Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The "sudden shock" approach is a risk mitigation. You have to ask yourself though, what risk were they mitigating?

There's no good answer to that question I can come up with that should make you want to stay at that company.



There's a lot of companies with IP that can be extracted or systems that can be sabotaged by a bitter employee. There's also the extreme cases of someone who knows they are being fired who can do a shooting/arson/some other extreme scenario.

I'm not saying I agree with the shock approach but there are definitely some generic risks that I don't think paint a bad picture of the company by their existence.


As a company, we entrust our employees with a lot of agency and access to our systems, networks and data. We do not spy on our employees nor have intrusive systems to prevent them from seeing/copying internal IP.

Therefore, while these operating procedures foster an agreeable environment for our collaborators to thrive and do actual things without too much segmentation, it makes it painful when a hard decision results in people getting suddenly both very angry against the company, and very capable to inflict damage upon it.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: