The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures • Hacker News Board

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#131

Post by hyperbovine » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:01 PM UTC

xoofoog wrote: post #107

klipt wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems pretty sexist to associate solving hard problems with masculinity. Women at Google also work on hard problems.

The sexist part is not the "hard problems" but the competitiveness. I don't think sexism is intrinsic to solving hard problems - certainly gender-inclusive companies work on hard problems successfully. But in my experience those companies tend to be more collaborative. Google needs to celebrate heroes. Like Jeff Dean. Or Sanjay Ghemawat. Those are Great Men. They are "Living Gods" because they solved Really Hard Prob…

This take strikes me as a weird form of reverse-sexism, in the sense of Kinsley's famous piece about reverse-snobbery (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2001/03/bill-o-reilly-am...).

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#132

Post by dv_dt » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:02 PM UTC

xoofoog wrote: post #82

Quoted post unavailable.

Not google, but I was once given feedback that I wasn't promoted to a management position at a company because I was seen as being too "nice". This was despite 4 years of being a manager at past companies and being perfectly able to solve problems w/o pounding on the table and twisting arms. I left that company soon after. But I see that as an symptom of toxic competitiveness culture too.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#133

Post by ctvo » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:04 PM UTC

cvhashim wrote: post #104

klipt wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems pretty sexist to associate solving hard problems with masculinity. Women at Google also work on hard problems.

Should have just said toxic humanistic traits

Toxic masculinity accurately represents what the OP describes and is clear here. There's nothing to be offended about. It's revealing the angst that sprang up from this community of mostly men.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#134

Post by uoaei » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

zarkov99 wrote: post #110

xoofoog wrote: post #82

Quoted post unavailable.

Quoted post unavailable.

When is this straw man argument going to die?

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#135

Post by hyperbovine » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

celdon25 wrote: post #64

meowtimemania wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aspire to be a homeowner, 200k in the Bay Area will be difficult.

As of 2022, it's now difficult anywhere in most US metropolitan areas.

"Most of the US" != the five places you'd be willing to live. Outside of the HN bubble, a $200k salary _easily_ affords a home in most markets.

https://cdn.nar.realtor/sites/default/files/documents/metro-...

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#136

Post by uoaei » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:06 PM UTC

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #127

xoofoog wrote: post #82

Quoted post unavailable.

>a culture of toxic masculinity Hyper competitiveness. There is nothing "male" in nature about pushing people to compete in a giant free for all.

But there is a masculine (in the sense of gender roles that a person assumes for themselves) way to do it, and that is what is typically expressed in these settings. And it is typically more harmful for more people on average than the feminine expressions of same.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#137

Post by burnoutgal » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:06 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #102

sokoloff wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d rather work twice as many hours per year for half as many years. It’s not that one choice is obviously dominant over the other across all people.

Yes, given "getting hit by a bus" is a probabilistic event that is independent of my working hours, I would rather make 2x for half as many years, all other things being equal. I'd also rather make 3x for a third as many years, and so on, if it were possible. Given time value of money and compounding interest, it's always better to front load your working time and make Nx for 1/N as much calendar time worked. And for…

"getting hit for a bus" is a hyperbolic example meant to stand in for a catastrophic event. It really means you (or a family member like a parent, partner or child) has a major health event, for instance. Some things are random, some things tend to become more likely with age. Even just chronic pain or other health issues might make retirement less fun than travelling in your 20s (speaking as someone with chronic pain from surgical implants).

Besides health there's a lot of reasons why being certain about doing something now might be preferable to putting it off for 10+ years.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#138

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:07 PM UTC

xoofoog wrote: post #107

klipt wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems pretty sexist to associate solving hard problems with masculinity. Women at Google also work on hard problems.

The sexist part is not the "hard problems" but the competitiveness. I don't think sexism is intrinsic to solving hard problems - certainly gender-inclusive companies work on hard problems successfully. But in my experience those companies tend to be more collaborative. Google needs to celebrate heroes. Like Jeff Dean. Or Sanjay Ghemawat. Those are Great Men. They are "Living Gods" because they solved Really Hard Prob…

It seems that you missed their point: the toxicity is non-gendered. (I say you missed their point but they also kinda did a poor job of making it, FWIW.) There might be a point that Google's culture in practice is male-dominant but I think it's mistaken thinking that puts the toxicity on the male-dominance.

Consider your words as if they were being said about a woman:

> Proving you're smart by solving hard problems is a gorilla-chest-thumping exercise.

Isn't it still true?

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#139

Post by MivLives » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:07 PM UTC

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #77

ZainRiz wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is a bit more insidious than that As an engineer, you want to be working on cool new features too! Very few folks will be content sitting on their laurels just fixing the occasional bug or adding a touch more polish to a product that's already "done" If you setup a team to work that way, very soon you'll find that most of your engineers have left. Heck, the manager might get bored and leave too. "Okay, th…

Part of this is due to companies shooting themselves in the foot over and over, recruiting developers looking for challenges rather than grunt developers okay doing largely maintenance for a solid income. If they advocate themselves as providing the challenges for the former and filter out the latter, yes, obviously your employees are going to leave after they have to move that one div by 5 pixels for the umpteenth t…

Does anyone recruit grunt devs like that? That honestly sounds like what I'd prefer. I just want to come in, keep the lights on, and have enough mental energy for other stuff after work.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#140

Post by sytelus » Wed, May 04, 2022, 5:07 PM UTC

xoofoog wrote: post #82

Quoted post unavailable.

Since when solving "hard problems" became toxic masculinity? Are you saying Marie Curie and Ada Lovelace suffered from toxic masculinity?

PS: I am not endorsing promo-culture where impact of users/revenue don't matter but I do believe solving hard problems should be rewarded (for example, Nobel Prize or Field Model) and making it "sexist" issue is unproductive .