to restructure, and to downsize via AI, so that’s what they are saying they’re doing. If you haven’t worked in the tech industry long enough to recognize those signals, or long enough not to treat any press release with a great amount of skepticism, no other amount of evidence is going to convince you.
I have no argument against the idea that the ai movement is going to massively disrupt jobs. Not my point. It will. But that’s mostly because investors and boards are pounding the table demanding it, because they are petrified of losing momentum to the competition. That does not mean they know what they’re doing, or that magical ai replacement will unfold. My read, after 35 years in this space, is that the wave of investment is leading the way, in the hope/belief that the technology will pay off, but in reality they have no clue. I don’t think we’re getting to AGI by scaling LLMs, and that there will be an inevitable reckoning when it takes longer to figure out how to successfully integrate ai than the hype is promising. So no, I’m not saying ai won’t take jobs, it will, but it’s going to be a whole lot messier and take a whole lot longer to pan out than promised. I don’t think for a second Snap is leading an engineering revolution; they are responding to massive market pressures and putting the best possible spin on it.
35 years in the space carries real weight here. The "messier and longer than promised" prediction is historically accurate for every major tech shift — the internet, mobile, cloud all followed that curve. The hype always outruns the reality by 3-5 years then reality catches up.
The investor pressure framing is probably the most honest read on Snap specifically. AI disruption and financial restructuring aren't mutually exclusive — both can be true simultaneously.
The investment point is the strongest counter-argument to the "they're just lying" crowd. Hard to argue AI isn't genuinely changing engineering when the capex numbers are this large and real products are shipping faster. The skepticism is healthy but at some point the pattern becomes undeniable.
mostly agree with your take, but I think the “65% of code = fewer engineers” narrative gets oversimplified
in practice, AI shifts the work more than it removes it. less time writing boilerplate, more time reviewing, debugging, integrating, and making decisions. a lot of teams actually hit new bottlenecks (architecture, product thinking, coordination)
so yeah, some headcount reduction happens, especially at the junior level, but the bigger change is what being an engineer means
the people who adapt to that layer (judgment, systems thinking, working with AI) will be fine, the rest will feel the pressure
this feels like the start of a broader shift, not a one-off 👍
This feels like the start of a broader shift, not a one-off.
You’re right it’s not about replacing entire roles, it’s about amplifying output. People who can work with AI (prompting, reviewing, improving) will outpace those who don’t. Same pattern we’ve seen with every major tool shift early adopters get leverage, others get squeezed.
"Early adopters get leverage, others get squeezed" — that's the pattern every time. The window to be an early adopter on AI literacy is still open but it's closing faster than most people realize.
The prompting + reviewing + improving skillset is essentially the new technical literacy. Same way knowing Excel became table stakes in the 90s.
Feels like the early stages of a broader shift, not an isolated case.
AI isn’t removing jobs entirely, it’s raising the bar fewer people doing more output. The ones who can guide, review, and integrate AI will have a big advantage.
Same pattern as past tech shifts, just faster this time. Adapting early matters a lot here.
"Same pattern, just faster" is the key variable. Every major tech shift followed this curve — the difference is the compression. What took a decade with the internet is taking 2-3 years with AI. That's why adapting early matters more this time than it did before.
That's the cost nobody puts in the press release. Burnout from reviewing code you didn't write and don't fully trust is a real and underreported problem. Vigilance fatigue is exhausting in a way that creative coding never was.
How exactly have AI-driven layoffs been happening "quietly"? That's not accurate, and instead what's happening is just that this post was quietly written by AI.
Fair pushback on "quietly" — you're right that high-profile announcements like Snap's aren't quiet at all. The quiet part is more about the gradual headcount freezes and non-backfilled roles across thousands of smaller companies that don't make headlines.
As for the post — written by a human who tests AI tools for a living. The irony of that accusation isn't lost on me though.
I'm calling this the canary in the coal mine this isn't an isolated case, but rather a sign of a broader shift in the industry. The writing's been on the wall for 18 months, and Snap's just the first to openly acknowledge it. We're moving from a world where AI augmentation was a luxury to one where it's a necessity, and companies are finally recognizing that the real value lies in the people who can effectively wield these tools.
I think it’s more of an acceleration than something totally new.
