Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's there on paper, but is is really still there?
I am a Googler, opinions on my own. The problem with the phrase is that it is very relative depending on your meaning of evil. It's a shifting over time and varies by person. At the same time it provides a good guiding principle for Google as a whole. You need to think about users in different parts of the world with different ideas of what is good and evil, and try to cater to all of them. It's a really hard problem…
Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
391–400 of 637 posts
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#392https://abc.xyz/investor/news/releases/2019/1203/ Slightly more organized info in the intro bullets. Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the CEO and President, respectively, of Alphabet, have decided to leave these roles. They will continue their involvement as co-founders, shareholders and members of Alphabet’s Board of Directors.
In a way this seems like an admission of the failure of the "Alphabet" thing. The idea behind that originally was that all of these other projects were going to become so significant that it wouldn't make sense to have them or their management coupled with Google. But a half-decade later, it's still 99.9% Google, so just double-up the Google guy to lead both tiers. Same as it ever was.
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's there on paper, but is is really still there?
I am a Googler, opinions on my own. The problem with the phrase is that it is very relative depending on your meaning of evil. It's a shifting over time and varies by person. At the same time it provides a good guiding principle for Google as a whole. You need to think about users in different parts of the world with different ideas of what is good and evil, and try to cater to all of them. It's a really hard problem…
To me, the minuta having to be written down was a symptom of the complexity making the simplistic and guiding principle don't be evil useless, which I think mainly was caused by scale and the way the ad industry and personal data practices everywhere have evolved. No need to dig in there, but basically, I think that the fact it's still there doesn't really say much. This isn't to say the problems and scale of Google are easy, for the record. Also not impossible either of course.
Curious, in your 100% personal opinion, do you disagree that the company has more or less "deprecated" it?
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm curious what their continued involvement will look like. Page and Brin, combined, are currently the majority shareholders of alphabet. Each controls 27% of the voting power ( 54% combined ). They are still in charge. They just won't be involved in the day-to-day operation of the company. Sundar will still report to Page/Brin and the board of directors.
Honestly, there’s so much drama and turmoil there, I wouldn’t want to be there either. So many other productive things they could be doing.
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#395Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I think it's worth noting these little hints that outgoing and extroverted are thought to be synonymous with "good leadership" (in the US, at least)" I don't think it's synonymous, but it's required. To be a good leader, you need to enjoy being around and understanding people. Most introverted people don't really enjoy either. I've had many introverted managers and they all were horrible: lack of communication which…
Leadership is a skill to learn, just like programming, writing, or most other things really. People who are introverts at heart can learn to become just as good managers as those who aren't. It may come less naturally, I couldn't say, but it's definitely possible.
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, there’s so much drama and turmoil there, I wouldn’t want to be there either. So many other productive things they could be doing.
Care to elaborate for the uninitiated ?
Founders: Bring your whole selves to work. Employees: great! That one guy: what a relief, because I’m literally a Nazi. Everybody: no. Leave that part at home. Guy: my rights are being trampled by a liberal conspiracy! Other person: my gender expression is the most important aspect of large-scale software development. Anyone who disagrees must be fired. Everyone: that doesn’t seem all that relevant, actually. Person: my rights are being trampled by a cis conspiracy! Everyone: rolling eyes
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
So Gates is not alone. Buffet and Ellison have both pledged the vast majority of their wealth to the Gates Foundation. Somewhat unique to the US, our billionaires tends to be fairly philanthropic.
And now imagine a society in which it would not be decided by self-proclaimed "philantropists" where societal progress is made and which basic human needs (like a roof over the head of every person, or kids having a lunch at school instead of being shamed for parents too poor to pay) are met, but instead the super rich pay their fair share in taxes and society decides democratically. US billionaires are only philantr…
As you put it, if there was some kind of "richness cap" (say, 1 billion) and all the rest was held as interest generator for social services and society, population wouldn't have to depend on the "goodwill" of people, but would have the basic necessities fulfilled.
Humanity will get there at some point. There is no other alternative, given population growth. But right now we humans are still quite underdeveloped as a society.
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an outsider looking in, many in the US seem to value charity over taxation. I can see why, though personally I'd rather send my money to those who (presumably, and hopefully) have a broad enough view of society to know where it is really needed.
> I'd rather send my money to those who (presumably, and hopefully) have a broad enough view of society to know where it is really needed. The difference is that do not trust the government to know what's best nor, do what's best.
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#399Weirdly this feels like a non-issue. Google has not felt like it has a "personality" for some time - maybe it's a function of hitting mega-corporate size, but it also feels a bit like when Microsoft (a Computer on every Desktop) essentially achieved its goal, it then spent a decade in "goalless and soulless exploitation" mode - something that one suspects is the next step for the worlds largest personality-free platf…
There's nothing wrong with its stock price and revenue and I'm sure from that angle a lot of financial people are pretty happy with the status quo of just milking that cow perpetually. However, looking at it from the technical angle, I see a company that is asleep at the wheel and showing a distinct lack of vision, leadership, and direction across the board of its product portfolio. Perhaps a bit like MS under Balmer ramming out increasingly less popular iterations of windows and office. MS turned things around under Nadella. Google perhaps hasn't sunken far enough that it needs that kind of leadership change yet but it seems in my eyes to be going down that same path slowly.
IMHO all the money making units worth mentioning in Google have their origin in a brief period of the early 2000s perhaps up to the 2006-2008 time frame (i.e. the Android launch) when it was smaller, more creative, nimble, and definitely more capable of translating vision into execution. That includes things like google docs, hangouts, maps, photos, youtube, gmail, android, chrome, google cloud and of course the big money maker ads.
A lot of other stuff launched in the years since has simply failed to get traction or got killed early. This has actually become a meme on HN and elsewhere where people openly wonder when they will kill X at the moment of the announcement where X is a long list of stuff Google tried and failed to deliver or just walked away from despite internal and external enthusiasm (e.g Google Inbox). The list of stuff that they announced in the last decade or so that actually didn't get killed is worryingly short.
There actually is very little of significance that I can name that emerged out of Google in the recent decade that is worthy of being added to that list and only some stuff under the Alphabet umbrella that comes close (i.e. Waymo would be the main success story there that has yet to prove itself as a long term money maker).
In other words, I think of Sundar as a caretaker, not a leader. He's greasing the wheels of the money printing machine that is ads but maybe not really the best for coming up with the next big thing. Maybe now is a good moment to start looking for a real leader to replace the founders that clearly just announced their permanent retirement from the industry and any other meaningful involvement with tech (tu un-sugar coat this announcement).
Re: Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly the type of thing you have PR people on staff to write though?
Yeah, I highly doubt either CEO wrote this. Its target audience is investors: "Everything is fine, buy more stock."