top | item 37900651

Stack Overflow is laying off another 28%

189 points| sprynr | 2 years ago |theverge.com

224 comments

order
[+] bryanlarsen|2 years ago|reply
Am I the only one that still finds SO to be quite useful? If I paste an error message into Google, it's still quite likely that the SO answer is the best one. And if it doesn't, I contribute an answer if/when I eventually find it because I still think I get more out of SO than I put in. I've received 21 necromancer badges doing that.
[+] shippintoboston|2 years ago|reply
It sounds harsh but I have no sympathy for the company or its community.

The people running that site turned it into such a hostile and toxic place, to the point they probably pushed a lot of people out of engineering.

Just completely condescending and rude jannies who were taking out their anger from being bullied in high school on unsuspecting beginners.

They’re getting what they deserve and I’m savoring every second of their downfall.

[+] busterarm|2 years ago|reply
Way back in 2014 or whatever it was I was really questioning the decision Fog Creek made to spin out Trello and Stack Overflow. It seemed to only benefit investors and I wondered how the companies could diversify their income streams with such fixed-niche products. At the time having such an opinion was very opposite of mainstream.

Even though Trello was acquired, I feel like Fog Creek the company and all of its products have suffered the worst fates possible from this decision.

For years the place seemed like an idea factory where people made great products and now it's basically irrelevant.

[+] ozr|2 years ago|reply
> Way back in 2014 or whatever it was I was really questioning the decision Fog Creek made to spin out Trello and Stack Overflow. It seemed to only benefit investors and I wondered how the companies could diversify their income streams with such fixed-niche products.

I was at Fog Creek (FC) while some of these decisions were made. There are a few missing pieces here that may help it make more sense.

The model was for FC to act as an incubator and fund other projects on the backs of FogBugz and Kiln. I'm more familiar with Trello, but with SO I'm sure the idea was the same: when you take VC, you are committing to a very specific model: burn cash on getting as large as possible.

The goal with Fog Creek was to _not do that_. So, rather than having FC take funding, Trello was spun out and raised as it's own entity.

FC employees received equity (in lieu of profit sharing) in these products.

The last product to come out of FC was the result of a few competing teams working on different projects. Glitch (nee Hyperdev) was.. not a great idea, with not a great team on it.

A leadership change shortly after the focus on Glitch led to (more-or-less) the complete collapse and acquihire of it by Fastly.

> Even though Trello was acquired, I feel like Fog Creek the company and all of its products have suffered the worst fates possible from this decision.

I guess it depends on your measure. FC employees made money. I regret what FC was turned into at the end.

[+] bhouston|2 years ago|reply
I disagree. StackOverflow grew to be many times the size of Fog Creek software. It was highly successful for a time.

You can not anticipate back then that AI would train on its Q&A and then provide the same service but fully integrated into IDEs. StackOverflow is being destroyed by Copilot and ChatGPT.

[+] jf22|2 years ago|reply
I'm not surprised. These days, I use SO a lot less often. Github issues, first party documentation, Discords, and Copilot are much better ways to get help.
[+] jasonjmcghee|2 years ago|reply
Anecdotally, every single time I’ve put effort into answering someone’s question, I got shot down by mods for various reasons despite (generally) being the only answer.

Quickly stopped contributing.

[+] kalleboo|2 years ago|reply
Even when there aren’t better sources I’ve found that the SO results are just all outdated and don’t cover any newer stuff. Like they’ve lost all their authors or at least they’re not being indexed by Google.
[+] JAlexoid|2 years ago|reply
SO is under serious threat from Reddit.

Look at your Google results, that are now presenting Reddit much more prominently than a few years ago.