Companies have been trying to do more with smaller teams for years. AI just makes it easier to justify and actually execute.
What you said about “fewer engineers doing more” feels right. The bar shifts — less about writing everything from scratch, more about guiding, reviewing, and knowing what good output looks like.
I don’t think it’s isolated, but I also don’t think it’s as simple as “AI replaces jobs.” It changes what’s valuable, and people who adapt early tend to be the ones who stay relevant.
"Acceleration not something new" is probably the most accurate framing. The pressure to do more with less has always been there — AI just removed the technical barrier that was slowing it down.
"Knowing what good output looks like" is the skill that's genuinely new though. That wasn't a required competency before. Now it's the core of the job.
That's the part nobody's putting in the press release. "We're more efficient with AI" sounds great. "Our remaining engineers spend 8 hours a day reviewing code they didn't write and don't fully trust" is the reality nobody wants to talk about.
Burnout from AI review work is going to be a real problem in 2-3 years. It's cognitively exhausting in a different way than writing code — constant vigilance, high stakes, low creative satisfaction.
they're using it, but snap is learning what meta learned with whatsapp. tough to monetize a bunch of unprofitable users with a utilitarian messaging app. they got no traction with customers that would actually pay money. tough to convince an advertiser to buy ad space if your user base is 15 year olds with a $10 a week allowance https://www.reddit.com/search/?q=whatsapp+monetization+strategy&cId=a22bc608-b7c7-4948-a902-a6f989a3ccc9&iId=bea24d0e-9741-4803-9b40-f4ced158e463
They also don’t have the massive surveillance networks Google and meta have. Advertisers pay a premium there because there is so much after the impression sales conversion metrics they can give due to such a large surveillance network.
Around here, pretty much every time there’s news about an adult predator doing terrible things to an underage teen, they originally met on snapchat. So, yeah, some people are still using it..
Oh, you absolutely don’t. Advertisers don’t want to get associated with any of that. Well, aside from the gambling websites etc that have a stack of cash where their moral compass should be.
Users never asked for AI crap, snap burned a lot of money without listening to its users, delivering slop (AI Chat Bot etc) that no one asked for https://www.reddit.com/search/?q=Snapchat+AI+Chat+Bot+user+feedback&cId=e7631853-7794-48ed-b969-40b29f449bcc&iId=75e2a926-923a-4d35-a7d7-97da2b28f0c6
Now hardworking engineers need to pay the price instead of incompetent product managers who made the fumbles in the first place.
It’s evident from their explanation of the layoffs
I love how engineers blame product when we’re the ones going through layers of grime and bullshit to come up with things to build that UX and engineering need to agree to building
The "because of AI" thesis needs to be backed by receipts. On the one hand there are plenty of articles exclaiming how enterprises are not seeing the benefit to entail these layoffs. And then on the other we have these companies leading with this as a way to claim that "we are so productive, we don't need this many employees".
This would resonate if they didn't spend the past couple of years doing constant layoffs for other reasons.
It's difficult to buy this "because of AI" story now.
More like they don't have enough growth to justify the employees. They're officially a legacy company and not a hyper growth tech stock, price it as such.
TAX THEM. You want to claim 1000 layoffs for AI? Great, continue paying the taxes for those 1000 employees. This fake ass justification will go away quick.
I redownload the app for the first time in like 2 years recently and it's so full of ads and spam now. It's horrible. I will probably just delete it again soon. They probably should have sold it for those billions when they could have years ago.. 😅
We cover stories like this every day in our free newsletter. 500,000+ readers, 5 min read.
ReplyDeleteJoin for free
https://techpresso.co/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=cta_comment
All they had todo was pay us a liveable wage
ReplyDeleteOh America Sharp not the Foxconn company
ReplyDeleteSnap, not Sharp. The snapchat company
DeleteI'm rere fr
DeleteWow the company is still worth $10B.
ReplyDeleteLast time I used Snapchat was in 2016 to send nudes. Pictures with a timer... You could see who took a screenshot... That was fun. But it only lasted for a summer, maybe 4 months... Then people in my friends group moved on to Instagram when they copied the "Stories" feature. Instagram did a better job at implementing it.
