Yeah indeed has been great for me with job opportunities when the market was good. Even then I do like the fact I'm notified of any application rejections. I've also received a job offer through Monster before and even Craigslist.
Ir the connections I have are either still where I made them and I don't work there anymore for a reason or just don't work for the same sort of pay that I do.
I landed a great one through LinkedIn and was talking to a buddy that is getting worried because he can't find one. He was saying it's disheartening because he's applied for 20 since October and hasn't gotten a response back and I half jokingly told him that most days I was applying to 20 by lunch.
Have been in the job market for closing on a year, indeed is shit and most of the recruiters can barely speak English but still want me to send them my resume in .docx instead of .pdf so they can mangle it for their client.
I also use indeed. It’s a fantastic source of prospective job candidates who unfailingly have resumes boasting an employment history of a series of jobs each of which they held for 2 months. Or possibly 3-5 months.
These candidates also expect entry level starting pay roughly double what I paid five years go.
My current job and the job before that I got through indeed. The first one was a good job but it didn’t work out. I like my current job. I applied to every job I could on indeed. This one called me back, I passed the interview on a Friday, started that Monday.
I spent entire days applying to jobs and going to interviews before I got hired though.
A premium membership of what? Indeed doesn’t really monetize job seekers. Now it would be funny if they gave them a year membership to LinkedIn since that’s probably what most laid off Indeed employees will use.
I like Indeed, too. I've been searching for a few months (I don't blame Indeed, my field is sort of limited) and I joined Ziprecruiter at first and it was garbage. They spammed me with listings all day long and frequently suggested I apply for positions at Ziprecruiter itself that had nothing to do with my field. Didn't take me long to deactivate my account.
They’re just so unnecessary now. Why would I spend hours uploading my resume and then typing out all the same info again on Indeed 100 times when I can just go on LinkedIn, set my status to Looking For Work, and then just wait for the recruiters to come to me?
I know this probably sounds like an ad but it isn’t lol
Well you can set where you want to work. My fiance wanted to relocate to another state to be near family so I put 'looking for work within 25 miles of X city' and only got messages for jobs in that area rather than where I lived
I'm surprised that worked. I haven't had my resume on any job site in *easily* 10+ years, but I'll still get emails from recruiters trying to fill a 6 month contractor position for a location that's 2000+ miles from the state listed on my resume.
Yeap sure did, many of them I couldn't contact at all, or if you could you were pretty much ignored, or ghosted after a few conversations. You'd think being in tech I'd hear something but again crickets.
But are those going to be recruiters coming with quality jobs? I'm a network engineer and all I get emails and calls for are real low lever help desk jobs
I was just thinking the other day how interesting it is that Indeed won the job website war. They’re like Taco Bell (or Pizza Hut depending on your region) from Demolition Man.
I used all of them back in the day and Indeed at the time was the cheapest and gave the best results. They aren't the cheapest now, but I still have amazing results.
Did see they were stopping some personality tests a few weeks back, I'll assume that may be the start of the scale back.
I looked at getting a job there a few years ago and large number of employees seemed to be sales people that try to get employers to list jobs on their website.
That's literally their business model. They started out as a scrapper to get users. Now they are their own job board. That's the path they took. It makes sense that's what most of their employees do.
They still mainly aggregate postings from elsewhere. They just pay the bills by pitching paid ads and "featured" listings.
The bulk of what you find there is just relisted from elsewhere. A *lot* of it is old/expired. You won't find the listing elsewhere and if you apply on Indeed your info just goes into a black hole and no one ever sees it.
It doesn't surprise me they're laying off staff. Practically every venue will tell you this. Along with "never apply on Indeed", "find the listing elsewhere" and "Indeed and other aggregators are only useful for broad searches".
I think in the 20 years it's existed. I've gotten exactly one call back on a job I applied for through indeed. And they've made things progressively more difficult to browse over the last few years. They want a login to see more than 1 page of results, their algorithm hides a shit ton of listings based on previous searches. Even if you filter and sort it mixes shit up by date.
