I really like how the article speculates that talented Google employees who value "don't be evil" enough to consider quitting over SPYW would take jobs at... Facebook.
Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
91–100 of 301 posts
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#92Spent over 20 minutes to disable all of Google's bullshit personalization of search. I swear to Bob, if they shove one more god damn "feature" into Search i'm gonna make my default engine Yahoo.
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#93A few decades from now, when someone writes up an HBS case study on Google, how will it read? My suspicion is that Google is going to treat us to a very painful object lesson: what happens to your business when you compromise the values of a beloved core product. Here's the thing: having the most complete, most accurate, most relevant search results means never having to say you're sorry. You can add ads, you can do…
I disagree with your premise. The two previous "compromises" you cite are both examples of giving you what you want, instead of what you said you want. While your anecdotal data says that you are annoyingly misled by that, I'm sure there's a measure of selection bias there, and I'm sure Google has a lot more than anecdotal data. I'm a bit confused by the recent outcry about relevance. Do people disagree that social s…
The thing about social relevance is it has to still be relevant. Some of the examples out there, like linking to Google+ profiles that aren't updated vs twitter profiles that are, throw relevance right out the window in the favor of a “social” link.
In essence, if they can't get those social signals via fb or twitter, they simply shouldn't use them. Trying to build your own social network that is getting questionable traction (at least among the majority of the people I know), then using that network to judge search results, means that your search results suffer. Your social network has to be the one people are using before the social signals are actually useful and can be said to truly help with relevance.
That is the fundamental problem here, and unless the promotion of Google+ content results in better (not higher, because they've got plenty of accounts, but better) traction for that social network, then they're shooting result quality in the foot, if not directly in the head.
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#94A few decades from now, when someone writes up an HBS case study on Google, how will it read? My suspicion is that Google is going to treat us to a very painful object lesson: what happens to your business when you compromise the values of a beloved core product. Here's the thing: having the most complete, most accurate, most relevant search results means never having to say you're sorry. You can add ads, you can do…
I think Google thinks that you and I, who want a search tool that does what you ask for, are a niche market not worth going after.
I have no idea whether they're right.
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree with your premise. The two previous "compromises" you cite are both examples of giving you what you want, instead of what you said you want. While your anecdotal data says that you are annoyingly misled by that, I'm sure there's a measure of selection bias there, and I'm sure Google has a lot more than anecdotal data. I'm a bit confused by the recent outcry about relevance. Do people disagree that social s…
> The two previous "compromises" you cite are both examples of giving you what you want, instead of what you said you want. While your anecdotal data says that you are annoyingly misled by that, I'm sure there's a measure of selection bias there, and I'm sure Google has a lot more than anecdotal data. You can wave your hands around in pretty patterns all you want – the fact remains I'm a user who used to enjoy the pr…
You can wave your hands around in pretty patterns all you want – the fact remains I'm a user who used to enjoy the product and now is frustrated by it. I'm not alone in this. Have they annoyed enough users for it to be a big problem? We'll see. But big or not – it's a problem.
I'm not sure what you mean by "wave your hands around in pretty patterns." I'm not denying that these things annoy some or even many users. I'm saying Google's pretty obviously in the best position to be able to tell, and famously and religiously acts from that position to a fault.
We seem to agree that Google can't do nothing. I guess my perspective on it is that Google's willingness to change even its core source of revenue continues to draw admiration from me.
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#96It is quite the jump from “This is the path we’re headed down – a single unified, ‘beautiful’ product across everything. If you don’t get that, then you should probably work somewhere else" to "Agree with SPYW or GTFO". One is an admirable goal for a whale of a company and the other is a stubborn denial of contrary opinions. I thought Pando Daily was suppose to be a "different" tech news site.
When the top executives at your employer are saying "If you don’t get that, then you should probably work somewhere else" it means precisely "the matter is decided, agree, go along quietly, or GTFO".
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#97Leaders should lead with a unique style. Their way. Larry's playing catchup with Facebook while thinking he can be Steve Jobs, and that, together with guarding the cents by removing the little things that made life @Google awesome (bagels anyone?) has led to low morale among the workforce. Geeks with low morale don't get shit done. They don't innovate. They don't create. Google staff aren't code monkeys, they're not…
Bagels. Really? That's what it takes to make life at $COMPANY awesome? What about working with smart people on interesting problems?
Sometimes it's the small things that make working and life a bit awesome...so if it's bagels for some, then yes.
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#98Leaders should lead with a unique style. Their way. Larry's playing catchup with Facebook while thinking he can be Steve Jobs, and that, together with guarding the cents by removing the little things that made life @Google awesome (bagels anyone?) has led to low morale among the workforce. Geeks with low morale don't get shit done. They don't innovate. They don't create. Google staff aren't code monkeys, they're not…
Bagels. Really? That's what it takes to make life at $COMPANY awesome? What about working with smart people on interesting problems?
I think the math is something more like:
$COMPANY provides bagels. +1 "Sweet!" point. $COMPANY provides bagels, but later stops providing bagels. -10 "Sweet!" points.
The removal of a perk has a larger net negative impact on morale than its existence ever did on the positive side.
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmph, I'd forgotten that. Interesting that we wouldn't do that sort of thing now. It would seem too rude to mention Google explicitly. Whereas when we first started YC we were so obscure we couldn't successfully be rude to anyone.
It also dates it, in the same way that "Bill and Steve won't respect you in the morning" would make it uniquely a thing of ten years prior. Whereas making it generic makes it more timeless, and timelessness is good design in general.
I assume it's Steve Jobs, not Balmer.
(edit) Why am I at -1? Balmer is a more reasonable match for Bill, but he is not a founder. Jobs is a better fit, but it is odd to see him paired with Gates.
Re: Larry Page to Googlers: If You Don’t Get SPYW, Work Somewhere Else
#100I'm seeing a whole lot of hyperbole around here for what still seems to be pretty much a non-issue. Don't like SPYW? Don't use it. It's one button . Click it, and move on. Between the Don't Be Evil script stunt from facebook/twitter and the content-free blogspam from Sarah Lacy/pandodaily, it seems like there are a few people out there who really, really want this to be an issue. It isn't. Get over it.
I don't understand: one click opt-out is ok for Google but not for Facebook's product launches?