Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- It's such a bad time to be laid off right now. The competition is ridiculous. I have to compete with like 100k world class employees. Best wishes cloudflare former employees. I hope some of you make new companies and hire other geeks who are on their butts. A lot of us at other companies got the boot with no severance or early stock vestings. It could be worse!
- My read of this:
Their AI costs have increased 600% but this hasn't translated into actual revenue. Also they are probably projecting AI costs to keep growing. They've done the math and at some point it is going to affect their bottom line.
Reducing or limiting AI usage would be inconceivable given Cloudflare itself has invested on AI and is selling AI services. Instead they've opted for reducing about 20% of their head count.
by pier25 - Nah, even insane token costs don't come close to the costs of labor.
Most likely this is just 'AI-washing' - dressing a layoff for economic reasons (such as propping up their shrinking margins) as something more palatable to investors (AI).
by minimaltom - I don't think so. I think this is a common narrative in Hackernews when layoff news are shared. All the people I talk to in the industry positively confirm a boost in productivity. Its contribution to actual revenue could lag but it is present and confirmed by many.
- > Cloudflare expects second-quarter revenue of $664 million to $665 million,
obviously $2.5e9ish/yr is substantial in absolute terms ... but that's it? They intermediate half the internet and only capture $7m/day?
by kristjansson - Oh less than Atlassian. Suprised.by dnnddidiej
- Revenue is not profit. They "capture" much less than $7m/day.by baobabKoodaa
- I use Cloudflare for a lot of my side projects. It's a pleasure to use, and I manage to stay under the free tier. It does feel like they should be bigger in the cloud space, but I imagine the major players get a lot of revenue from VMs, which is a space Cloudflare has avoided.by patwolf
- I think about investing in Cloudflare but that P/E ratio scares me off every time.by argee
- They are in a great position to generate a lot of value without rising prices, they haven't realized it yet because what they have to do is pretty boring.by is_true
- Businesses tend to choose them because they're cheaper than alternatives.by mmarian
- These all follow a same pattern now:
Vague overtones on AI savings without any hard evidence that’s happening, while ignoring obvious evidence that the company over-hired and is now underperforming relative to what would be needed to justify all that headcount.
Nobody believes these narratives at this point and CEOs would garner a lot more respect if they just simply said
“I screwed up, we hired too many people and fell short of performance targets. I own that. This resets us back on track.”
by cmiles8 - That would require the CEOs to admit they messed up.
- I know it's probably automatic because of the similar titles, but hitting the bottom of the layoff announcement only to be recommended that article about hiring 1,111 interns in 2026 is a reaaal bad lookby davidcelis
- What is an intern in this context? When I hear "intern" I think of a summer internship. Are there other types for software developers?by farfatched
- Kind of makes me wonder if the "more than 1,100 employees globally" actually means "1,111" employees. Talk about committing to the bitby SebRollen
- There was an recent article on X with an interesting take - it could be that companies are doing layoffs not because AI is making them more productive but because it hasn't. Their costs have gone up paying for expensive AI but haven't seen any revenue benefits to offset it.
Article https://x.com/championswimmer/status/2051807284691612099
- I wouldn't argue that it doesn't give any benefits. However, it's not worth the current cost unless you already own RTX PRO 6000 to run any reasonable LLM. I'm using Claude Free and I'm happy with what I get, especially for the cost of $0.
I'm eagerly waiting for the prices to come down so I can upgrade my PC to AM5 and run Gemma 4.
by szmarczak - They're laying off the people who can't produce a minimum of 2x with AI, and keeping the maximalists with no life outside of work barely keeping up with the 100k LOC a week they're shipping to prod.
Suits have an idea of what the New Model Coder should be, and it's not people who don't burn through 100,000,000 tokens a week.
by bantunes - They are laying people off because the cost of financing have gone up. The risk free rate is now almost 5%. For equity financing you'd need to show revenue growth models that allows repayment at that rate plus equity risk premium (which is quite large for new growth companies).
So the CFO makes a model that allows for this and for sufficient ROI they need less people to be more productive. This mechanically forces them to lay people off.
Of course laying people off might actually not improve productivity, but they need this to have chance.
by luke5441 - This is no that far fetched... I don't think it's that common that a customer sits on the fence and says "If only company X had Y on their feature list I'll be a paying customer". So the speed at which the company now runs through its roadmap does not equate to new customers joining.by harel
- Personally, I think AI is just a convenient scapegoat for these mass layoffs. Also, these kinds of announcements contribute to sustaining the AI hype which all tech investors benefit from. And investors looove hearing about mass layoffs, stock goes up every time without fail.by thrance
- Rings true because now teams end up building a lot of things that may or may not have alignment to customer/business needs.
The slow part has always been figuring out exactly what the customer/business actually needs, not the coding. Now teams are throwing money at tokens without solving the "who's buying this?" part appropriately and end up just building excess.
All judgement seems to have gone out the window.
- This genuinely wouldn't surprise me, and I need to go back to looking at balance sheets to see if I can sus out the validity of that narrative. As AI subsidization ends prematurely and costs skyrocket, we should expect to see those costs reflected in the operation statements of major customers.
Since I had Coinbase up for review already, I decided to peek there first for any sort of correlation. In 2023, their "Technology and Development" line item shows $1.32bn going out, and by 2025 it'd ballooned to $1.67bn. This is despite headcount actually contracting by almost a thousand people between those two statements, which would normally mean a smaller technology spend since a lot of corporate software is seat-based nowadays. This suggests that yeah, actually AI spend is creating a heavier drag on the balance sheets and it's being offset with layoffs since the "job replacement" narrative is strong. That said, I'd need to check dozens' more balance sheets to draw any sort of industry-wide conclusion.
by stego-tech - I'm going to start calling these "Canary" moments.
Assuming we take everything at face value for these sorts of cuts, it creates the following scenario:
A company finds itself with surplus labor capacity due to the efficiencies in AI while also posting substantial profit or revenue growth. The company could downsize the workforce to capitalize on short-term efficiencies and increase margins, though this will come at the cost of long-term reputational harm due to posted profits/health as well as burning out staff who must do the same (or increasingly, more) work with less headcount, leading to attrition when the market shifts in their favor. Alternatively, it could leverage this surplus labor for a period of moonshot R&D or paying down technical/process debts while they have the capacity and the profit to pay for it, which harms short-term share price relative to their competitors slashing jobs, while improving the company's capabilities in the marketplace in the long-run, potentially through mastery of these AI tools or the creation of new product lines.
The fact so many orgs opt for immediate greed over long-term growth really is its own canary that leadership and governance both has failed the marshmallow test.
by stego-tech - This was kind of my read as well. We are increasing our AI usage but not in a way that meaningfully affects our ability to deliver on our product roadmap, so the solution is to cut opex on people so we can devote more to compute. The last bit is obviously speculation but it doesn’t feel like a far leap.by enahs-sf
- > The fact so many orgs opt for immediate greed over long-term growth really is its own canary that leadership and governance both has failed the marshmallow test.
Why do you think it's greed? The company's stock is down and they just missed expectations on their last earnings report (unheard of in big tech in the last 2 years).
It seems more like a traditional layoff scenario
- cloudflare vibecoded a wordpress clone (emdash), they have no idea where to allocate engineers to make new products.by brazukadev
- Excess labor would only translate to increased revenue and new products if these companies had a product vision to begin with. But they don't, so people get sacked.by rozap
- If using AI had a "substantial profit or revenue growth" wouldn't it make more sense to hire more people so they can use more AI and increase revenue?by pier25