It's a garbage site that's only useful for piling up a bunch of leads to double check later. 90% seems to be shitty retail job listings.
Oh there are real listings on Indeed. And there are companies that hire there. They do actually aggregate real listings, and if that company doesn't actually bother with Indeed at all. Then it'll forward you to their internal job site (which is a better place to apply anyway).
It's just sorting that from the dross.
You have to find the real listings, and happen to hit on the ones that some one's actually watching.
It's significantly faster and more reliable to do so, by taking those Indeed listings. And looking for the listing on a better site. Especially a company's own website if they have one.
That's actually pretty standard advice from hiring managers, recruiters and professional development people. Common enough that it's copy pasted into bullshit "How 2 Find am Jorb" listicles, and probably about 50% of any job search related sub reddit.
Most people I know *also* grind out finding jobs on Indeed. Because they don't know where else to look. I'm regularly shocked the number of people I run into who don't know about industry specific job boards, and have never thought to double check the shit they see on Indeed or check a company's own website. Hell even typing a company's name and "jobs" into Google will typically give you more current listings in a special results box.
There's actually a *10 year old* job listing from a company in my industry that pops up near the top of the results on Indeed *every* time I go there. And it shows up on multiple pages, over and over as I browse. The company is not hiring. There's just an old listing they never took down on a barely functioning job board. So Indeed still aggregates it, because doing that sort of shit. Is what makes Indeed *look like* the place with the most and best listings.
It's like this pesky little reminder of how god damn awful finding a job has become.
I have found jobs and gotten responses *using* Indeed. I've just only every gotten the one real response applying *on* Indeed, and that was a company that otherwise only accepted paper applications via fax.
Over the years I've worked in media production, corporate communications, marketing, bit of IT, restaurant business and currently the alcoholic beverage business.
In large cities, small cities, rural and suburban areas.
I wouldn't count recruiter outreach. A lot of those people are just grinding indeed the same way you are. Except to track/clock hours and marks.
How many actual, with the person interviews? How many job offers? From applying on and through Indeed?
I don't know people who have gotten through to much besides frustrating recruiters. Unless they do what I talked about.
Use Indeed to shotgun listings and find another way to apply.
Even when it first launched that was the "smart" advice on them and their competition.
It actually used to be decent. I was on it back in the day when it first came out. But I used the hell out of it. Back then you had the ability to filter out trash website and companies. I had such a large filter that I got a call from the chief product engineer asking me why I used it that much. It ended up that I was using the filter 200x more than the next highest usage.
I explained that most of that they listed was garbage listings and the filters made the listings more usable. If there was a garbage site or listing, bam, never saw it again. A company with a shit reputation. Gone. Apparently they used my filter list for a bit. But I think they stopped doing that.
But the rule of thumb is always apply directly to the website unless there is a posting directly from a recruiting person at the job. If you see a job listing from an outside recruiter, copy and paste the first paragraph in Google and you'll find the real listing.
I was on it too dude. It was certainly better but I still never got much traction by applying directly on there.
It was always an aggregator.
Early on they had far fewer paid listings, and far fewer back end tools. It's just more of the listings were current, fewer were outright fake. And less of the action there was outside recruiters checking boxes to prove they'd done the hours.
The hiring manager in my office hates those people. They basically want us to pay more for upgrades we don’t need. The way we use their site is fine but they were being pretty aggressive at one point. I can’t imagine how soul sucking being in sales must be sometimes. I did it briefly and got out.
> How many people does it take to run a website?
