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

Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

semafor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 265 posts

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#71

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

modeless wrote: post #33
aspectmin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would counter that voice assistants are not a failed experiment. I would suggest that Amazon and Google’s execution of said experiments have failed. I am extremely excited about the potential of projects like the Rabbit R1 and Humane.

I agree, I just think these new projects based on LLMs should be considered a different category, AI agents or something. The traditional grammar-based voice assistant architecture used by Google Assistant, Siri, Alexa, Bixby, etc is an abject failure, and not for lack of trying.

I think many parts of the architecture can be reused - in Alexa terms, all of the “skills” that integrate the assistant with various other services. IMO one of the main problems with assistants is that I don’t know what skills are available or how to invoke them. It’s like I’m a wizard who has to memorize all the spells I could be casting. It never happens because I don’t care enough. I think LLM’s could potentially help my making it easier to discover and invoke those skills.

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#72

Post by qp11 »

neilv wrote: post #22

So what's a good employer now, now that Google has been losing the reputation for treating employees well? (Multiple rounds of laying off people isn't treating only those people poorly, but also increasing stress for the people who remain, knowing they can suddenly be laid off as well.)

Just use your resume to Move to location where ever they are hiring. Dont worry about "good employer" certifications. That stuff belongs to a bygone era thats never coming back.

Large corps spanning hundreds of countries are managed primarily by finance arbitragers who use cross border differences in labor costs/interest rates/tax rates/govt regulations/freebies/tariffs etc to keep the lights on. As they get faster and faster at responding and taking advantage of these constant changes world wide, these methods come to dominate decision making, especially during uncertain times.

So dont worry about what they are doing. It will never make sense unless you spend time reading financial statements every day. Just move to whereever they are hiring. And they are always hiring.

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#73

Post by thanhhaimai »

wilg wrote: post #38
neilv wrote: post #22

So what's a good employer now, now that Google has been losing the reputation for treating employees well? (Multiple rounds of laying off people isn't treating only those people poorly, but also increasing stress for the people who remain, knowing they can suddenly be laid off as well.)

In your opinion what is the proper way to do a layoff? Or if any layoff is a problem, how do you prevent companies from hiring too quickly or whatever?

Layoff should be done with a large cut, but one round. If done right, it gives people the motivation to turn things around. Multiple rounds of layoff in a short amount of time (multiple rounds per year for example) gives the signal that the management can't figure out what is needed to turn the company around. At that time, your bests and brightests will leave.

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#74

Post by JKCalhoun »

neilv wrote: post #22

So what's a good employer now, now that Google has been losing the reputation for treating employees well? (Multiple rounds of laying off people isn't treating only those people poorly, but also increasing stress for the people who remain, knowing they can suddenly be laid off as well.)

I retired from Apple a few years ago but still follow the company. I am not aware of any layoffs at Apple. Others have pointed out that Apple didn't go on the same hiring boom that other companies did during Covid.

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#75

Post by bsdpufferfish »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #25
neilv wrote: post #22

So what's a good employer now, now that Google has been losing the reputation for treating employees well? (Multiple rounds of laying off people isn't treating only those people poorly, but also increasing stress for the people who remain, knowing they can suddenly be laid off as well.)

Federal government. No equity, but stability. Best place to take shelter during economic uncertainty or bearish conditions imho. Rode out the 2008 GFC at a DOE lab. https://www.usajobs.gov/

the value of stability is inversely related to confidence

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#76

Post by ramraj07 »

aspectmin wrote: post #29
modeless wrote: post #21

I don't use any feature of Google Assistant that wasn't present in the original Android voice search feature over a decade ago. And the few features I do use haven't improved in any way that I've noticed. In fact I feel like reliability has regressed. Google could have fired almost the whole team years ago and my user experience would not be different today. I consider voice assistants to be a failed experiment. It's…

I would counter that voice assistants are not a failed experiment. I would suggest that Amazon and Google’s execution of said experiments have failed. I am extremely excited about the potential of projects like the Rabbit R1 and Humane.

Not sure if any comment that holds Humane in high regard can be taken seriously though.

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#77

Post by trashtester »

RHSeeger wrote: post #49
razodactyl wrote: post #37

Why lay-off instead of repurpose? Will we consider smartphones as "Personal Assistants" anytime soon? AI has advanced considerably in terms of what can be processed locally but the restructure seems a bit over the top considering it's still the same concept in a broader sense. It's like laying off a team of developers simply because you changed branding.

I seem to recall Google saying that they don't hire for a specific position; they hire good developers and then find the right position for them. This idea is directly countered by the act of firing developers in a specific position because that position is no longer viable.

If a company wants to fire some people they believe can cause legal trouble if fired individually, somtimes they will spend a year or two reorganizing in a way that incidentally have many of these people all ending up in the same part of the organization.

Then they can do layoffs there, seemingly without violating any wrongful termination laws.

Somehow the best developers and others who contribute directly to the bottom line tend to be unaffected by such events.

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#78

Post by jillesvangurp »

razodactyl wrote: post #37

Why lay-off instead of repurpose? Will we consider smartphones as "Personal Assistants" anytime soon? AI has advanced considerably in terms of what can be processed locally but the restructure seems a bit over the top considering it's still the same concept in a broader sense. It's like laying off a team of developers simply because you changed branding.

> Why lay-off instead of repurpose?

Because they are overstaffed already and the cost reduction is more attractive.

Re: Google lays off hundreds working on its voice-activated assistant

#79

Post by happyopossum »

fumar wrote: post #58

I had not visited Semafor before. I like the simplicity of it. The word choice is clear and simple. Anyone have thoughts on reading Semafor once a week? Even though I am on here, I try to avoid too much daily news.

Semafor is great for getting the news without getting caught in the news-hype-scare-cycle.
Post reply on HN