Proton cancelled the interviews. Read what stayed.

A founder setting headcount can set two Proton statements side by side. On October 29, 404 Media published how the Swiss company behind Proton Mail has been pushing engineers onto AI. Joseph Cox spoke with eight current employees and one former employee, and reviewed Slack chats, meeting recordings, and a manifesto from chief technology officer Bart Butler. A spokesperson did not dispute the reporting. The next day, Proton called off the re-interviews.

What had already been said

At the end of August, an employee in Proton’s security Slack channel asked for a few days to pentest newly written code before pushing it live. 404 Media published the exchange. In that account, Yen told the team to stop handcrafting the code and use AI more, and said this is the last year Proton will hire engineers. The company would instead only hire people to build things with AI.

404 Media also reported software on workers’ computers that tracks how much AI code the company is generating. An internal document the outlet obtained says Proton is not on track for its annual recurring revenue target by the end of the year, “Due to insufficient velocity.”

The Next Web, drawing on 404 Media, reported on October 30 the plan as it stood in an internal email. The email called a round of re-interviews consequential. Interviewers would record assessments for a wider review, and that review could change roles and continued employment. Yen began by interviewing more than 40 senior leaders in engineering and product. Not every employee would be called. Interviewers would come from outside the person’s team. The dates were November 4 to 11.

The same account says Butler told a meeting that AI wrote 90 percent of Proton’s code in October, and that 404 Media had the audio. That 90 percent is a sentence from a meeting. The October 30 note does not publish it as a measured result.

Business Insider quoted the memo as 404 Media reported it. “Your job is to help the LLM write better code faster.”

The spokesperson’s October 29 reply included a line to keep beside the rest. “In our determination to move fast, we have sometimes been too blunt or too slow in explaining ourselves to our people.”

What changed on October 30

The Verge reported that day that 404 Media said Yen was cancelling the interviews. It said there will be a reorganization, and it quoted Yen saying there will be no loss of jobs from AI.

Later that day Proton’s own account posted a public note. These points are company-reported. Proton said it does not install tracking software on employees’ laptops to measure how much AI-generated code they produce, and that the rumor stemmed from a misunderstanding about how its MDM software works. Proton said AI use will never be at the expense of security, and that additional layers of security review were added in the past year. Proton said it will publish how code reviews and security reviews are done, and where AI is permitted and where it is not. On the interviews, the note says, “we are not re-interviewing our staff about AI usage, and there are no job losses due to AI re-interviews.” The note apologizes for falling short of the standard people should hold the company to.

The Verge’s account of Yen says there will be no loss of jobs from AI. Proton’s public note says there are no job losses due to the AI re-interviews. The August line, that this is the last year Proton will hire engineers, does not appear in the October 30 note. The note does not mention the 90 percent or Butler’s job sentence. The tracking claim was denied. The interviews were called off.

A page to fill this week

This page records sentences already said. Decisions about someone’s job belong with the company and its own counsel.

Use four rows.

1. The job. The sentence you have used for what an engineer’s work is now. The date, and where it was said. If a later note changed it, write the later sentence underneath.
2. The hire. The sentence you have used for who you will still hire next year. The date. Write “standing” if you would still say it in public. Write “not said” if you have not said it.
3. The measure. Any percentage for how much of the code a model wrote. Who said it, the month it covers, and whether it came from a meeting or from a counter you can name. If you have denied a tracking tool, write that denial in the words you used.
4. The person. Any sentence that ties how someone uses AI to their role or to continued employment. The date it was said. The date it was withdrawn, if it was. The sentence that replaced it.

Under the rows, add one paragraph a new hire could read before any of the four. If it does not exist, write “missing” and today’s date.

Proton’s page, filled from this week, already shows the shape. Job: help the LLM write better code faster. Hire: the August line, absent from the October 30 note. Measure: 90 percent of October’s code, from a meeting, beside a denial of laptop tracking. Person: a review that could change continued employment, withdrawn on October 30 in two sentences of different scope.

What to do this week

• Copy the four rows from messages you have already sent. Leave the new policy for another sitting.
• Write the two October 30 sentences about jobs, The Verge’s and the company’s, one under the other. Mark the scope you would publish.
• If a percentage is already in use, write the month it covers and whether a counter exists.
• If people have been told their AI use will be reviewed, put the explanation paragraph on the page before any conversation is scheduled.

Writing the page, and deciding which sentence you would still say the next day, is the work of a consult block.