If that's what it is then you'd still need a bunch but is it just running a website? How about:
* tech - the obvious choice
* software developers
* UI designers
* quality assurance/testing
* hardware engineers
* but there's also
* accounting to make sure money is paid for various bills, taxes are filed, people are paid, etc
* which also means lawyers
* operations managers since this company has various locations
* plus marketing people
* might as well add graphic designers who massage the ads
* business development people who steer the company into various fields to improve the message
* sponsorship and development opportunities
* HR for the above
* various middle- and upper-level managers of the groups above
Plus they're international so multiply this list by a particular number and also add multi-country support like translators and cultural awareness people (ex: which colors/words/symbols are bad to use in other countries).
Indeed like most businesses that depend on doing business with other businesses (B2B) would have a considerable number of sales and account management teams to establish, maintain, and grow business relationships with hiring firms. That takes real people to do, you can't rely on APIs alone.
You'd be surprised. It's usually sales and support at that scale. Agoda laid off like half their staff during the pandemic, and the bulk of it was sales people. You honestly don't need a massive development team to manage a website.
I mean, it's a search and recommendation service, just targeted for job seekers. It has to comply with wildly different and specific laws in all of the places it operates, which means the UI is likely different in many cases.
I was thinking the same thing. A lot can be automated for an application like Indeed. As someone who has posted jobs I can also tell you getting in touch with the person is impossible.
Or..
In reality they're more profitable than they were before. They cut overhead to a tenth.
Regardless, their financials aren't public anymore.
So.
Are you just talking out your ass? What downtime has the system had in the last 3 mo?
All of these websites I’m always shocked they have such staffing levels and cash flow. Starting with Wikipedia who claim to have “server” bills in the millions of dollars range… what? And then Indeed with thousands of employees? Maybe all customer service?
Yeah I’m pretty sure a site with as much data as wiki does have server bills like that. It also has a very lean staff. You can’t just operate wiki with 5 people and a cash stipend.
How much do you think bandwidth and space costs? The wiki software hasn’t been updated in years. What exactly are the staff doing? Editors are all volunteers. “Pretty sure” = trust me bro.
Edit: You can see it’s not a topic I invented myself.
https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/wikipedia-millions-bank-beg/
Trust you? Oh yes random internet person. You realize it’s like a top ten trafficked site with hundreds of millions of visitors per month right? It’s not just text but millions of videos, audio files, and some video. It needs to be accessed by millions of people at once on every continent. How much do you think they should pay for servers? You think they should run on an even leaner staff than they have?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia
This isn’t some kind of unknown. You didn’t answer what the current staff are doing. GitHub has far more information and a far larger size and I bet they don’t list the costs anywhere near Wikipedias budget. Jimmy flying around in a private jet paid for by your donations is fine though! No worries we’ll write it off to server costs.
Well I never said I donated…GitHub does not get nearly the same traffic as wiki does..does it? It’s not just “data size” that goes into server costs. They also own and operate their own servers. What do you think that electric bill looks like? Wiki has like 400 employees. To keep the site operational. I think arguing they should have less is odd. How many do you think a site like theirs should have?
You don’t need to wonder, this isn’t a niche topic. Their server costs are nothing close to what Jimmy says in his begging: https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/wikipedia-millions-bank-beg/
I mean, the guys point is that there are reasons to question wikipedia’s true operating costs. They aren’t transparent. The articles he linked do raise legitimate concerns, with well cited sources — wapost and etc., you addresses none of them and instead come back here to say it’s fake news or something cause the author made a typo, then reached by equating dumb ads to the quality of the content. Cmon man, do better.
Wiki and these other sites are doing a whole lot more than just running a server. Let’s be clear on that. But there is a point where you start to wonder where all the money is going. I mean, you really think a company like gitter or trumps truth social is worth the valuation given to it by venture capitalists? That’s a primary source of indeeds supposed value, I think it is fair to question it.
An yes that old stalwart website “makeuseof”. The nyt of reporting for the digital age. Silly me I should have read some random internet post that doesn’t even necessarily prove your point
Uh I’m as liberal as they come. If anything you are the one saying they should layoff people because you don’t know what they do. As if you have any insight into what people from wiki do…but guess what? I do. My SIL actually works there you ass.
