Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment • Hacker News Board

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#71

Post by topkai22 » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:40 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #51

topkai22 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s a good practice to keep the abbreviations the same when talking about in the same context. It makes clear the ratio being talked about.

I'm definitely not in the world of finance, but in day to day conversation, I have to stop to think what one hundred sixty thousand million means. If I hear one hundred sixty billion, then I immediately understand. Even if I had previously heard five million then heard one hundred sixty billion, it is obvious that billion is 1000x a million which clearly makes it a bigger number. This is what I meant by unnatural.

Verbal conversation gains the context of audible emphasis on the difference. Rhetorically, you are able to say "Waymo has revenue of 5 million dollars, while Google has 160 BILLION dollars." (imagine the all caps being dramatically stated, possibly a la Dr Evil in Austin Powers).

In writing you can't do that as easily or effectively, so I think keeping the abbreviated units the same is effective writing.

In fact stating income in thousand millions is exactly how financial statements are formatted. In alphabet's 10k (at https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1652044/000165204419...) there is a table showing that the google segment had $136,224M in revenue, while "all other bets" had a total revenue of $595M. I suspect that the SEC would have some stern words for alphabet if they expressed on measure in billions and one in millions...

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#72

Post by scarface74 » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:41 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #41

dylan604 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>After they axed Reader, I stopped using anything from the G I never used Reader, but did anything else come along to fill the void? I ask as I am curious on the market when G kills a product. When G kills off a product, does the rest of the world just assume that if G couldn't make it work then it must not be worth doing? I know HN readers were vocal about the death of lots of G products, but HN readers are edge cas…

There are other RSS readers but RSS as a stand-alone thing that people use (where “people” was always somewhat of a niche) has largely withered in the face of social media. Much as the tech crowd likes to complain about Reader’s Denise, it was at least in part a response to RSS’s decline not the cause.

RSS has not “withered”. True very few people use it, but every site still supports rss where it makes sense.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#73

Post by scarface74 » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:41 PM UTC

wnoise wrote: post #49

popup21 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> did anything else come along to fill the void? Yep. I'm using ol'faithful: Mozilla Thunderbird

Doesn't satisfy "synced history across any device".

Feedly.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#74

Post by detaro » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:43 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #38

popup21 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will never stop. After they axed Reader, I stopped using anything from the G. Watching them build legit software, gain users, and then dissolve those services over and over and over again had the effect of suffocating any further curiosity towards their products. Like a Skinner mouse, they literally train you not to give a shit anymore.

>After they axed Reader, I stopped using anything from the G I never used Reader, but did anything else come along to fill the void? I ask as I am curious on the market when G kills a product. When G kills off a product, does the rest of the world just assume that if G couldn't make it work then it must not be worth doing? I know HN readers were vocal about the death of lots of G products, but HN readers are edge cas…

inoreader is another alternative in addition to the ones already mentioned.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#75

Post by StuffedParrot » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:51 PM UTC

tssva wrote: post #15

irrational wrote: post #11

The fact that you linked to an amp version of the page, instead of the real link, is deeply disturbing to me. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-04/alphab...

And I was very appreciative of the AMP version being posted. It made for a much better mobile viewing experience than the typical non-AMP experience from Bloomberg.

If your life was materially impacted by slow mobile speeds you should spend less time on your phone.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#76

Post by nvrspyx » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:54 PM UTC

tssva wrote: post #15

irrational wrote: post #11

The fact that you linked to an amp version of the page, instead of the real link, is deeply disturbing to me. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-04/alphab...

And I was very appreciative of the AMP version being posted. It made for a much better mobile viewing experience than the typical non-AMP experience from Bloomberg.

Unlike the AMP version, I didn’t have to wait 5+ seconds for the bottom “Signed into Google as ...” banner to disappear to scroll up on the regular site. It made for a worse mobile experience for me.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#77

Post by OnlineGladiator » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:56 PM UTC

repsilat wrote: post #40

MarkMc wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been a Google shareholder for more than 10 years, and I would love it if Alphabet spun off Waymo so I could dump my Waymo stock. My view is that the market undervalues Google and overvalues Waymo but unfortunately Mr Page and Mr Brin force me to invest in both.

Funny, I'm sure a lot of people think the opposite, and that only proves your point more.

As someone intimately familiar with the world of self-driving cars (and their investors, and their enthusiasts) - yes. There are many people who believe Waymo is going to be ridiculously valuable because they are certain (almost always based on being wildly misinformed) that it is going to magically blanket the planet in robotaxis in a handful of years.

I would love to short Waymo. And now that Sergei is no longer there to shield it from Ruth Porat - who is well known for hating risky bets - I don't see a bright future for the company. And working conditions there have already deteriorated to the point where most talented people don't stay (just check glassdoor reviews if you don't believe me).

I'm pretty sure Larry and Sergei wanted their legacy to be Waymo. I'm pretty sure Ruth Porat wants her legacy to be killing Waymo.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#78

Post by ghaff » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:57 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #72

ghaff wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are other RSS readers but RSS as a stand-alone thing that people use (where “people” was always somewhat of a niche) has largely withered in the face of social media. Much as the tech crowd likes to complain about Reader’s Denise, it was at least in part a response to RSS’s decline not the cause.

RSS has not “withered”. True very few people use it, but every site still supports rss where it makes sense.

Very few people using it seems the very definition of withering. Yes, a lot of sites and blog software etc. still default to offering RSS feeds. (Which I take advantage of from time to time and it's presumably used behind the scenes for various purposes.) But that's hardly a ringing endorsement of the role of RSS in today's world.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#79

Post by jariel » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:57 PM UTC

drawkbox wrote: post #9

melling wrote: post #6

Google’s attempt to be a modern day Bell Labs was the one thing that set them apart. Make a lot of money in advertising and spend some of it to invent the future. Without the second part, the entire company changes. We need another company to take the mantle: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/opinion/sunday/innovation...

Looks like the product/engineering/creative focused time of Google is giving way to the metric/marketing/MBA/McKinsey people for a fully pedal to the metal push into their Ballmer phase. When will technology/product/engineering/creative companies learn that the value creation is more important than the value extraction? With value creation there is always the ability to value extract. With value extraction the focus,…

This characterisation as business people not creating value is false - MS is mostly a 'business' driven company and they've been growing forever.

By every measure, Ballmer was a massively succesfull CEO. He grew income by 3x, moved MS into the cloud, integrated recurring pricing, went full web with MS Office, so many other things. Satya has not done any better in terms of creating more revenue.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#80

Post by crazygringo » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 4:58 PM UTC

It has always seemed strange to me that Google become part of Alphabet, instead of vice-versa.

It seems like a much more honest approach would always have been for Google to be one company... for Alphabet to be a separate one... and for, say, Google to own 33% of Alphabet, for Larry and Sergei personally to own another 33%, and outside investors to own the rest and be the ones principally determining its own, separate valuation.