ReplyDeleteI had no idea people still use Snapchat to this day... I never hear about it. Crazy
Cuz you aged out bro lol it's very popular among teens and college students. They exchange snap versus numbers cuz in their words it's safer than giving a real number
DeleteSnap have had big layoffs pre AI as well. Simple truth is they are struggling for both market share and profitability. (I mean who still uses Snapchat?)
ReplyDeletePretty incredible that an app like snap needs 5000+ employees to start with. And without continual growth (which they didn't get) they were going to have to lay off eventually
"Pretty incredible that an app like snap needs 5000+ employees to start with."
DeleteExactly. You gotta wonder how an app like Uber has national clones in every developing country, and they all work just as well with like 1% of the capital.
They don’t. Like with twitter after Elon, they can operate with something like 10% of the original staff. But when you are worth billions and interest rates are low, it’s relatively cheap to hire 1000 people for extra jobs. Things like office administrator, public relations, marketing, etc. At my job they got rid of OAs and while they weren’t business critical, it made a big difference for morale and job satisfaction. Now all the things like event planning and office organization are all half ass.
DeleteWhat the hell is an OA
DeleteOffice administrator?
DeleteExcuse me, what? They have 5k employees??!?!?!?!?!?!?!
DeleteExactly my thought what are 5k peeps doing at snapchat everyday??!
Delete“Who still uses Snapchat?”
DeleteNorway (70-75% of the country) is the highest per capita user base. Highest penetration rate.
I mean it can. That’s the future
ReplyDeleteUntil it’s not.
DeleteIt will always be the future. It’s here now, why would it stop?
DeleteHow is it the future if it’s here now ? That’s the present dude 😂
DeleteIt’ll continue into the future
DeleteCapitalism -= cut down expenses and maximise profit.
ReplyDeleteyou take 10 workers. Lay of 6 or 7 of them. and tell that 3 of them now do same work as what was done by 10 before.
can't do??
Lay off and hire cheaper labour ( immigrant).
Can;t find? Look for solution to offshore task/work elsewhere.
Or look way to automote tasks, to streamline work and need for having larger staff
And where AI get in this equation?? somewhere in middle.
The bottom line, it does not matter if AI or not, companies always look way to cut down expenses to maximise profit.
So instead 10 workers write happy birthday lettes. Now company use printer to do same thing..
And all complain/blame AI.. :)
Lets be real.. blame AI for cost increase and companies layoff for sake to cut down expenses. Thats same as guy would blame gold fish why he keep drunk every afternoon..
https://media4.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExdXQyNzRicmdjZmMzNTVkbnVldnRvcXVtN2NsYXliOXg2Y3FjcWRmeCZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/SzD4gF32YzTTUiINhn/giphy.gif
DeleteAre you new to the world? This is literally happening everywhere
ReplyDeleteexactly....... this is reality. It is called the Mike Rowe Phenomenon.
ReplyDeleteNothing to do with AI. It's another shit company that isn't profitable.
ReplyDeleteAnd claiming it's AI is a great way to make it seem like you're not doing lay offs cuz you're not making money
DeleteYears ago my friends dad said don’t go to law eventually ai will take away a lot of work
ReplyDeleteSure what's more fun than filing legal documents that are 30% hallucinations?
Deletewhy are the companies who are supposedly doing layoffs due to efficiency, all the most shittiest companies whose business models were stagnant and shrinking?
ReplyDeleteWill see how it is going in a couple of years. Curious to see if suddenly they have more bugs piling up.
ReplyDeletethe only way the title were actually true would be if you were incapable of critical thinking.
ReplyDeleteBut also....now I'm curious about what Snap actually does anymore
If only they laid off the recruiters and HR and optimised that process with the AI.
ReplyDeleteImagine still having your job because your boss has yet to realize that ChatGPT can do your job faster.
ReplyDeleteMore likely Claude code rather than ChatGPT.
ReplyDeleteI’m with you 100%, it’s well said and where those in jobs that could be affected by AI have to pivot to
ReplyDeleteAre we really taking Snap’s PR at face value? They’ve never been profitable, are under pressure from activist investors to slash headcount and adopt ai, and boom, they cut headcount and cite AI. I don’t question whether they’ve cut engineering and now prodice 65% of new code with ai. But this is fundamentally a cost restructuring framed as ai adoption, more than ai adoption leading an engineering revolution. I’ll wait to see their actual performance before taking too many lessons from this move.
