Cloudflare CEO: How I Decided Which Employees to Replace with AI?

marsbitОпубликовано 2026-05-22Обновлено 2026-05-22

Введение

Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince explains his decision to lay off over 20% of the company's staff, despite record-high growth and revenue. He frames this as a necessary adaptation to AI-driven business transformation, drawing on Peter Drucker's framework of three corporate roles: builders, sellers, and measurers. Prince argues AI primarily targets "measurers"—roles in auditing, finance, legal, compliance, middle management, and operations. AI systems can perform these measuring and oversight tasks with superior objectivity, efficiency, and scale, enabling continuous auditing and faster financial processes. This allows for consolidation and automation in these areas. Conversely, "builders" (e.g., engineers) and "sellers" are seen as secure and even more valuable. AI amplifies their productivity, and human relationships remain crucial for sales. The layoffs were not merely cost-cutting but a reallocation of resources to hire more builders and sellers. Prince highlights the company's record number of open roles and its highly AI-native intern class, who are primarily builders and sellers. He concludes that AI will reshape every company by enhancing measurement capabilities, allowing human talent to focus on creating and capturing value through building and selling.

Author: Matthew Prince

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Two weeks ago, I laid off more than 20% of our company's employees. I did not make this decision because Cloudflare was in trouble. On the contrary, our revenue growth has hit a record high, cash flow is ample, and the number of new customers we've acquired globally has reached unprecedented levels. I made this decision because the business environment is undergoing a dramatic shift; and to win in the future, Cloudflare must adapt.

Searching through American business history, you might not find a second publicly traded company like ours that, while maintaining over 30% high growth, also laid off 20% of its staff. However, what we did over the past two weeks will likely become the industry norm within the next year. This is a story about how artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping everything, but unfortunately, many executives and commentators misunderstand how exactly AI will disrupt business rules and who will be impacted.

To figure this out, I reopened an old book published in 1954 (this book is 20 years older than me): Peter Drucker's "The Practice of Management." In this book, Drucker deeply analyzes the various roles within an enterprise. I categorize these roles into three types: builders, sellers, and measurers.

As the names suggest, "builders" are responsible for creating products, and "sellers" are responsible for selling them. "Measurers" encompass everything else: internal audit, revenue recognition (an accounting term referring to the process of determining when a sale can be officially recorded as income on the company's books according to accounting standards), finance, legal, compliance, middle management, daily operations, and so on, to name a few.

Contrary to the pessimistic predictions of some analysts, the jobs of "builders" are very secure and aren't going anywhere. If an engineer on my team could increase their productivity tenfold with the help of AI, I would definitely hire all such talent I could find in the market.

"Sellers" also have no need to worry about being replaced. Because those who control budgets are still living humans, they prefer to buy from people who are willing to take the time to listen to their needs, can build trust, and can provide support when problems arise.

"Measurers" are also crucial to the enterprise, but they are fundamentally different from the first two. Top "measurers" are often worth their weight in gold. They work tirelessly behind the scenes, not seeking the flowers and applause of front-of-house roles (like servers in a restaurant who directly face customers, referring to positions that easily attract external attention and praise); ideally, they can also maintain an objective perspective independent of other company departments. Drucker pointed out that measuring business performance is important, but customers are ultimately won through "building" and "selling." A truly top-tier company should invest the most resources in these two core functions.

The wave of AI is not targeting "builders" or "sellers"; it is truly aimed at "measurers." Tireless, absolutely independent, extremely efficient, and always online—today's AI systems, when measuring and examining a company, achieve a level of objective detail and precision that even the most outstanding employees of the past could not match.

Take Cloudflare, for example. In the past, our internal audit team could only sample a few business risk points for review each quarter. Now, we are fully implementing a new system that conducts continuous, 24/7 audits on every single business risk point. We are closing our books (closing our books, referring to the regular process where a company settles its accounts and issues financial statements at month-end or year-end) faster. We are making fewer mistakes, and even when occasional errors occur, they can be identified more accurately and reliably. As CEO, I now have unprecedented, excellent tools that not only allow me to precisely measure the company's overall operational status but also help me accurately identify rising stars within the team.

The vast majority of the employees we laid off last week were "measurers." We streamlined middle management across the company because, with AI assistance, managers can now oversee more direct reports while still conducting accurate performance evaluations and providing effective guidance. We consolidated scattered operational roles into a unified business support group, leveraging AI to fill gaps when specific expertise is needed. We also significantly reduced the marketing team—like most companies, it was once a heavy concentration area for "measurers." Furthermore, within the entire finance team, we found ample opportunities to consolidate roles and automate tasks.

