401–410 of 422 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Numbers on both sides. Just because they have thousands of employees out of billions of people means nothing special about their process/culture. There are likely to be thousands of people in the world who are fine with it.
If things were truly bad they can just go work for other FAANG. That is not the case. Since it's HN.."Google must be bad but people are just lazy"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, my analogy wasn't great. But when comparing Amazon as a whole and Google as a whole, the only thing Amazon killed that comes to mind is the Fire Phone (maybe there's more I'm not aware of), while there's a laundry list of things that come to mind for Google. Also not totally fair because Google has provided a ton of free web apps and Amazon hasn't, but I think it feels more personal when Google removes somethin…
How many Amazon apps do you use other than Amazon.com, Kindle, Echo? How is it still a fair comparison?
I could compare it to a company like Cloudflare, who do offer lots of different public, free services (even if their market is different) and don't seem to have shut anything down.
Maybe not the best analogy either, but the problem is no other company has the kind of breadth of free public consumer-facing services that Google has, so no analogy would work. On one hand that could be a defense, by saying what Google's doing is unique and risky so sudden cancellations are to be expected. But on the other hand who knows how another company might handle a similar situation; we have no way of knowing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If things were truly bad they can just go work for other FAANG. That is not the case. Since it's HN.."Google must be bad but people are just lazy"
You're missing the point. But that's OK.
I can say safely that this interview process is “ableist”.
I passed all the hard Google questions with flying colors.
There is no current Google interview method to support the hard-of-hearing rock star SW engineer.
The next step was to open a VoIP channel to the interviewer.
Unfortunately, our current FCC-sanctioned deaf-to-hearing Video Conference mechanism doesn’t not support this because Google will not post a telephone number in which for me to call with.
End of interview process. Their loss.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same things, but in august 2019. I spent about a month to prepare for the on-site. The sections time-limit was about 45 minutes(not the 1hour) Failed on one coding section and on Googliness. HR coordinator said that I've slightly below the acceptable hiring level. Also, the free seminars for NALSD finished the two weeks before my interview. Also, I heard that I have only two remaining attempts of on-site at Googl…
> I have only two remaining attempts of on-site at Google LOL WAT. This is a good enough reason for me to stay away tbh. I did not hear this from my recruiter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many Amazon apps do you use other than Amazon.com, Kindle, Echo? How is it still a fair comparison?
Yeah it's still not really a fair comparison (though one could easily imagine Amazon shuttering Fresh, or certain Kindle or Echo features). I could compare it to a company like Cloudflare, who do offer lots of different public, free services (even if their market is different) and don't seem to have shut anything down. Maybe not the best analogy either, but the problem is no other company has the kind of breadth of f…
“You can pass every interview with A grades and still not get a job, because a senior Googler decides that you're the wrong person to be hired.” Google doesn’t need you. They probably already have a clone of you. They have gobs of rank-and-file SWE effort on reserve should one of their key products fail. The process is designed to entertain the hiring manager and certain key employees. They don’t want you for your pr…
This is ludicrously false and not at _all_ why Google hires people. They hire people because - big surprise - there are projects that need staffing. "At this stage, if Google hires you, you are almost certainly being used to aid in the retention of somebody else. You’re going straight for the bench." I mean, just wow. Do you really believe this? This is fantasy to an incredible degree.
* Google's current hiring process lag from first contact to start date is 4-6 months. That's based on reports in Blind and a couple of recent hires I know. That lag is double that of large competitors. Google wants to make candidates wait in order to appear more exclusive. "Projects need staffing"-- clearly not as much as Google needs to maintain its brand.
* "You're going straight to the bench." This is based on a variety of comments, some posted here, some from former Google PMs and SWEs I know. It takes more than a year to get a project that most people consider meaningful. Some have different expectations upon joining, though.
* "you are almost certainly being used to aid in the retention of somebody else." I used to work with an ex-Googler who had a large role in Google's Ads team. He couldn't code very well, and routinely struggled to have accurate assessment of senior engineers. It's questionable how he passed the SWE interview bar at Google. But he was "good looking" and "affable" (he once appeared in a vanity magazine in a shirtless photo shoot). He routinely claimed that his female Google superiors hit on him. Other ex-Googlers told me there where many people in the office who seemed to be "fluff" for everybody else.
The bottom line: Google prides itself (excessively) on having a uniform brand, yet is large enough today that the long tail of "out-of-brand people" is quite large. When you submit your resume to Google, you're feeding their index and ranking of all-of-SWE humanity (literally-- they heavily apply ML to their resume pool). Don't get brainwashed with the brand, and think critically before letting a _company_ have this sort of power over people.