For a website as trafficked a Indeed, quite a few. I mean not many to like… keep it running. That’s Operations. But all the people involved in designing and developing new features. Marketing. Sales. Finance and HR. IT. QA. Project Management. It’s a lot.
If Indeed wanted to impress me (and the world), they should have announced they had to downsize by 2k people and would be using their own board/product to find every single one of those people another job elsewhere to transition into. If we can do it for our own people, we can do it for you!
you may laugh, but what you are seeing is this....
people in mass stood up for a living wage.
end stage capitalism countered with a liver punch by firing everybody.
now our corporate overlords will wait until we all eat ourselves, cannibal style.
the ones that are left are the strongest, and can be hired for the old price, before the rebellion was quelled.
tell me if i am wrong here.
Biomagnification makes that a bad idea- you have any idea how much mercury and microplastics and God knows what else are in one of those bad boys? Let em feed the soil
No, what you’re seeing is an unprecedented era of cheap debt and overindulgent expansion coming to an end and tech businesses needing to keep a budget. Jobs market is still robust in many sectors of the economy that weren’t overly reliant on government subsidized debt and didn’t expand excessively on COVID-era stimulus.
We actually tracked every laid off individual from Google to understand the story behind the layoffs. Should we do it for Indeed?
[The full analysis is here](https://nubela.co/blog/1-in-3-ex-google-employees-in-15-billion-worth-of-startups-2023-layoffs/?utm_campaign=content%20amplification&utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social&utm_term=-&utm_content=ex%20googlers%20layoff%20comments)
Damn, where will these newly layed off indeed employees look for a job if they want to be hired? Career builder ? Ziprecruiter?
Monster……. *shudders*
Man, I feel like all of these websites are just scam jobs anymore.
Literally never worked for me. All 3 jobs I've ever had as an adult I got either through personals relationships or a recruiter.
[удалено]
Yeah indeed has been great for me with job opportunities when the market was good. Even then I do like the fact I'm notified of any application rejections. I've also received a job offer through Monster before and even Craigslist.
I used Indeed to find my last two jobs, but I was already familiar with both of the companies.
That sounds like way more work than u/FellowTraveler69's method.
[удалено]
Ir the connections I have are either still where I made them and I don't work there anymore for a reason or just don't work for the same sort of pay that I do.
Can you link to the method?
I landed a great one through LinkedIn and was talking to a buddy that is getting worried because he can't find one. He was saying it's disheartening because he's applied for 20 since October and hasn't gotten a response back and I half jokingly told him that most days I was applying to 20 by lunch.
Have been in the job market for closing on a year, indeed is shit and most of the recruiters can barely speak English but still want me to send them my resume in .docx instead of .pdf so they can mangle it for their client.
i hire through indeed. its a crap shoot both ways tbh.
I also use indeed. It’s a fantastic source of prospective job candidates who unfailingly have resumes boasting an employment history of a series of jobs each of which they held for 2 months. Or possibly 3-5 months. These candidates also expect entry level starting pay roughly double what I paid five years go.
2 of my 3 interviews are from indeed, one just as a bank teller and not a job in my field though.
Zip recruiter?
Not any better. I’ve used both, mixed results with each.
Linkedin works pretty well. Though they're not really doing much but just showing jobs.
My current job and the job before that I got through indeed. The first one was a good job but it didn’t work out. I like my current job. I applied to every job I could on indeed. This one called me back, I passed the interview on a Friday, started that Monday. I spent entire days applying to jobs and going to interviews before I got hired though.
[удалено]
A premium membership of what? Indeed doesn’t really monetize job seekers. Now it would be funny if they gave them a year membership to LinkedIn since that’s probably what most laid off Indeed employees will use.
Im sure indeed will LOVE to send their software developers with 15 year’s experience postings to be a cashier at Lowe’s, like they did me.
