Google to reduce workforce by 12k • Hacker News Board

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#581

Post by Octokiddie » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:09 PM UTC

> Over the past two years we’ve seen periods of dramatic growth. To match and fuel that growth, we hired for a different economic reality than the one we face today.

Translation: we fell for the economic mirage.

I'm not buying it. Google sees something on the economic horizon and is now bracing for impact. And that something is not a mean reversion. It's an overcorrection.

Google's main product, advertising, puts it in a unique position to see into the economic future. Google is a bellwether. If the coming recession were truly going to be "mild," then Google wouldn't care.

It's time for everyone in tech to admit that the last two years were a mirage driven in part by corporate FOMO. Many do, but I don't think they're prepared for what comes next.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#582

Post by ascagnel_ » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:10 PM UTC

boplicity wrote: post #559

EthanHeilman wrote: post #543

The Google of 2005 wouldn't do this. The Google of 2005 would use this as opportunity to monopolize all the talent and move into some new space and eat everything with fantastic software. * I had a good seat to watch google obliterate mapquest and yahoomaps with amazing javascript maps. It was day and night. Yahoo was penny pinching their mapping engineers while Google was buying geographic satellite companies and in…

That also explains why carriers are obsessed with buying media companies; they just can't let go of their dreams of a walled garden.

Carriers are doing their best to avoid becoming a "dumb pipe" utility-style service where other people make all the money.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#583

Post by throw123123123 » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:11 PM UTC

AYBABTME wrote: post #422

Every time I read stuff like: > "Over the past two years we’ve seen periods of dramatic growth. To match and fuel that growth, we hired for a different economic reality than the one we face today." I feel taken for a fool. Every damn body knew that the last 2 years were not representative of the future. Everybody knew that free-money, COVID and related phenomenons were a phase. I can't believe that Google, Shopify, C…

Your clairvoyance must have made you extremely rich as you assess these events with accuracy and perfect timing, and thus made the right open-market financial bets to profit from them.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#584

Post by xiphias2 » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:12 PM UTC

EthanHeilman wrote: post #543

The Google of 2005 wouldn't do this. The Google of 2005 would use this as opportunity to monopolize all the talent and move into some new space and eat everything with fantastic software. * I had a good seat to watch google obliterate mapquest and yahoomaps with amazing javascript maps. It was day and night. Yahoo was penny pinching their mapping engineers while Google was buying geographic satellite companies and in…

Google of 2008 didn't do this, I was there.

The difference is that current Google is full of non-tech non-sales people who fight with eachother to reorganize tech people who are trying to build things.

Other tech people change the API for no reason and give work to 1000 more people to ,,upgrade to the newer system'' and stop maintaining the old system.

Also the new CEO is not a software engineer, so he doesn't understand the problems they are facing day to day.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#585

Post by bumby » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:12 PM UTC

acdha wrote: post #577

bumby wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are your examples also examples of survivorship bias? I was reading in the WSJ how all tech seems to be paring back their moonshot programs. I think the Google example was a program cut that had $1B in revenue but $6B in costs. (forgive me if the exact numbers are wrong). It seems like prioritizing and cutting back on programs that lose money (despite being innovative or inspiring) is a natural consequence of economi…

There’s definitely some risk of that but I’d put it more at 2008: that’s when Google acquired DoubleClick, and the sea change away from building products which people wanted to use seemed to start a bit later when the ad focus had set in. It’s hard to think of something they’ve done since then which has been a popular success.

>when the ad focus had set in

Isn't that the point? Something like 80% of their revenue is from ads so that's where their focus lies. As cool as a lot of the other products are, they just don't seem to do much for the "business" other than supporting the data for targeted ads. Meaning, anything that does support their main revenue stream is at risk during economic downturns. (I'd be happy to be proven wrong by someone who, unlike me, has real insight)

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#586

Post by rumblefrog » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:13 PM UTC

In the dawn of rounds and rounds of layoffs in the tech sector. How would one advise a new CS BS graduate to tread?

I've been told that young engineers are still in demand, and to look for opportunities in small startups, but seemingly out of the applications, merely no one has moved forward or replied back.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#587

Post by avhception » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:14 PM UTC

BowBun wrote: post #566

FlyingSnake wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever’s happening is a prime example of how disruptions happen in tech industry. Previous giants become fossils and new incumbents take the spot. IBM -> GE -> Google etc will all follow the same trajectory towards irrelevance.

In general I agree that these companies retract from the forefront and maybe aren't the innovative powerhouses that they once were, however both IBM and GE do fine as businesses and will probably be around for a long time. And I think it's important we have a bit of both in the world. The new startups produce innovation and cutting-edge tech, but we need these huge monoliths for capital-intensive projects. Google has…

While I think you're right and GE is a fine example, I'm not so sure with IBM. They seem to really have lost any direction or vision of what they actually want to do.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#588

Post by Firmwarrior » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:14 PM UTC

EthanHeilman wrote: post #543

The Google of 2005 wouldn't do this. The Google of 2005 would use this as opportunity to monopolize all the talent and move into some new space and eat everything with fantastic software. * I had a good seat to watch google obliterate mapquest and yahoomaps with amazing javascript maps. It was day and night. Yahoo was penny pinching their mapping engineers while Google was buying geographic satellite companies and in…

I dug up the original story* and read it for the first time just now, it was a great read. I particularly like the imagery of Apple and Google dealing the deathblow to that idiotic app-rental scam the carriers had been running

It seems like we've pretty much come full circle in the 10-15 years since then. I wonder who'll be the ones to put old Google to sleep..

* A PDF of it popped right up in search results

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#589

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:15 PM UTC

insane_dreamer wrote: post #515

chippiewill wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google don't have to worry about such activist shareholders in the same way that other companies do. Larry Page and Sergey Brin have the controlling share in Alphabet thanks to their Class B shares. They only have a fiduciary responsibility to the other shareholders.

So does Zuckerberg. But while he and Page/Brin may have a controlling interest in _voting_ stock, they own a much smaller amount of overall shares. Sure, activists can't control the board, and Zuck/Page/Brin are not in danger of being ousted, their fiduciary duty is to the shareholders not just those with voting rights.

Facebook, nor Google, is firing people because of activist investors. They're firing them because they just way over hired people recently, and they have way too many people for what they can adequately put to good use given their size now.

Feels like everyone wants to put a semi "conspiratorial" twist on these announcements when it's pretty obvious what the underlying driver is.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#590

Post by kderbyma » Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:17 PM UTC

xiphias2 wrote: post #584

EthanHeilman wrote: post #543

The Google of 2005 wouldn't do this. The Google of 2005 would use this as opportunity to monopolize all the talent and move into some new space and eat everything with fantastic software. * I had a good seat to watch google obliterate mapquest and yahoomaps with amazing javascript maps. It was day and night. Yahoo was penny pinching their mapping engineers while Google was buying geographic satellite companies and in…

Google of 2008 didn't do this, I was there. The difference is that current Google is full of non-tech non-sales people who fight with eachother to reorganize tech people who are trying to build things. Other tech people change the API for no reason and give work to 1000 more people to ,,upgrade to the newer system'' and stop maintaining the old system. Also the new CEO is not a software engineer, so he doesn't unders…

Pinchai has been a Terrible pick. He made google just worse. Like a passive aggressive leader...