Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leaving Google

jayconrod.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 464 posts

Re: Leaving Google

#21

Post by nostrebored »

cube00 wrote: post #2

> PMs made all the decisions. Engineers (at least at my level) had very little influence. This is interesting given Google used to have a reputation for being an "engineer led" organization, I guess that's slowly changing over time.

The idea that products at large tech companies are going to be lead by engineers who by and large do not talk to people or understand the cross functional relationships and strategies is absurd.

This isn't a future engineers want either -- I hear complaints about meetings from nearly every engineer I know. The idea that you should have low level knowledge of the system you're working on and high level knowledge of all the cross functional team's responsibilities along with the responsibility for cultivating those relationships is ridiculous.

People say this without having any idea what PMs do.

Re: Leaving Google

#22

Post by systemvoltage »

echelon wrote: post #15
ashtonkem wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s kind of incredible how fast the shine has come off of most of the FAANG companies.

They're no longer about breadth, limitless innovation, and moonshots, but rather extraction of platform economic control. They're the new Oracles, except they own mobile, social, and web instead of databases. Start new companies and push them over. Fight their ability to land grab more.

This is the most optimistic thing I've read in a long time here. Much needed, thanks.

Re: Leaving Google

#23

Post by sillysaurusx »

freyir wrote: post #17

“Quite a few activists and researchers were fired for asking Google to be a bit more ethical” In the examples the author cited, those activists and researchers were fired for reasons going beyond “asking Google to be a bit more ethical. And frankly it doesn’t seem ethical for activists, researchers, and the author to deliberately misconstrue facts whenever they believe they’re on the right side of an ethical (and som…

I'm not sure this is true. Normally I'd be inclined to agree with you, but the Timnit situation was handled badly.

Objectively, there was nothing wrong with her paper.

You may have a point about the other researchers. I'm not familiar enough with their situations. But I dug into Timnit's pretty thoroughly.

Their recent behavior isn't too encouraging either: https://archive.md/7jCQY

(Related Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/jackclarkSF/status/1451273190974660612)

Hopefully everyone will just chill out and focus on research.

Re: Leaving Google

#24

Post by kevingadd »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #18

A few months ago, I considered applying to Google to join the JAX team. It turns out that you can't apply to Google's JAX team. You have to apply to Google, and then managers at various teams select whether they want you. The thing is, JAX is amazing. So I'm now faced with the uncomfortable idea that this process must make sense, because it clearly works. Yet I profoundly dislike it. Perhaps my ideas are the problem,…

If the team wants you bad enough, they can hire you. It has to come from the inside, which I'm sure has no impact on whether nepotism happens.

Re: Leaving Google

#25

Post by oppositelock »

Waterluvian wrote: post #4

I think it’s interesting that the good things about working there had nothing to do with the employer and the bad things had everything to do with the employer. Indeed, this line is the takeaway, in my opinion: “…is because we've been at least a little brainwashed into thinking a job at Google is the pinnacle of employment.” I haven’t worked for one so this take might be quite hot, but I get the sense that big tech c…

I worked at Google from 2005 to 2013, seeing it grow from 4,000 to 50,000 employees during this time.

In 2005, it was a wonderful, prestigious place to work with many great people and a startup vibe, the place was vibrant. By 2013, Larry and Sergey were put out to pasture, and the company took on a much more bureaucratic, compartmentalized feel.

I was working hard, most of my work was fighting bureaucracy and optimizing what I did for the horrific perf process, and going through constant re-orgs so that I had no consistent manager, and no chance of promotion (this is a big deal at Google). Joining in 2005 was the best thing I've done for my career, and leaving in 2013 was again the best thing I've done for my career. I value the time there, but the Google that I remember no longer exists.

Re: Leaving Google

#26

Post by kevingadd »

slimsag wrote: post #14
cube00 wrote: post #2

> PMs made all the decisions. Engineers (at least at my level) had very little influence. This is interesting given Google used to have a reputation for being an "engineer led" organization, I guess that's slowly changing over time.

You left out the best part: > We were expected to hit precise deadlines on multi-quarter projects (within two weeks), and when that inevitably didn't happen, we had to track all the time we spent on anything in 30 minute increments. It felt very cog-in-the-machine.

This is absurd. I haven't been asked to file timesheets (other than for days off) as a sweng in over a decade, including when I was at Google. Management on that team has completely lost it.

Re: Leaving Google

#27

Post by Waterluvian »

echelon wrote: post #15
ashtonkem wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s kind of incredible how fast the shine has come off of most of the FAANG companies.

They're no longer about breadth, limitless innovation, and moonshots, but rather extraction of platform economic control. They're the new Oracles, except they own mobile, social, and web instead of databases. Start new companies and push them over. Fight their ability to land grab more.

I really like this optimistic sentiment. And I think it’s true.

I work for a company that’s a unicorn this year. About five years ago it didn’t exist until Amazon decided to drop customer support for their warehouse robots, forcing a warehouse company to build its own replacements.

There is still plenty of room for new players to emerge.

Re: Leaving Google

#28

Post by chem83 »

Relevant perhaps is the fact that Google folks just came out of a promo cycle, which is run by a committee. Folks I talked to seem to agree the process is utterly broken, so this is about the time many will decide to jump ship.

Re: Leaving Google

#29

Post by cube00 »

kevingadd wrote: post #26
slimsag wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You left out the best part: > We were expected to hit precise deadlines on multi-quarter projects (within two weeks), and when that inevitably didn't happen, we had to track all the time we spent on anything in 30 minute increments. It felt very cog-in-the-machine.

This is absurd. I haven't been asked to file timesheets (other than for days off) as a sweng in over a decade, including when I was at Google. Management on that team has completely lost it.

I read that as the "30 minute increment" tracking is used as a short term punishment for not meeting the deadline.

Re: Leaving Google

#30

Post by thanhhaimai »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #18

A few months ago, I considered applying to Google to join the JAX team. It turns out that you can't apply to Google's JAX team. You have to apply to Google, and then managers at various teams select whether they want you. The thing is, JAX is amazing. So I'm now faced with the uncomfortable idea that this process must make sense, because it clearly works. Yet I profoundly dislike it. Perhaps my ideas are the problem,…

I don't think it's true that "you can't apply directly to a team". I've seen many people got interviewed/hired for exactly one position. The manager of the team will need to be in the loop though. If they don't know you and don't agree with you applying directly, then it's most likely you're going to the normal pipeline.
Post reply on HN