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

The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

andzwa.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 292 posts

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#51

Post by [deleted] »

fnfjfk wrote: post #47
paxys wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google had that reputation when compared to Amazon and Facebook, but that is hardly a bad thing considering the culture at those companies (and it's not like they are doing too hot right now either despite all that stack ranking and overwork). There are plenty of large tech companies with real "retirement home" reputations – Microsoft, Cisco, IBM, Oracle, VMware, Adobe, Intel, HP, Dell... There's no comparison betwee…

Are places like HP and Dell really comparable to Google on TC? You can also chill out working at a quiet local bookstore or other “BaristaFIRE” jobs that people like, but you’re not getting paid $500k to do it… (Microsoft definitely competes now)

[deleted]

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#52

Post by paxys »

hsn915 wrote: post #40
kerblang wrote: post #20

You work for google because you make insane money and have cachet you can take anywhere and get hired instantly. Hell, you can pull in 10 million funding for your startup idea if you like. Or just retire, get a boat, go sailing. Of course all of this had to go bad. Come on now. Stop whining already. I work in the IT sewer fighting rats. I will always have work. I'm filthy and I smell bad, but I'm doing fine, and no,…

Observing super priviliged people whining about how unfair it is to get laid off is really something.

There's nothing "privileged" about working at Google. It's a job, like anything else in tech.

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#53

Post by fnfjfk »

logicalmonster wrote: post #11

Is there any publicly available commentary on what kinds of roles these big tech companies such as Google were chopping, and in what percentages? Were these layoffs mostly recruiting/HR types, various managers, marketers, etc, or programmers? Did they chop 70% of their recruiting/HR types, but closer to 1% of their techies, or vice versa? Analyzing these layoffs IMO might be best done through the lens of what kind of…

Likely recruiting was more affected as a percentage, it just makes sense if you are not hiring nearly as much as you used to.

I don’t think that only programmers are “real talent” though.

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#54

Post by [deleted] »

bradleyjg wrote: post #10

This ruling [Dodge vs Ford Motor Company (1919)] stands at the heart of the current situations being faced by companies like Google today. —- It really doesn’t. First, that’s a Michigan case interpreting Michigan law. Almost every non trivial US company is incorporated in Delaware and subject to Delaware law. Delaware law does have somewhat similar cases, eBay v. Newmark is a good one to read but … Second, in both th…

[deleted]

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#55

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

"Members only".

Subscriptions and paywalls proliferate because Google as middleman takes a cut and makes online ads too expensive.^1

Yet Google gets a "free subscription" and in this case publishes a copy in its cache.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:...

1. Argument of US government and state AGs in latest suit against Google for Sherman Act violations. See paras 9 and 267.

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#56

Post by tayo42 »

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #27
themitigating wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"but Google has long been known as the FAANG to go to if you want to chill, coast, and ves" Is that a fact or just your perception?

Certainly is public opinion. I remember people trying to make the claim that Google paying smart people to not work was a good strategy because it prevented those workers from creating start-ups that would compete with Google. The Blind app is an interesting place.

Idk if I would call blind public opinion

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#57

Post by [deleted] »

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #27
themitigating wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"but Google has long been known as the FAANG to go to if you want to chill, coast, and ves" Is that a fact or just your perception?

Certainly is public opinion. I remember people trying to make the claim that Google paying smart people to not work was a good strategy because it prevented those workers from creating start-ups that would compete with Google. The Blind app is an interesting place.

[deleted]

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#58

Post by lumost »

fnfjfk wrote: post #35
themitigating wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"but Google has long been known as the FAANG to go to if you want to chill, coast, and ves" Is that a fact or just your perception?

Obviously it is impossible to measure this sort of thing objectively, but if you know enough people that bounce around in FAANGs or check Blind, this is pretty widely the opinion.

Blind turns into the worst version of a company pretty quickly. It would have you believe that both anyone can get a job at certain companies and that others fire their entire staff.

My understanding is that google historically simply didn’t give raises or approve projects for under performers. As long as someone didn’t rock the boat or put up low quality CRs, or stop working entirely, they would be left alone - and maybe google wouldn’t bother to give them any new stocks when their grant expired.

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#59

Post by anonymouskimmer »

vsskanth wrote: post #2

> The Dodge brothers owned 10% of Ford and opposed this and took Ford to court because they wanted the payments to be able to start their own company. They won and Ford was not allowed to lower prices or raise salaries at the company thus enshrining maximising shareholder value into law. Is maximizing shareholder value really law now ? Just trying to understand if CEOs are legally responsible to return maximum share…

The linked wikipedia article directly contradicts the medium article on this.

With respect to the Dodge decision, could other Ford shareholders have sued the Dodge brothers for forcing Ford to yield dividends once the Dodge brothers then used those dividends to undercut the value of Ford stock by creating a competitor? Or do minority shareholders not have a duty to other minority shareholders the way majority shareholders do?

Re: The Google layoffs are about personal ambition and poor leadership

#60

Post by code_lettuce »

revskill wrote: post #49

As people get more intelligent and smarter, the Ad business will die. I'm sure about it. In my whole life, there's no single ad that makes sense for me to see and click, because it's annoying. I love smart search results, not smart ad results.

I wonder if the world is trending in this direction. If anything, the moat between the two is growing larger, highlighting the differences. Everyone in your bubble may seem to be growing and learning, but you're also the type who spends their off time browsing highly technical message boards.
Post reply on HN