Pros: Amazing culture. There are so many clubs for extra-curricular activities to join. The office is spacious, quiet, bright, and full of snacks and drinks. Co-workers are super kind and the smartest I have worked with.

Cons: Some parts of the code are unnecessarily complicated. But nothing a refactor cannot fix.

Pros: Great perks, smart people, fast-paced.

Cons: Red tape, given the size of the company.

Pros: Company name. Successful success. Interesting engineer culture, salary, stock options, breakfast and lunch, nice location, smiley people, smart everything (almost). Code quality in most cases is decent. Very open company culture; you know all details about the company's progress, what is happening, what should be improved, and so on. A lot of opportunities to learn and have fun.

Cons: Rapid company growth affects staff quality sometimes. Some managers play strange games and change rules on the fly. The pace is very fast; in half of the teams, you can forget about drinking coffee with colleagues – you don't have time for that. Cross-team communication issues are constant. An asynchronous culture doesn't work; you may wait for answers forever. To get an answer, you need to escalate, and for some reason, your manager won't do it even if you ask them, so you have to do it yourself. People say you may be asked to shut up and stop highlighting problems on the company level. Expectations from your code are completely different from the codebase quality (which is sometimes dirty and hacky) and are often unclear. Different teams follow their own architecture and code styles, so passing a pull request review may be a kraken hell. The code monorepo adds to this; it's often impossible to avoid conflicts in PRs, and it's difficult to push your changes (GitHub locks/outages). Declared values and approaches are not always the truth.