[taurath]

This reminds me of the meme of Margaret Thatcher: "And There is No Alternative" - a way to justify the policies she desired to implement and attempt to preempt any other view.

We're supposed to believe Jack is a victim of circumstance. He hired all those people, and now he has no choice but to fire them - he wasn't clairvoyant to the future when he hired all those people, or else he'd known he would have had to fire them. But now since he is clairvoyant to the future, he knows he must fire them.

We are all as childrens playthings right now.

[raincole]

> since he is clairvoyant to the future

AI software development is the present, not the future. You don't need to be a clairvoyant to see AI replaced (some) developers.

[skywhopper]

Nah, if AI were truly revolutionary, those developers would all be twice as productive. So why would you fire them?

[lr4444lr]

I dislike Jack going back several years, but I think in this instance he's admitting that he's taking responsibility between weighing the risk of doing this vs. not doing this. Maybe morale will tank anyway and the company will hold on, but be out-innovated by competitors that invested in growth. There are future outcomes that could prove he made the wrong call, and I any time layoffs are announced, there is a tacit mea culpa about past over-hiring.

[taurath]

> admitting that he's taking responsibility

Its funny how for him, he is enriched by this option as the stock price rises, and its couched in words like responsibility. I was taught when I failed at something that responsibility meant making amends to the people wronged. His reputation taking a hit doesn't come even close to the loss of 4000 people's livelihoods - he will not lose one of his presumably many houses.

> tacit mea culpa

This is the opposite of a mea culpa, this is saying there is no choice and the decision is inevitable, and he is only allowed (by the very framework he constructed) to do it fast or slow.

[NicuCalcea]

It's easy to take responsibility when all you have to do is say "I'm taking responsibility". Or, in his case, "i'm taking responsibility".

[Lammy]

It reads as hypocritical because he frames it as himself making a sacrifice when what he's really taking responsibility for is choosing the outcome that makes himself the most money.

He owns 1 million Class A shares and 79.7%(!!!) of Block's Class B shares: https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001512673/0cb664c...

[poszlem]

Insert Michael Scott shouting "I AM DECLARING BANKRUPTCY" meme. Change that to "I AM TAKING RESPONSIBILITY".

[wiseowise]

> but I think in this instance he's admitting that he's taking responsibility

What kind of responsibility is he taking, exactly? Has he stepped down? How much money has he lost when stock rose 23%?