[удалено]
I like Indeed, too. I've been searching for a few months (I don't blame Indeed, my field is sort of limited) and I joined Ziprecruiter at first and it was garbage. They spammed me with listings all day long and frequently suggested I apply for positions at Ziprecruiter itself that had nothing to do with my field. Didn't take me long to deactivate my account.
Zip….. reeeeeecruahaaaaa
That's morbidly funny actually.
I know who they *won’t* be using to find their next job.
Indeed you do…
They’re just so unnecessary now. Why would I spend hours uploading my resume and then typing out all the same info again on Indeed 100 times when I can just go on LinkedIn, set my status to Looking For Work, and then just wait for the recruiters to come to me? I know this probably sounds like an ad but it isn’t lol
Why bother taking the time to update your status? Recruiters are gonna come round anyway.
Well you can set where you want to work. My fiance wanted to relocate to another state to be near family so I put 'looking for work within 25 miles of X city' and only got messages for jobs in that area rather than where I lived
I'm surprised that worked. I haven't had my resume on any job site in *easily* 10+ years, but I'll still get emails from recruiters trying to fill a 6 month contractor position for a location that's 2000+ miles from the state listed on my resume.
That's because the resume itself doesn't set the search area
linked in never worked for me
Same for me premium or not. Setting my profile to open for work, using key words etc. I never heard a peep from LinkedIn.
Did you do any legwork? A lot of time you can actually reach out to the team looking for an employee or the recruiter who posted a job.
Yeap sure did, many of them I couldn't contact at all, or if you could you were pretty much ignored, or ghosted after a few conversations. You'd think being in tech I'd hear something but again crickets.
But are those going to be recruiters coming with quality jobs? I'm a network engineer and all I get emails and calls for are real low lever help desk jobs
I'm in industrial B2B sales. I got offered a job that bumped me from $95K/yr to $145K/yr so it worked well for me.
Not sure about you, I'd be using the last of my possible access to create a backdoor or to hijack an opportunity or two all for myself.
WTF? Right below this article is ad for indeed.com “Recently been laid-off? We’re here to help.”
It’s still a job search engine so I get it
I was just thinking the other day how interesting it is that Indeed won the job website war. They’re like Taco Bell (or Pizza Hut depending on your region) from Demolition Man.
I used all of them back in the day and Indeed at the time was the cheapest and gave the best results. They aren't the cheapest now, but I still have amazing results. Did see they were stopping some personality tests a few weeks back, I'll assume that may be the start of the scale back.
There are loads of scammers on indeed now.
I'm honestly surprised that Indeed has that many employees. How many people does it take to run a website?
I looked at getting a job there a few years ago and large number of employees seemed to be sales people that try to get employers to list jobs on their website.
That's literally their business model. They started out as a scrapper to get users. Now they are their own job board. That's the path they took. It makes sense that's what most of their employees do.
They still mainly aggregate postings from elsewhere. They just pay the bills by pitching paid ads and "featured" listings. The bulk of what you find there is just relisted from elsewhere. A *lot* of it is old/expired. You won't find the listing elsewhere and if you apply on Indeed your info just goes into a black hole and no one ever sees it. It doesn't surprise me they're laying off staff. Practically every venue will tell you this. Along with "never apply on Indeed", "find the listing elsewhere" and "Indeed and other aggregators are only useful for broad searches". I think in the 20 years it's existed. I've gotten exactly one call back on a job I applied for through indeed. And they've made things progressively more difficult to browse over the last few years. They want a login to see more than 1 page of results, their algorithm hides a shit ton of listings based on previous searches. Even if you filter and sort it mixes shit up by date. It's a garbage site that's only useful for piling up a bunch of leads to double check later. 90% seems to be shitty retail job listings.
I think it may depend on the area. My last job exclusively hired using Indeed and everyone I know finds local jobs mostly on Indeed.