[+] latchkey|2 years ago|reply
What I'd love to see is ChatGPT trained on GH issues/prs for a project and then use that to summarize things into something that looks like SO output.
[+] huytersd|2 years ago|reply
And chatGPT, I rarely need stack overflow anymore
[+] maldev|2 years ago|reply
I'm a boomer, how do I find Discords of people coding?
[+] ncann|2 years ago|reply
The biggest problem with SO is that it is self-conflicting in its mission. It wants high-quality answers, it wants to avoid duplicates, it wants to be wiki-like or even something that can replace official docs/man page. All those are good and noble goals, but you cannot have that and at the same time be novice-user friendly. Wikipedia has the same issue to a certain extent, but SO is much worse because it's a Q&A site, and yet because of the above goals it in effect prevents novices from asking questions because of duplicate, because they don't know what to ask (since they are novice), etc. If they want to be truly useful to question askers, perhaps there should be some spin off part of SO where people can ask question freely to their heart's content but somehow doesn't affect the main site's quality...
[+] passion__desire|2 years ago|reply
Why can't Stackoverflow create queues for questions?

E.g. beginners will help novices

Mid developers will help beginners

It's like that meme where top people help people below them come up

[+] IshKebab|2 years ago|reply
I agree. It can be a Q&A site where you ask a question and get an answer, or it can be an FAQ style reference wiki where all the questions and answers are perfect and people edit any answer. It can't be both, but it seems like they just can't decide which it should be.
[+] _the_inflator|2 years ago|reply
I side with you. On the other hand, there seems to be no business case left. You mentioned Wikipedia. I think that WP is highly profitable and even in the times of ChatGPT still is. And does not need such a high staff count.
[+] makingstuffs|2 years ago|reply
The way the redundancies were carried out were very disrespectful. People got invited to a meeting and essentially told "You'll lose access in about 30 minutes" -- from a close source who was laid off after literally receiving feedback that they were the most efficient in their department a couple days prior.
[+] willsmith72|2 years ago|reply
Beats the infamous twitter layoffs.

Sadly being "the most efficient in their department" doesn't always mean anything in layoffs. Whole departments and teams come and go, and salaries are also a concern (e.g. 20 year vet vs 5 year mid level with half the salary)

[+] ddtaylor|2 years ago|reply
How do you mess up where your product value is massively derived by unpaid volunteers?
[+] jarym|2 years ago|reply
Many ways, for instance you could ask Reddit for advice :-)
[+] bastardoperator|2 years ago|reply
I blame the unpaid volunteers to some extent. Sometimes they're overly rude, not always, but we've all seen it. You never have that problem with AI. You can ask all the questions you want and it will at least try to answer them.
[+] notsurenymore|2 years ago|reply
I was under the impression that they were trying to shift their value into selling that enterprise version.
[+] wredue|2 years ago|reply
“Stack overflow did not elaborate”

A year after a major hiring push? Guessing it’s the “save money by ridding ourselves of expertise” workflow:

1) hire a bunch of fresh blood who are willing to work long hours for no money for some reason

2) get them trained up

3) lay off the expensive senior people

4) lol ceo big bonus

[+] ram4jesus|2 years ago|reply
Good. Lay off everyone. Only reddit beats SO in terms of being made to feel inadequate, stupid, etc. when asking others for help on technical issues.

SO made their bed. Enjoy the snark, mistreatment, and power trips while it lasts. There are definitely gentler and better communities out there.

[+] corethree|2 years ago|reply
Grow some skin. Other then the snark it's a good resource.

I agree that the snark shouldn't be there but stack overflow is a good resource for lurkers and people who don't care and aren't so hurt by online mistreatment. It's just randos on the internet.

[+] matkoniecz|2 years ago|reply
It is quite ironic to snark while complaining about snark.
[+] owenversteeg|2 years ago|reply
It feels crazy to say this, but I find StackOverflow useless in 2023. It's crazy because ten years ago or even six years ago StackOverflow was everything. There were all the jokes that you couldn't even code without it or that StackOverflow being down would halt all programmers worldwide or whatever and they were for a large part actually true. If you tried to set up a new library or framework or whatever you would eventually run into an issue that would just take way too much time to figure out by yourself and you'd find the solution on StackOverflow in minutes (or ask a question yourself and often get a good answer.) Sure, it was a bit of a hostile community but most of the time if you phrased your question well you'd get a good answer that would solve your problem. You could even use it exclusively - restrict your searches to site:stackoverflow.com and you'd be fine. I found many solutions on StackOverflow that were absolutely not anywhere else on the web.