However, the fundamental purpose of this layoff was absolutely not simply to reduce headcount. In fact, the number of open positions we are currently hiring for has reached a record high. I expect our total employee count to continue growing in the coming years. Precisely because the work of "measuring" no longer requires as much manpower, we can now free up resources to heavily invest in the talent that truly drives company growth.

This summer, we received nearly one million resumes competing for 1,111 paid internship positions. The interns we finally hired are not only exceptionally outstanding but also naturally AI-native (AI-native, referring to the new generation who grew up in the AI era, naturally adapting to and viewing AI as a mindset and fundamental tool). Without exception, they are all "builders" or "sellers," and we expect the vast majority of them to ultimately receive full-time offers.

They are the new generation of the future, who will invent new ways to power our business. Thanks to AI, we can now more precisely measure their contributions and accurately identify those future leaders. AI is by no means a harbinger of disaster leading to bleak unemployment for young people—quite the opposite is true.

AI will not end all jobs, but it will inevitably reshape every business. In the end, time will prove Drucker right. AI will greatly enhance our ability to measure our organization, so that the living humans on our team can focus all their energy on where they can truly create and capture value: building and selling.

Связанные с этим вопросы

QAccording to the article, why did the Cloudflare CEO decide to lay off more than 20% of employees despite strong company performance?

AHe did it because the business environment is changing drastically, and Cloudflare must adapt to win the future. The decision was driven by how artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping business rules, specifically targeting certain types of roles.

QBased on Peter Drucker's framework mentioned in the article, what are the three types of roles within a company, and which are most safe from AI disruption?

AThe three roles are Builders (who make products), Sellers (who sell products), and Measurers (who handle internal audit, finance, legal, compliance, operations, etc.). According to the CEO, Builders and Sellers are very safe, as their jobs are not threatened by AI. The AI wave is primarily aimed at Measurers.

QHow has AI specifically changed the work of 'Measurers' at Cloudflare, according to the CEO?

AAI has enabled continuous, around-the-clock auditing of every business risk point, faster financial book closing, fewer and more precisely caught errors, and provided the CEO with superior tools to measure company performance and identify rising talent. This increased efficiency and objectivity reduced the need for many human Measurers.

QWhat was the ultimate goal of the layoffs, and what is Cloudflare's hiring outlook?

AThe ultimate goal was not simply to reduce headcount. It was to reallocate resources toward roles that drive growth. Cloudflare currently has a record number of open roles, and the CEO expects total employee count to grow in the coming years. The savings from automating 'Measurement' allow the company to invest heavily in more Builders and Sellers.

QWhat does the CEO say about the new generation of 'AI-native' interns and the future of work with AI?

AHe states that the new generation of AI-native interns are exceptionally talented and are inherently Builders or Sellers. He sees AI not as a disaster causing unemployment but as a tool that will reshape every business. AI will enhance the ability to measure an organization, allowing humans to focus their energy where they truly create and capture value: building and selling.

Похожее

Three Years Later: Looking Back at My Predictions About ChatGPT in 2023

Three Years Later: Revisiting My 2023 Predictions on ChatGPT In March 2023, shortly after ChatGPT's launch, I made 20 predictions about its future. Now, in mid-2026, I've used AI agents to fact-check each one against the latest data. Overall, most major directional forecasts were correct, with only one outright error (incorrectly stating GPT-4 had 100 trillion parameters). Key successes included predicting that RAG and retrieval architectures would become the standard for handling knowledge and hallucinations, that natural language interfaces (LUI) would create a massive new industry layer beyond the models themselves, and that China would develop viable large language models, significantly closing the performance gap with Western counterparts within about three years. Predictions about the absence of mass unemployment, the rise of a new "robot network" for agent communication, and ChatGPT not possessing consciousness also held true in their core arguments. However, the "devil was in the details." Errors frequently involved specific numbers, timelines, or overlooking distributional effects. I tended to overestimate the speed of adoption (e.g., for agent networks) while underestimating the ultimate scale of capabilities or costs (e.g., AI winning IMO gold without tools, or the extreme capital required for frontier models). Other misjudgments included: underestimating how AI would reinforce, not dissolve, information filter bubbles; incorrectly assuming AI-generated content would easily circumvent copyright (it has instead triggered record-breaking settlements); and misidentifying where value would be captured (it accrued overwhelmingly to the compute layer, like Nvidia, not just the application or model layers). Key lessons from reviewing these predictions are: 1) Directional and mechanistic insights are far more reliable than precise numbers or absolute statements. 2) There's a consistent bias to overestimate short-term speed but underestimate long-term magnitude. 3) Errors often lie in missing distributional impacts within a generally correct aggregate trend. 4) Predictions phrased with nuance and caveats aged the best. 5) Some fundamental debates (e.g., on machine consciousness or the ultimate value chain) remain unresolved even after three years. This exercise is less about scoring the past and more about establishing rules for clearer thinking about the next three years of AI.

