51–60 of 1001 posts
> I take full responsibility for the decisions that led us here
As usual, he says nothing more what the consequences for him are.
It seems like all of the FAANGs have made severe strategic cockups when it comes to hiring lately. I wonder if it will affect their longterm attraction as employers.
Question for those who got laid-off from tech recently (say since Aug last year): how hard did you find it to get another tech job? Would be interesting to get some anecdotal evidence to shed light on the following WSJ article which claims laid-off tech workers are finding it easy to get re-recruited: https://www.wsj.com/articles/laid-off-tech-workers-quickly-f... If the phenomena described in the WSJ article is true…
Not been laid off myself, but I'm still being absolutely hounded by recruiters. There are still a ton of tech jobs out there, at least in the UK.
I blame companies for blaming with people's lives like this: not market dynamics. companies are the ones that decided to overhire, overpay - based on covid demand, cheap money that was floating around. companies not the market, resulted in a war over talent. now it's a war on talent. and of course everyone and their grandma will want to work at these tech companies where life is laid back and you get all the benefits…
But this concept of over-hiring and overpaying doesn't make sense.
There is no way to predict whether a positive economy will last 10 years or 10 months, and if you don't follow the economic growth you will lose bigger than if you follow it and have to make cuts later.
Everyone is quick to blame companies for "over-hiring", but they would also be quick to blame them for being too careful in a positive economy, and the market would punish them.
> Pivoting the company to be AI-first years ago That seems like a weird thing to throw in there. Does anyone else read it as a hasty "we were doing AI before ChatGPT was cool"?
Considering this was the Tweet that he sent yesterday.. https://twitter.com/sundarpichai/status/1615820298305118221
As a followup to AI blogpost (which is clearly in response to ChatGPT) https://ai.googleblog.com/2023/01/google-research-2022-beyon...
Can we update the title to let everyone know of the size: 12000?
Out of a total of roughly 140,000 employees (according to Wikipedia as of 2021). So a tad less than 10% of their workforce. Just thought I'd add that for perspective.
> Pivoting the company to be AI-first years ago That seems like a weird thing to throw in there. Does anyone else read it as a hasty "we were doing AI before ChatGPT was cool"?
definitely google is on the defensive right now[0] and just this week they had jeff dean do a "here's all our AI credentials" recap [1]
0: https://lspace.swyx.io/p/google-vs-openai
1: https://ai.googleblog.com/2023/01/google-research-2022-beyon...
> We’ll pay employees during the full notification period (minimum 60 days).
Weird flex. Would it be legal not to?
Google is an advertising business. And advertising revenue is extremely sensitive to changes in the economy (Companies cut ad spending when there isn’t as much demand to soak up). In the last recession Google was still rapidly stealing ad share from old media, but now they’ve won the game and are the market.
So this one makes complete sense to me. I’m sure everyone still thinks Google only hires engineers, but they actually employ A TON of ad sales people.
Does anyone know what "Outside the US, we’ll support employees in line with local practices." exactly means? In Germany I could imagine it to be "You're fired. Go to the Arbeitsagentur and find a new job". Of course within the legal forewarning period.
I blame companies for blaming with people's lives like this: not market dynamics. companies are the ones that decided to overhire, overpay - based on covid demand, cheap money that was floating around. companies not the market, resulted in a war over talent. now it's a war on talent. and of course everyone and their grandma will want to work at these tech companies where life is laid back and you get all the benefits…