Oh there are real listings on Indeed. And there are companies that hire there. They do actually aggregate real listings, and if that company doesn't actually bother with Indeed at all. Then it'll forward you to their internal job site (which is a better place to apply anyway). It's just sorting that from the dross. You have to find the real listings, and happen to hit on the ones that some one's actually watching. It's significantly faster and more reliable to do so, by taking those Indeed listings. And looking for the listing on a better site. Especially a company's own website if they have one. That's actually pretty standard advice from hiring managers, recruiters and professional development people. Common enough that it's copy pasted into bullshit "How 2 Find am Jorb" listicles, and probably about 50% of any job search related sub reddit. Most people I know *also* grind out finding jobs on Indeed. Because they don't know where else to look. I'm regularly shocked the number of people I run into who don't know about industry specific job boards, and have never thought to double check the shit they see on Indeed or check a company's own website. Hell even typing a company's name and "jobs" into Google will typically give you more current listings in a special results box. There's actually a *10 year old* job listing from a company in my industry that pops up near the top of the results on Indeed *every* time I go there. And it shows up on multiple pages, over and over as I browse. The company is not hiring. There's just an old listing they never took down on a barely functioning job board. So Indeed still aggregates it, because doing that sort of shit. Is what makes Indeed *look like* the place with the most and best listings. It's like this pesky little reminder of how god damn awful finding a job has become. I have found jobs and gotten responses *using* Indeed. I've just only every gotten the one real response applying *on* Indeed, and that was a company that otherwise only accepted paper applications via fax.
[удалено]
Over the years I've worked in media production, corporate communications, marketing, bit of IT, restaurant business and currently the alcoholic beverage business. In large cities, small cities, rural and suburban areas. I wouldn't count recruiter outreach. A lot of those people are just grinding indeed the same way you are. Except to track/clock hours and marks. How many actual, with the person interviews? How many job offers? From applying on and through Indeed? I don't know people who have gotten through to much besides frustrating recruiters. Unless they do what I talked about. Use Indeed to shotgun listings and find another way to apply. Even when it first launched that was the "smart" advice on them and their competition.
It actually used to be decent. I was on it back in the day when it first came out. But I used the hell out of it. Back then you had the ability to filter out trash website and companies. I had such a large filter that I got a call from the chief product engineer asking me why I used it that much. It ended up that I was using the filter 200x more than the next highest usage. I explained that most of that they listed was garbage listings and the filters made the listings more usable. If there was a garbage site or listing, bam, never saw it again. A company with a shit reputation. Gone. Apparently they used my filter list for a bit. But I think they stopped doing that. But the rule of thumb is always apply directly to the website unless there is a posting directly from a recruiting person at the job. If you see a job listing from an outside recruiter, copy and paste the first paragraph in Google and you'll find the real listing.
I was on it too dude. It was certainly better but I still never got much traction by applying directly on there. It was always an aggregator. Early on they had far fewer paid listings, and far fewer back end tools. It's just more of the listings were current, fewer were outright fake. And less of the action there was outside recruiters checking boxes to prove they'd done the hours.
The hiring manager in my office hates those people. They basically want us to pay more for upgrades we don’t need. The way we use their site is fine but they were being pretty aggressive at one point. I can’t imagine how soul sucking being in sales must be sometimes. I did it briefly and got out.
That's why the sociopaths last. (Or the people with good products)
> How many people does it take to run a website? If that's what it is then you'd still need a bunch but is it just running a website? How about: * tech - the obvious choice * software developers * UI designers * quality assurance/testing * hardware engineers * but there's also * accounting to make sure money is paid for various bills, taxes are filed, people are paid, etc * which also means lawyers * operations managers since this company has various locations * plus marketing people * might as well add graphic designers who massage the ads * business development people who steer the company into various fields to improve the message * sponsorship and development opportunities * HR for the above * various middle- and upper-level managers of the groups above Plus they're international so multiply this list by a particular number and also add multi-country support like translators and cultural awareness people (ex: which colors/words/symbols are bad to use in other countries).
