| ▲ | simonw 8 hours ago |
| I don't like how that's in the Deno post but gets no mention in the Cloudflare post. Seems like a pretty important detail! |
|
| ▲ | rancar2 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I think it’s covered appropriately for the audiences. The two posts are for different audiences and purposes. The Deno post by Ryan is for the Deno audience, which is mention at the top of his writing on the Cloudflare post that is for a broader audience of what this means for the Cloudflare audience:
“For more on what's happening to the Deno runtime and our various efforts, see my post on the Deno blog.” FWIW both Ryan and Kenton are very transparent in person, in public, and online over their professional careers. They will and do openly change their minds based on new information and opportunities as time goes along. Both are now founders of open source projects acquired by Cloudflare for the technical architecture talents seeing a future that they would like to build. |
| |
| ▲ | baobabKoodaa 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | There's no need to excuse this behavior. People who write announcements like this are dishonest to their core. |
|
|
| ▲ | elcritch 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Definitely negative karma points for Cloudflare. |
| |
| ▲ | sysguest 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | well I just don't get it -- why? unless cloudflare's CEO is a friend of cloudflare people, so just want to financially them bail out... ...why acquire and kill? cloudflare can have more outreach and reputation by keeping deno alive | | |
| ▲ | swiftcoder 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > why? unless cloudflare's CEO is a friend of cloudflare people, so just want to financially them bail out...why acquire and kill? Aquihiring is a time-tested strategy to build out a team. The Deno folks likely have a bunch of experience that Cloudflare is well placed to make use of | | |
| ▲ | moistoreos 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Aquihiring also requires the personnel hired to... actually stay with the company.... Unless you dangle HEFTY stock options with incremental maturity dates, nothing is else is keeping them from leaving. | | |
| ▲ | swiftcoder 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Unless you dangle HEFTY stock options with incremental maturity dates That is indeed how this whole thing works. I used to work with several folks who were kicking around FAANG for 4 years till their acquisition stock fully vested When you consider how much time/money it takes to hire an experienced engineer, and how quickly they are liable to jump to the competition, acquiring an existing team of experienced engineers and tying them with the golden handcuffs is not a bad deal | | |
| ▲ | sysguest 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > acquiring an existing team of experienced engineers and tying them with the golden handcuffs is not a bad deal well... why not tie who's already inside the company (who you actually know about) instead of an external people (who you DON't know about)? it's much difficult to get info about some external person, and most info is about external reputation ('the looks') though... that's the reason job-ping-pongs work: someone outside looks better than someone inside, because of your lack of info |
|
| |
| ▲ | ptaffs 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | If the talent wanted to work at Cloudflair, they'd apply there. Being acquired is a loss of agency and the project you care about is shut down. Several public research papers say retention is hard. | | |
| ▲ | zem 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | that just means they might not be actively looking to join cloudflare but are willing to do it if the price is right. nothing wrong with that, it's how employment works for the most part. likewise retention in these cases is typically solved via golden handcuffs, another "the price is right" thing. | |
| ▲ | WorldMaker 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Which also leads to considerable questions about if the thing being shut down in the acquirehire was the real purpose and any momentum of the team itself moving to new projects a bonus. |
|
| |
| ▲ | saghm an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I assume the logic is something like this: - We want to do more work on our runtime and need people to do it - Those developers for that company over are there working on another runtime - Buying that company allows them to come work for us without any potential issues from investors in that other company |
|
|
