[animalgonzales]

not just IBM, but the link to the microsoft layoffs is kind of mind blowing: http://techrights.org/2020/08/02/microsoft-layoffs-secrecy/

>“Microsoft rarely, if ever, allows anyone working there to reach 55 and have their pension become vested.”

>“Microsoft was twice as likely to lay you off if you were over 40.”

>“Cortana is an analytics and telemetry app that data mines people while pretending to be a digital assistant,”

[gesticulator]

What pension? I don’t think that’s a common US benefit. https://careers.microsoft.com/us/en/usbenefits

[zxcvbn4038]

Pensions used to be common in the US, IBM is from that era, but if you entered the workforce in the late 70s or early 80s then you probably missed that boat although the US stock market has benefited enormously since that time from all that money being put into securities backed retirement funds.

Financial services companies play the same game - bonuses get paid first couple months of the year so around Christmas they cut as many people as they can. Real jerk move but not as bad as working someplace thirty years and then losing your retirement three months before.

[floren]

I think many companies have moved from pensions to 401k over the last couple decades, but people who came into the company during the pension regime typically retain their pensions. Someone who is approaching 55 could well have a legacy pension.

[tibbydudeza]

401K I think is what we consider to be retirement funding.

[tssva]

Microsoft 401K matches vest immediately which leads me to think they may be an untrustworthy source of information.

[chrisseaton]

It says in your own link - 401k, which is a type of pension.

[function_seven]

Eh, technically I suppose.

When people refer to a "pension", they're usually talking about a defined benefit plan that requires little or no funding from the employee's paycheck. The amount of money you get at retirement is determined upfront, and based on things like years of service and average wages over some prescribed time period.

[wmf]

401ks don't have vesting though. At worst the match might be in December so people who are laid off mid-year lose half a year of matching.

[hinkley]

I had employer match with a 3 year vesting period at one place. I've never had anyone else do more than 12 months, and not everyone did that. The matching is for the paycheck you just paid me for work I already did. Why is it tied to the end of the year? As an employee retention hook it's a lousy idea. It's too small, and lacks all of the dopamine of watching a stock price seesaw up and down, wondering what it'll be worth when you can finally spend it.

[toomuchtodo]

Some do (employer contributions).

https://www.google.com/search?q=401k+vesting

[triceratops]

> 401k, which is a type of pension.

I was going to fight you on that, but you're right. TIL.

[jdsully]

Just an anecdote but anyone I saw leave around that age had been @ msft in the 90s and was wealthy enough to stop working long before. Most had pretty colourful BillG stories.

[throwaway5752]

"Cortana is an analytics and telemetry app that data mines people while pretending to be a digital assistant"

I am stunned that anyone here believes that any of the digital assistants are anything other than data ingestion and analysis vehicles.

[shajznnckfke]

Owning a web search box is valuable because you have customers coming to you making some request that can often be satisfied by the sale of a product or service. It’s the perfect advertising opportunity - much more effective than throwing ads at customers that aren’t actively looking for your product. That’s why Google makes the big bucks. It’s also why Goggle pays Apple billions for the privilege of answering queries in the iOS search box - so it can sell ads on that traffic. And this is why Google had to make Android, so they don’t have to pay for all mobile search usage. Also, Amazon is now making billions selling ads on the Amazon product search traffic. There are other uses for the data from search intent, but none of it generates cash like directly selling ads on those searches.

Now apply this context to the voice assistant market. If computer interactions shift from the web to voice, the digital assistant is the new search box. Being the company who creates the leading digital assistant means you’re in the position of getting paid billions for that traffic, rather than paying billions to get it.

In short, I think the idea that voice assistants must exist to obtain new kinds of data misses the point. The creators of these services are going to want to collect data to train models, to debug, etc. but it’s all a means to an end. The end is to put a troll toll in place to extract a chunk of the value of any economic activity organized through the voice assistant. Imagine if AT&T could collect a tax on the value of any service sold over the phone - that’s the kind of economic opportunity we are talking about here. There’s no need to search for other hidden motivations.

Of course, other entities like governments would actually like the ability to listen to all your conversations, so they are going to try to get ahold of this data too.

[JoeAltmaier]

Hey IBM is famous for cannibalizing their pension plan and letting people go months before payouts. Nothing new here.

[thisisnico]

Couldn't you get employment lawyers involved here?

[JoeAltmaier]

Lawyers, ha - when IBM did it (years ago) there was an investigation by Congress! But of course the big corporation was found blameless and within their rights.

[marcinzm]

>"Microsoft rarely, if ever, allows anyone working there to reach 55 and have their pension become vested."

Don't pensions usually vest within 5/10 years of working for a company (possibly in tiers) rather than when reaching age 55? I'd assume anyone who has been at MS long enough to be eligible for a pension (which was probably last offered in the 90s or earlier) would have vested decades ago. You simply can't draw upon your pension until you reach 55 but you lose nothing. Makes me question the whole article to be honest.