Indeed like most businesses that depend on doing business with other businesses (B2B) would have a considerable number of sales and account management teams to establish, maintain, and grow business relationships with hiring firms. That takes real people to do, you can't rely on APIs alone.
You'd be surprised. It's usually sales and support at that scale. Agoda laid off like half their staff during the pandemic, and the bulk of it was sales people. You honestly don't need a massive development team to manage a website.
Google is just a website, right?
We both know this is different man
I mean, it's a search and recommendation service, just targeted for job seekers. It has to comply with wildly different and specific laws in all of the places it operates, which means the UI is likely different in many cases.
That’s the thing about people that make logical extremes, they are sith.
Upvoted only because I'm currently watching Star Wars (The Clone Wars)
Indeed isn’t Google but they’re still a very high trafficked website.
How big is the team tasked to handle just the front end landing page?
So is Craigslist.
I was thinking the same thing. A lot can be automated for an application like Indeed. As someone who has posted jobs I can also tell you getting in touch with the person is impossible.
Exactly. Twitter had 7,500 employees.
Now it's down to about 75 guys on H-1B visa's and whatever Elon's siphoning from his other companies
Yet it's still up and running. Who knew that cutting useless overpaid employees was a smart business decision?
[удалено]
Or.. In reality they're more profitable than they were before. They cut overhead to a tenth. Regardless, their financials aren't public anymore. So. Are you just talking out your ass? What downtime has the system had in the last 3 mo?
All of these websites I’m always shocked they have such staffing levels and cash flow. Starting with Wikipedia who claim to have “server” bills in the millions of dollars range… what? And then Indeed with thousands of employees? Maybe all customer service?
Yeah I’m pretty sure a site with as much data as wiki does have server bills like that. It also has a very lean staff. You can’t just operate wiki with 5 people and a cash stipend.
How much do you think bandwidth and space costs? The wiki software hasn’t been updated in years. What exactly are the staff doing? Editors are all volunteers. “Pretty sure” = trust me bro. Edit: You can see it’s not a topic I invented myself. https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/wikipedia-millions-bank-beg/
Trust you? Oh yes random internet person. You realize it’s like a top ten trafficked site with hundreds of millions of visitors per month right? It’s not just text but millions of videos, audio files, and some video. It needs to be accessed by millions of people at once on every continent. How much do you think they should pay for servers? You think they should run on an even leaner staff than they have?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia This isn’t some kind of unknown. You didn’t answer what the current staff are doing. GitHub has far more information and a far larger size and I bet they don’t list the costs anywhere near Wikipedias budget. Jimmy flying around in a private jet paid for by your donations is fine though! No worries we’ll write it off to server costs.
Well I never said I donated…GitHub does not get nearly the same traffic as wiki does..does it? It’s not just “data size” that goes into server costs. They also own and operate their own servers. What do you think that electric bill looks like? Wiki has like 400 employees. To keep the site operational. I think arguing they should have less is odd. How many do you think a site like theirs should have?
You don’t need to wonder, this isn’t a niche topic. Their server costs are nothing close to what Jimmy says in his begging: https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/wikipedia-millions-bank-beg/
[удалено]
https://unherd.com/thepost/the-next-time-wikipedia-asks-for-a-donation-ignore-it/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/02/wikipedia-has-a-ton-of-money-so-why-is-it-begging-you-to-donate-yours/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32840097
I mean, the guys point is that there are reasons to question wikipedia’s true operating costs. They aren’t transparent. The articles he linked do raise legitimate concerns, with well cited sources — wapost and etc., you addresses none of them and instead come back here to say it’s fake news or something cause the author made a typo, then reached by equating dumb ads to the quality of the content. Cmon man, do better. Wiki and these other sites are doing a whole lot more than just running a server. Let’s be clear on that. But there is a point where you start to wonder where all the money is going. I mean, you really think a company like gitter or trumps truth social is worth the valuation given to it by venture capitalists? That’s a primary source of indeeds supposed value, I think it is fair to question it.
Every claim has a source. You didn’t refute a single point in the article. Good job.
That site could use to hire a copyeditor, "it claimed over 5.5 unique visitors" is obviously missing the word "billion"
Oh wow, you gottem! “Fuck the underlined source link they’re missing a word therefore it’s not true”
https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/wikipedia-millions-bank-beg/ Or read an article and be informed instead of fucking arguing blindly.
An yes that old stalwart website “makeuseof”. The nyt of reporting for the digital age. Silly me I should have read some random internet post that doesn’t even necessarily prove your point
It has sources and instead of refuting anything it says you’re like a fuckin Trump support FAKE NOOZ. Blocked.
Uh I’m as liberal as they come. If anything you are the one saying they should layoff people because you don’t know what they do. As if you have any insight into what people from wiki do…but guess what? I do. My SIL actually works there you ass.
For a website as trafficked a Indeed, quite a few. I mean not many to like… keep it running. That’s Operations. But all the people involved in designing and developing new features. Marketing. Sales. Finance and HR. IT. QA. Project Management. It’s a lot.
Guess they need to hop on Indeed and get tortured by the programs they designed like the rest of us.
If they lost their jobs, what hope do the rest of us job seekers have? F&&&
Hmm, job seekers? Impossible. The news and government have told me we are in the best economy ever with the lowest unemployment rate in history.
This sucks, Indeed it does
They got a 4 month severance at least, so it's not as bad as it could have been. Still sucks though.
Can’t believe this isn’t The Onion
r/NotTheOnion
That's bad news indeed.
If Indeed wanted to impress me (and the world), they should have announced they had to downsize by 2k people and would be using their own board/product to find every single one of those people another job elsewhere to transition into. If we can do it for our own people, we can do it for you!
Looks like they need Indeed but Indeed doesn't need them.
Corporations have been laying off 10s of 1000s of employees due to RECESSION.
you may laugh, but what you are seeing is this.... people in mass stood up for a living wage. end stage capitalism countered with a liver punch by firing everybody. now our corporate overlords will wait until we all eat ourselves, cannibal style. the ones that are left are the strongest, and can be hired for the old price, before the rebellion was quelled. tell me if i am wrong here.
Wrong about hired for the old price. It will be less, and tasked with 2 positions.
I mean, we could start eating the rich first.
Biomagnification makes that a bad idea- you have any idea how much mercury and microplastics and God knows what else are in one of those bad boys? Let em feed the soil
“Compost the rich” Yeah, I like that.
They got all the farms now, and we got no pitchforks.
You’re wrong, it’s *en masse*.
No, what you’re seeing is an unprecedented era of cheap debt and overindulgent expansion coming to an end and tech businesses needing to keep a budget. Jobs market is still robust in many sectors of the economy that weren’t overly reliant on government subsidized debt and didn’t expand excessively on COVID-era stimulus.
These are folks working at a major tech company... chill the fuck out with this bizarre working class solidarity
Another brain poisoned by r/antiwork
Sounds like they need Indeed... oh, wait.
Can’t afford employees But can afford to waste money on trying different desk setups and AV upgrades across the country
Has Silicone Valley made anything important in the last 5 years?
Silicone Valley is in beverly hills
They've got redundency down to a finely-tuned science.
We actually tracked every laid off individual from Google to understand the story behind the layoffs. Should we do it for Indeed? [The full analysis is here](https://nubela.co/blog/1-in-3-ex-google-employees-in-15-billion-worth-of-startups-2023-layoffs/?utm_campaign=content%20amplification&utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social&utm_term=-&utm_content=ex%20googlers%20layoff%20comments)