marsbit4 ч. назад

Three Years Later: Looking Back at My Predictions About ChatGPT in 2023

marsbit4 ч. назад

Three Years Later: Looking Back on My 2023 Predictions for ChatGPT

Looking Back After Three Years: Revisiting My 2023 Predictions on ChatGPT In March 2023, shortly after ChatGPT's debut and before GPT-4's release, I made over twenty predictions about AI's future based on limited information and intuition. Now, in May 2026, I revisited those forecasts using an AI-driven analysis with 41 Opus 4.8 agents to cross-reference them with the latest data. The assessment used symbols: ✅ Correct, 🟢 Mostly Correct, 🟡 Partially Correct, ❌ Incorrect. Overall, the directional judgments held up well, with only one major factual error regarding GPT-4's rumored parameter size (incorrectly cited as 100T). However, nuances and degrees of accuracy revealed more. **What Was Largely Correct:** Predictions about mechanisms and directions proved accurate. The rise of RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) as the standard architecture for combating AI hallucination was confirmed, as was the transformative potential of LUI (Language User Interface) in creating a new industry layer atop GUIs. The emergence of "robot networks" (agent-to-agent communication protocols) and China's rapid catch-up in developing capable large models (closing the performance gap with top models to ~2.7%) were also on point. The analysis affirmed that LLMs lack consciousness and that the Turing Test merely measures perceived intelligence. **What Was Off Target:** Errors often involved specific numbers, over-optimistic timelines, or misjudged distributions. The prediction that value would primarily accrue to the application layer was half-right but missed NVIDIA's dominance as the profitable infrastructure layer. Forecasts about AI circumventing copyright issues and fostering a "global common ground" by averaging human viewpoints were incorrect; instead, major copyright settlements occurred and AI personalization is increasing. Estimates for model training costs ("$5-10 billion cap") were significantly off, underestimating frontier costs and overestimating replication costs. The notion that LLMs could never do complex math without tools was disproven by later models winning IMO gold. **Key Patterns from the Review:** 1. **Direction over precision:** Judgments about mechanisms and trends were more reliable than specific numbers or definitive statements. 2. **Timing bias:** There was a tendency to overestimate short-term speed but underestimate long-term magnitude and transformation. 3. **The distribution blind spot:** Aggregate-level correctness often masked uneven impacts (e.g., on young professionals' employment). 4. **The value of qualifiers:** Predictions framed with caution (e.g., "reportedly," "for now," "prototype in 2-3 years") aged better. 5. **Some debates continue:** Issues like the nature of "emergent abilities" or machine consciousness remain unresolved. This three-year review highlights that while seeing the big picture is crucial, humility regarding specifics, timelines, and disparate impacts is essential for future forecasting.

链捕手6 ч. назад

Three Years Later: Looking Back on My 2023 Predictions for ChatGPT

链捕手6 ч. назад

AI Bubble Warning: AI Investments Are Negative Returns for Most Tech Giants

The article issues a stark warning about a potential AI investment bubble. It notes that while the AI boom shares similarities with the TMT bubble of the late 1990s, its scale is vastly larger, currently driving 93% of U.S. GDP growth. Major hyperscale cloud providers like Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and Oracle are planning to invest trillions in AI data centers over the coming years. However, calculations based on analyst projections for 2025-2030 reveal a concerning math problem: expected capital expenditure growth far outpaces projected revenue growth. Even under an extremely optimistic scenario of zero costs, the implied return on investment for most of these tech giants (except Amazon) is deeply negative. This suggests that the current trajectory could lead to one of history's largest shareholder value destruction events. The piece outlines two potential escapes: AI generating vastly more revenue than currently anticipated—a near-impossible task—or a significant cutback in the planned investment splurge. The latter scenario could trigger a domino effect, severely impacting the entire tech supply chain (from Nvidia to TSMC), potentially pushing the U.S. economy into recession, and causing a major stock market downturn. The author suggests upcoming high-profile IPOs by companies like OpenAI and Anthropic might represent a transfer of risk from early investors to public market participants. While the peak of the hype cycle might sustain investment through 2026, the fundamental financial dilemma remains unresolved, setting the stage for a potential market correction in 2027 or 2028, similar to the years following Alan Greenspan's "irrational exuberance" warning.

