Pros: Mediocre culture. Mundane tasks (in a tolerable manner). Learning occasionally. Mentally stagnant. Comparable compensation (base salary + bonus + stocks). Competitors may offer better value.

Cons: The company's core values have devolved into a mockery, akin to the hollow promises of "Playing As A Team" and stack ranking. Accountability is a one-way street, conveniently bypassing upper management's lapses while micromanaging and scapegoating lower-level employees for the slightest setbacks. The recent transition from aggressive hiring to abrupt layoffs reeks of incompetence and hints at deeper, more insidious motives that the company refuses to acknowledge. Over the past few months, the executives' rhetoric has taken on a thinly veiled tone of passive-aggressive manipulation, attempting to deflect blame onto external factors while ignoring their own mismanagement and corruption. Toxic positivity runs rampant, a facade maintained by middle managers who blindly celebrate each reorganization as a triumph, regardless of the havoc it wreaks on morale and stability. Career advancement and personal well-being are hostage to the whims of inept and morally bankrupt superiors. Talented individuals are left to languish in an environment rife with favoritism, cronyism, and unchecked abuse of power, with no avenue for recourse or resolution against the pervasive culture of incompetence and corruption.

Pros: Good compensation, the team has good culture, and you can work on interesting problems.

Cons: The performance review process is tedious, and the general overhead of feature delivery is now the developer's responsibility.

Pros: Payment is the only good part.

Cons: 1. Metric-obsessed performance system leading to unhealthy bottom elimination. 2. Corrosive culture with increasingly “Meta-like” middle management. 3. Detached leadership focused more on pleasing the board than empowering engineers.