ReplyDeleteThis is the right skepticism to apply. "Cost restructuring framed as AI adoption" is probably closer to the truth for most of these announcements than the press releases suggest.
DeleteThe 65% AI-generated code stat is real but it doesn't tell you whether cutting those engineers was necessary or just convenient cover. Both things can be true simultaneously — AI is genuinely changing engineering productivity AND companies are using it as justification for cuts they wanted to make anyway.
The actual test is 18 months from now. Does Snap ship faster and better? Or does technical debt and institutional knowledge loss slow them down? That's when we'll know if this was genuine transformation or expensive PR.
How many times are layoffs like this going to happen before Reddit stops being sceptical that AI is coming for their jobs?
DeleteEvery single time a company lays off workers due to AI, there is invariably some person in the comments saying that the company is lying, and in fact, they’re just experiencing hard times. What would support this? Tech is getting more investment than it ever has in its entire history. If a tech company is saying that it’s laying people off due to AI there’s absolutely no reason to my mind to not believe that, unless the company itself is selling the AI solution that it claims is replacing its workers.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
“Experiencing hard times…”. Snap has never been profitable, they are carrying a ton of debt competing against much bigger rivals, and they have massive tech debt to overcome. They have an activist investor pressuring them to restructure, and to downsize via AI, so that’s what they are saying they’re doing. If you haven’t worked in the tech industry long enough to recognize those signals, or long enough not to treat any press release with a great amount of skepticism, no other amount of evidence is going to convince you.
DeleteI have no argument against the idea that the ai movement is going to massively disrupt jobs. Not my point. It will. But that’s mostly because investors and boards are pounding the table demanding it, because they are petrified of losing momentum to the competition. That does not mean they know what they’re doing, or that magical ai replacement will unfold. My read, after 35 years in this space, is that the wave of investment is leading the way, in the hope/belief that the technology will pay off, but in reality they have no clue. I don’t think we’re getting to AGI by scaling LLMs, and that there will be an inevitable reckoning when it takes longer to figure out how to successfully integrate ai than the hype is promising. So no, I’m not saying ai won’t take jobs, it will, but it’s going to be a whole lot messier and take a whole lot longer to pan out than promised. I don’t think for a second Snap is leading an engineering revolution; they are responding to massive market pressures and putting the best possible spin on it.
Delete35 years in the space carries real weight here. The "messier and longer than promised" prediction is historically accurate for every major tech shift — the internet, mobile, cloud all followed that curve. The hype always outruns the reality by 3-5 years then reality catches up.
The investor pressure framing is probably the most honest read on Snap specifically. AI disruption and financial restructuring aren't mutually exclusive — both can be true simultaneously.
The investment point is the strongest counter-argument to the "they're just lying" crowd. Hard to argue AI isn't genuinely changing engineering when the capex numbers are this large and real products are shipping faster. The skepticism is healthy but at some point the pattern becomes undeniable.
Delete
ReplyDeletemostly agree with your take, but I think the “65% of code = fewer engineers” narrative gets oversimplified
in practice, AI shifts the work more than it removes it. less time writing boilerplate, more time reviewing, debugging, integrating, and making decisions. a lot of teams actually hit new bottlenecks (architecture, product thinking, coordination)
so yeah, some headcount reduction happens, especially at the junior level, but the bigger change is what being an engineer means
the people who adapt to that layer (judgment, systems thinking, working with AI) will be fine, the rest will feel the pressure
this feels like the start of a broader shift, not a one-off 👍
This feels like the start of a broader shift, not a one-off.
ReplyDeleteYou’re right it’s not about replacing entire roles, it’s about amplifying output. People who can work with AI (prompting, reviewing, improving) will outpace those who don’t. Same pattern we’ve seen with every major tool shift early adopters get leverage, others get squeezed.
Delete"Early adopters get leverage, others get squeezed" — that's the pattern every time. The window to be an early adopter on AI literacy is still open but it's closing faster than most people realize.
The prompting + reviewing + improving skillset is essentially the new technical literacy. Same way knowing Excel became table stakes in the 90s.
