Anyone who thinks they can get way with saying they worked for edX, and didn't work for edX before the acquisition--actually building edX--is doing the same deception that 2U is known for its fraud with USC. 2U destroyed edX by trying to make a non-profit profitable. At some point, more people will know the truth. Many in the tech world already do know.
https://www.classcentral.com/report/2u-layoffs-2024/
@2qmu+1rdkWmK4 edX was a non profit, making a profit wasn't the point, just being self sustaining. We were on our way there. I don't know why our board decided to sell out to Chip, but I wish it hadn't happened. I wonder if 2U approached edX or if edX was looking to be sold. I feel like MIT and Harvard abandoned their creation to the wolves.
I was nervous about 2U from the start. Company seemed to be the opposite culture and ethics of what edX was. We had good health insurance and a good 401k match.
edX while maybe having a good brand isn't what you think it was. It was a sh---y company that lost tens of millions a year and would not have lasted much longer if 2U didn't acquire it for an insanely inflated price tag. The UI su-ks, it's worse than coursera in many regards.
The thing that has been the most apparent with edX and 2U is that most of the edX middle management has a severely inflated sense of self worth, thinking they are smarter and better at their jobs than others.
I KNOW that is not true of everyone at edX, but I've found it true for many of the director/manager levels, quite a few who no longer are employed.
tl;dr
It was a bad company to begin with, just happened to be a good domain name.
I'm not going to doxx myself by giving details but I used to work for a company that was considered "controversial" by some people in the industry and eventually failed. We had a prominent critic who would regularly predict that anyone working there had no future. Meanwhile in the real world, people working there constantly went on to huge things and I'm not aware of a single person whose career was hurt by working there. The moral of the story is that nobody cares.
@dtu+1rdkWmK4 lol what is your point?
Interesting...who would write this...
"Even if you worked for edX before 2U acquired it, you were likely an IC, you likely didn’t build' the company."
That’s a stretch. Using the public facing name edX because it’s better known and used to have a reputation worth a damn so we can get out of here is in no way shape or form as deceptive as c-suite execs running a bad business model that resulted in debt for thousands and mass layoffs. People who are using edX instead of 2U on their resumes are trying to get a better job by using a trademarked name owned by 2U. What even is the point of this post? Shame people for trying to get a job before this place shuts down or lays them off? The alternative you’re implying is to use 2U to avoid what you personally perceive as deception when that’s an even less widely known company with probably a worse reputation, and there is no legal reason why an employee for 2U that works within the edX division shouldn’t be able to use that. Even if you worked for edX before 2U acquired it, you were likely an IC, you likely didn’t “build” the company. Stop gatekeeping, no one is taking anything away from anyone by trying to position themselves to get a better job and leave a sinking ship. Do you prefer people just give up and not try whatever they can to get a better job?