After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

Post by MisterBastahrd » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 9:58 PM UTC

marcinzm wrote: post #31

sillysaurusx wrote: post #16

I see a lot of people saying this seems not a big deal, or that his leadership deserved promotion. It’s because this is a second order article. The original, most substantive source that I could find is quite thorough: https://archive.is/wqdkF > "He would ask us to do personal things for him," one of these people said. "He said, 'I need you to write a briefing for me on Russian history and politics.' [...] We had abs…

>We had absolutely no work in Russia. Wouldn't the point of such a high level briefing be because they're tying to get work in Russia but don't already have any? It's rather common for employees to not know the details of the strategic plans of the executives until the execution starts.

Post by shadowgovt » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 9:59 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #87

Traster wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At my old company it was a bit of a joke, you would repeatedly see shit managers become "architect"s. Management were too cowardly to get rid of bad managers, so they were forced to promote them to get them out of their role. So managers who were shit technically constantly ended up with senior technical titles - and everyone knew why.

Were they bad architects though? It's easy to paint bad managers as bad workers (or even bad people ) - but sometimes, they're just bad at managing. In such cases, it's better to shift them into roles they're more suited for than to fire them and hire new people for those roles - existing employees already know the company's procedures and products. Plus, it'll likely be cheaper salary-wise - in our industry, new emp…

Post by HWR_14 » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 10:01 PM UTC

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #39

gigatexal wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that we are having this conversation. And if engineering wants to grow past its problems it has got to change. (edit: the previous part of this disparaged those on the spectrum and I am sorry)

Can we not imply that "on the spectrum" means being an asshole? Autism causes a lot of social difficulties, but it has nothing to do with publicly humiliating people on purpose to make yourself feel powerful.

Post by kitsune_ » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 10:03 PM UTC

xioren00 wrote: post #38

paulryanrogers wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this reaction sarcastic? As if to say "I'm not afraid of people who boast of crushing others"?

Are you saying you would be afraid of this person for that comment? Part of being an adult is learning to deal with adversity.

Post by HWR_14 » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

pyuser583 wrote: post #76

HWR_14 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In elite schools [edit: that are as elite as] Oxford, the drop out rate would be close to Oxford's. The US numbers are pretty skewed by the massive drop out rate in 2-year community colleges, which both admit huge numbers of people and have very high dropout rates. Also, a huge percentage of dropouts are in the first year, when people are deciding that college may not work for them or be the right fit.

> In elite schools like Oxford, the drop out rate would be close to Oxford's Typo? Lots of US 4 year colleges have terrible graduation rates. It’s not just community colleges. The UK also doesn’t have a culture of “drop out and start your own company.”