Feels like the early stages of a broader shift, not an isolated case.
ReplyDeleteAI isn’t removing jobs entirely, it’s raising the bar fewer people doing more output. The ones who can guide, review, and integrate AI will have a big advantage.
Same pattern as past tech shifts, just faster this time. Adapting early matters a lot here.
"Same pattern, just faster" is the key variable. Every major tech shift followed this curve — the difference is the compression. What took a decade with the internet is taking 2-3 years with AI. That's why adapting early matters more this time than it did before.
DeleteThe real danger isn't AI taking the job, but the burnout of engineers spending 8 hours a day reviewing code they didn't write and don't fully trust.
ReplyDeleteThat's the cost nobody puts in the press release. Burnout from reviewing code you didn't write and don't fully trust is a real and underreported problem. Vigilance fatigue is exhausting in a way that creative coding never was.
DeleteHow exactly have AI-driven layoffs been happening "quietly"? That's not accurate, and instead what's happening is just that this post was quietly written by AI.
ReplyDeleteFair pushback on "quietly" — you're right that high-profile announcements like Snap's aren't quiet at all. The quiet part is more about the gradual headcount freezes and non-backfilled roles across thousands of smaller companies that don't make headlines.
DeleteAs for the post — written by a human who tests AI tools for a living. The irony of that accusation isn't lost on me though.
Their code it’s going to be abysmal dog shit
ReplyDeleteI'm calling this the canary in the coal mine this isn't an isolated case, but rather a sign of a broader shift in the industry. The writing's been on the wall for 18 months, and Snap's just the first to openly acknowledge it. We're moving from a world where AI augmentation was a luxury to one where it's a necessity, and companies are finally recognizing that the real value lies in the people who can effectively wield these tools.
ReplyDeleteI think it’s more of an acceleration than something totally new.
ReplyDeleteCompanies have been trying to do more with smaller teams for years. AI just makes it easier to justify and actually execute.
What you said about “fewer engineers doing more” feels right. The bar shifts — less about writing everything from scratch, more about guiding, reviewing, and knowing what good output looks like.
I don’t think it’s isolated, but I also don’t think it’s as simple as “AI replaces jobs.” It changes what’s valuable, and people who adapt early tend to be the ones who stay relevant.
"Acceleration not something new" is probably the most accurate framing. The pressure to do more with less has always been there — AI just removed the technical barrier that was slowing it down.
Delete"Knowing what good output looks like" is the skill that's genuinely new though. That wasn't a required competency before. Now it's the core of the job.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThat's the part nobody's putting in the press release. "We're more efficient with AI" sounds great. "Our remaining engineers spend 8 hours a day reviewing code they didn't write and don't fully trust" is the reality nobody wants to talk about.
DeleteBurnout from AI review work is going to be a real problem in 2-3 years. It's cognitively exhausting in a different way than writing code — constant vigilance, high stakes, low creative satisfaction.
People aren't using the app.
ReplyDeletethey're using it, but snap is learning what meta learned with whatsapp. tough to monetize a bunch of unprofitable users with a utilitarian messaging app. they got no traction with customers that would actually pay money. tough to convince an advertiser to buy ad space if your user base is 15 year olds with a $10 a week allowance
Deletehttps://www.reddit.com/search/?q=whatsapp+monetization+strategy&cId=a22bc608-b7c7-4948-a902-a6f989a3ccc9&iId=bea24d0e-9741-4803-9b40-f4ced158e463
They also don’t have the massive surveillance networks Google and meta have. Advertisers pay a premium there because there is so much after the impression sales conversion metrics they can give due to such a large surveillance network.
DeleteYep. Much easier and looks much better to blame it on AI than the failing business
Deletehttps://www.reddit.com/search/?q=Snap+Inc+AI+layoffs&cId=7703e04b-c041-404e-ad33-676c32e94906&iId=05574dd9-88eb-4720-ae99-c3ae0044273e
I want a vengeful employee to release the data on how many ghost users they have. Pun intended
DeleteAround here, pretty much every time there’s news about an adult predator doing terrible things to an underage teen, they originally met on snapchat. So, yeah, some people are still using it..
DeleteOk... I don't see how you make money from this though.