Today, I use a combination of Github issues, documentation and ChatGPT/Copilot - and it's way more powerful than StackOverflow, it's not even close.

One underappreciated part is that the rate of change of programming has significantly increased. Two months time today brings more change in our world than a whole year in the 2000s. Not even just AI stuff but also the frequency and magnitude of change in frameworks, best practices, services, APIs... I once learned things from paper books, now by the time you've written and published one it's already outdated. Keeping a massive resource like StackOverflow up to date in 2014 or so required a similarly massive effort, but with today's rate of change it's crazy.

I hope they can turn it around but I fear it's already dead.

[+] bdcravens|2 years ago|reply
You are probably correct, but that perspective can be skewed by becoming a better developer and learning more about your language's documentation and how to research.
[+] msie|2 years ago|reply
Did anyone ever interview those harsh SO moderators to see what's their problem?
[+] miohtama|2 years ago|reply
StackOverflow peaked in 2014, and has been in decline ever since. This is not related to the recent AI boom, although it may accelerate the decline.
[+] alternatex|2 years ago|reply
As someone doing full-stack PHP in 2014 I'm not sure about that. SO was filled with bad advice for PHP and JavaScript. It was so bad you could use it as a guidebook for writing outdated insecure code.
[+] pornel|2 years ago|reply
It's such a shame they've closed their job board. It was the only decent developer-centric job site. Having a CV connected to SO profile was one place where the Internet Points were actually worth something.
[+] VirusNewbie|2 years ago|reply
SO has languished so much, it’s really sad. There is a definite need here, and yet they seem happy to provide the same service they did 10 years ago while people migrate to LLMs and copilot and GH search and the like.
[+] BobbyJo|2 years ago|reply
Right? They were perfectly positioned to profit from the rise of LLMs, and somehow missed the boat (and continue to do so).
[+] corethree|2 years ago|reply
The irony is that for LLMs to continue to exist and stay relevant stackoverflow needs to be used and still exist.

If everyone migrates to LLMs then the training data no longer gets updated. The current crop of LLMs will get less and less relevant as things change.

[+] ajsnigrutin|2 years ago|reply
Sir, you work as a sales representative, we have your employee records here... oh wait, you've been marked as duplicate, there's a guy doing purchasing already employed, you've been deleted!
[+] sprynr|2 years ago|reply
After 10% back in May, another round is coming through at 28% today.
[+] gnicholas|2 years ago|reply
It's unclear if today is 28% or if that's the whole year. TFA says:

> Stack Overflow has laid off 28 percent of its staff over a year after doubling its employee base in a massive hiring push.

and

> Coding help forum Stack Overflow is laying off 28 percent of its staff as it struggles toward profitability.

The linked letter from the CEO says:

> This year we took many steps to spend less. Changes have been pursued through the lens of minimizing impact to the lives of Stackers. Unfortunately, those changes were not enough and we have made the extremely difficult decision to reduce the company’s headcount by approximately 28%.

[+] mupuff1234|2 years ago|reply
What I don't understand is why the board never calls for a significant paycut for the CEO alongside layoffs.
[+] bigstrat2003|2 years ago|reply
The same reason the board never does anything to punish CEOs, even when they run the company into the ground. It's a good old boys network where the people on the board are themselves an executive somewhere else, and they want their own boards to take care of them.
[+] ge96|2 years ago|reply
If SO indeed does go down as people seem to suggest. At least those copy/mirror sites will be useful now (sad smile).

I'm still pro SO over chatGPT

[+] smsm42|2 years ago|reply
I can't help but wonder why did they have a massive hiring push recently? I don't remember any huge functional upgrades, the site is pretty much how I remember it being for years. Why double the staff? What were they trying to do? Did they just convert from engineering org to a massive sales org with engineering on the background?