marsbit7 ч. назад

AI Bubble Warning: AI Investments Are Negative Returns for Most Tech Giants

marsbit7 ч. назад

From Tokens to Machine Labor: AI is Shifting from Tool to "Worker"

The article "From Token to Machine Labor: AI is Evolving from Tool to 'Worker'" argues that the business model for AI is shifting beyond simply selling computational resources (tokens, GPU hours) or model access. Instead, a new "machine labor market" is emerging, where the core economic transaction is the purchase of economically useful work directly performed by software. The central thesis is that AI pricing will evolve through four stages: 1) raw tokens, 2) standardized LLM capabilities (e.g., text generation), 3) industry-specific labor markets (e.g., legal review, radiology), and finally 4) a programmable results market where tasks like resolving a support ticket are bid on and priced based on outcome. In this future, buyers will care less about *which* model or GPU completes a task and more about whether the work meets specified standards for accuracy, latency, and cost. This transition reframes the impact of AI on human labor. Rather than simple replacement, it suggests a re-coordination where machines handle standardized, verifiable work, freeing humans for roles involving oversight, context management, responsibility, and final judgment. In some cases, this "last 1%" of human input becomes more valuable as it enables the other 99% to be automated. Furthermore, as AI reduces the cost of work, demand may expand, creating larger markets (e.g., 24/7 customer service) rather than just cheaper versions of existing ones. The article concludes that while infrastructure (GPUs, models, tokens) remains crucial upstream, the market is converging on a simpler, tradeable unit: machine labor that can be defined, measured, priced, and procured based on contractible specifications.

marsbit7 ч. назад

From Tokens to Machine Labor: AI is Shifting from Tool to "Worker"

marsbit7 ч. назад

Xiaomi MiMo's 99% Price Cut is Not Marketing! Luo Fuli Posts on X to Refute Critics

The price of Xiaomi's MiMo-V2.5 series API has been permanently reduced by up to 99%, specifically for the "Input (Cache Hit)" cost, which covers users re-reading historical context in long conversations. MiMo's head, Luo Fuli, published a detailed technical blog to clarify that this drastic price cut stems from genuine engineering breakthroughs, not a marketing stunt or a simple price war. The core of the achievement lies in six key engineering optimizations. First, the model architecture adopts a Hybrid Sliding Window Attention (SWA), reducing the memory footprint (KVCache) to 1/7th of a traditional model. Second, a dual-pool memory management system actually utilizes these savings, allowing a single GPU to handle over 5 times more concurrent users. Third, an upgraded prefix caching mechanism achieves a cache hit rate of 93-95% for repeated reads, meaning most such requests bypass GPU computation entirely. Fourth, a self-developed distributed cache (GCache) utilizes idle SSD space on existing GPU servers, eliminating additional storage costs. Fifth, an intelligent scheduling system (LLM-Router) efficiently routes requests to maximize cache reuse and performance. Sixth, Multi-Token Prediction (MTP) accelerates the model's text generation ("output") side. Together, these systemic optimizations dramatically lower the real computational cost per request, enabling the 99% price reduction for cached inputs while reportedly maintaining positive gross margins. Luo Fuli's disclosure aims to shift the narrative from "price war" to a demonstration of substantive AI engineering progress.

marsbit9 ч. назад

Xiaomi MiMo's 99% Price Cut is Not Marketing! Luo Fuli Posts on X to Refute Critics

marsbit9 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы

Популярные статьи

Неделя обучения по популярным токенам (2): 2026 может стать годом приложений реального времени, сектор AI продолжает оставаться в тренде

2025 год — год институциональных инвесторов, в будущем он будет доминировать в приложениях реального времени.

1.8k просмотров всегоОпубликовано 2025.12.16Обновлено 2025.12.16

Неделя обучения по популярным токенам (2): 2026 может стать годом приложений реального времени, сектор AI продолжает оставаться в тренде

Обсуждения

Добро пожаловать в Сообщество HTX. Здесь вы сможете быть в курсе последних новостей о развитии платформы и получить доступ к профессиональной аналитической информации о рынке. Мнения пользователей о цене на AI (AI) представлены ниже.

活动图片