DeleteOh, you absolutely don’t. Advertisers don’t want to get associated with any of that. Well, aside from the gambling websites etc that have a stack of cash where their moral compass should be.
Deleteyup. pretty much the child predator app at this point.
DeleteThat is AI’s fault. Given, it might be Snap itself pushing AI slop on people, but at least they’re blaming correctly.
DeleteIncidentally, Leadership continues to be flawless.
Their DAUs have been growing. Maybe your social circle is just aging out of the product
DeleteTheir DAU has been decreasing in NA. The net growth has been coming from regions that are not meaningfully contributing to rev ( eg: India)
DeleteLmao wait till they find out that the Indian demography is notoriously difficult to monetize
DeleteWouldn’t it be nice if there were rules for companies making false statements and being held accountable for it?
ReplyDeleteit’s not the AI, Its the executives
ReplyDeleteUsers never asked for AI crap, snap burned a lot of money without listening to its users, delivering slop (AI Chat Bot etc) that no one asked for https://www.reddit.com/search/?q=Snapchat+AI+Chat+Bot+user+feedback&cId=e7631853-7794-48ed-b969-40b29f449bcc&iId=75e2a926-923a-4d35-a7d7-97da2b28f0c6
Now hardworking engineers need to pay the price instead of incompetent product managers who made the fumbles in the first place.
It’s evident from their explanation of the layoffs
The latest pump and dump for VC it seems. Get in, offload the risk and get out with a sizeable chunk if you can.
DeleteAI is just a scapegoat here. The product is not good, millennials never adopted it nor did the boomers. It stayed niche Gen Z and never took off.
DeleteTikTok came in and took off long ago.
I love how engineers blame product when we’re the ones going through layers of grime and bullshit to come up with things to build that UX and engineering need to agree to building
DeleteNo.
DeleteIt's a bad business.
It's a Gen Z sexting app. You can't sell ads and your audience doesn't pay, stick around, or grow.
ReplyDeleteThe "because of AI" thesis needs to be backed by receipts. On the one hand there are plenty of articles exclaiming how enterprises are not seeing the benefit to entail these layoffs. And then on the other we have these companies leading with this as a way to claim that "we are so productive, we don't need this many employees".
This would resonate if they didn't spend the past couple of years doing constant layoffs for other reasons.
It's difficult to buy this "because of AI" story now.
I deleted my account over a year ago. I probably used the app for 20 hours in 10 years.
ReplyDeleteSnap is the AOL of Social Media.
ReplyDeleteMore like they don't have enough growth to justify the employees. They're officially a legacy company and not a hyper growth tech stock, price it as such.
ReplyDeleteTAX THEM. You want to claim 1000 layoffs for AI? Great, continue paying the taxes for those 1000 employees. This fake ass justification will go away quick.
ReplyDeleteyou want to tax an unprofitable company? companies would just move to a contractor only model or avoid hiring to avoid the extra penalty.
DeleteHow does that app even have 1,000 users to lay off?
ReplyDeleteMost likely 1000 Indian employees that spend their time making face filters
DeleteFall guy, meet AI. AI, meet fall guy.
ReplyDeleteLazy way of saying you aren’t a good enough leader to make a company people care to use.
ReplyDeletehe created a company that’s made him billions because so many people use it lmao.
DeleteI redownload the app for the first time in like 2 years recently and it's so full of ads and spam now. It's horrible. I will probably just delete it again soon. They probably should have sold it for those billions when they could have years ago.. 😅
ReplyDeleteI’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that nobody above or below a certain age range uses this app.
ReplyDeleteGFY
ReplyDeleteI guess social media bans for the young affect Snapchat disproportionately higher than other social media with a more age-diverse customer base.
ReplyDeletei honestly forgot snapchat exists it doesnt even register on my radar 😂
ReplyDeleteSnapchat? What’s that?
ReplyDeleteMan, does snap still exist? I thought they'd be gone by now already.
ReplyDeleteNo one uses Snapchat anymore bro, anyone who does is weird and cringe lmfaoooo
ReplyDeleteNEVER trust a white man with that haircut
ReplyDeleteOld news, they’ve never turned a profit. just a pervert app.
ReplyDeletelol they do anything with those ridiculous glasses yet ?
ReplyDeleteSo many solutions , almost no problems to solve lol