Live data from Hacker News

Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

nytimes.com

41–50 of 103 posts

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#41
post #35

> "From an H.R. standpoint, this is a nightmare... It completely reverses their image as a desirable employer." Good. I mentor early career and nontraditional-background engineers, and among this set, Google has acquired a certain reputation. To paraphrase, if you can just pass the interview bar, you'll find yourself in an organization where the pay is amazing, the oversight is minimal, the visa/greencard policy is g…

> If Google becomes less of a target for barely-qualified people who want to rest and vest, I'm all for it. Why though, do you work there?

Where did they say that they work at Google?

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#42
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful what you wish for: Many of those highly talented individuals will likely end up channeling their skills into areas that one could view as equally negative societally, such as hedge funds or defense contracting (like Palantir). This isn't to justify the current state of advertising, but rather to express skepticism that dismantling an industry will lead talented individuals to willingly accept a significant…

Actual defense contracting (Boeing/Lockheed, not Palantir) are hugely societally positive in defending the homeland. Unfortunately, Google engineers likely think of these companies as employing lesser people, mostly because they genuinely do pay very poorly.

I've worked for the DoD, so I've had to think through my take on the ethics of it all.

IMHO the issue is that a country's military can be used for good and/or for evil, and people generally are unable to participate when and only when they agree with a mission.

But I also agree about the pay. Even for labs on the DEMO pay scale, the median pay isn't very competitive with the private sector for well-qualified software developers. And there's no possibility of competing with the potential high-end of private sector pay.

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#43
post #35

> "From an H.R. standpoint, this is a nightmare... It completely reverses their image as a desirable employer." Good. I mentor early career and nontraditional-background engineers, and among this set, Google has acquired a certain reputation. To paraphrase, if you can just pass the interview bar, you'll find yourself in an organization where the pay is amazing, the oversight is minimal, the visa/greencard policy is g…

> If Google becomes less of a target for barely-qualified people who want to rest and vest, I'm all for it. Why though, do you work there?

Not anymore. I left years ago.

As an anecdote, right before I left I did my standard self-assessment for performance season. I to my horror I realized that I had accomplished nothing for an entire year. This was largely (I believe...) due to factors outside my control: I did lots of work, but nothing came of it due to delays, procedural slowdown, project cancellations, etc. Instead of reprimanding me for this lack of output, my manager put me up for promotion. I left shortly after this.

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#44
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful what you wish for: Many of those highly talented individuals will likely end up channeling their skills into areas that one could view as equally negative societally, such as hedge funds or defense contracting (like Palantir). This isn't to justify the current state of advertising, but rather to express skepticism that dismantling an industry will lead talented individuals to willingly accept a significant…

Actual defense contracting (Boeing/Lockheed, not Palantir) are hugely societally positive in defending the homeland. Unfortunately, Google engineers likely think of these companies as employing lesser people, mostly because they genuinely do pay very poorly.

Not really, the way that Congress allocates defense spending is based on funneling money to their donors and their districts and often not what is best for the military or even what the military is asking for.

For at least the last 30 years there have been times where military leaders wanted to close bases but Congress wouldn’t allow them because of the civilians in their districts who would lose jobs.

Not to mention that military leaders have been preaching for years that the current and growing US debt is an existential risk.

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I routinely got to see people who I would never want to work with get hired there. Can you expland on this? It doesn't really mesh with the preview sentence for me. >>If Google becomes less of a target for barely-qualified people who want to rest and vest It's always been my impression that people who actually manage to get a job at Google are extremely competent(so by definition - qualified) - is that not true?

Or able to spend six months studying for coding interviews…

If you mean to actually learn to code for a job that obviously requires coding skills...

While we are at it, also spend another year learning technology and design patterns to prep for a design interview.

Listen, nobody gets a job at Google because they studied for coding interview. Coding is a precondition of getting the job, but it is far from enough to secure it.

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#46
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In a country with not much of a social safety net and runaway medical/elder care costs is there really another option? Yes, there is really another option, because most people don't even have the option of taking Google-level compensation. Indeed, it's very likely that working as a software engineer for less than BigCo compensation will still put you ahead financially of most people. "How is it an option to live li…

The tricky part is that there's "living within your means" and there's "living within what your means could be if you made significantly less money than you do now". You can live just fine -- hell, still be in a top income percentile -- on half of what a well compensated big tech SWE gets in their total comp package. But just as software expands to fill the hardware available, so do lifestyles expand to fit the budge…

> it's still a whole thing, a stressful transformation that takes a large investment of time and energy to achieve.

Unless you're born with a silver spoon in your mouth, I wouldn't call it a "transformation". I would call it "normal". If there's a transformation, it's from a person who has to be concerned about budgets to a person who makes so much money that they don't need to care.

I guess I'm just "lucky" that I've never had BigCo compensation, so I don't have to worry about the stressful transformation.

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#47

> "From an H.R. standpoint, this is a nightmare... It completely reverses their image as a desirable employer." Good. I mentor early career and nontraditional-background engineers, and among this set, Google has acquired a certain reputation. To paraphrase, if you can just pass the interview bar, you'll find yourself in an organization where the pay is amazing, the oversight is minimal, the visa/greencard policy is g…

The fundamental insight of modern democracy, is not 1 man 1 vote, but that of balances and checks against power.

1 man 1 vote does not lead to the wisest or most long term of decision making, however, without it, the natural tendency is for the politician class and the wealthy to coalesce into one, with money reinforcing political power, and vice versa, sucking away any vitality in society.

In the US, as well as in many countries, its been shown again and again that money cannot simply buy the vote of every person. And there mass voting already demonstrates its power.

This principle extends to every facet of society. Company executives are checked by the board, the board checked by the shareholders, the shareholders checked by each other (the US allows shorting stocks for a reason).

I therefore find it questionable that a bunch of unchecked software engineers will lead to very good outcomes. No oversight, no pressure = freedom to pursue creativity and outcomes? Or merely idle hands? When people were proposing working multiple remote jobs during COVID, was that people being smart, or unethical behaviour being tolerated and justified?

Now the pendulum swinging too far back into the other direction would also be bad. See what happens to Boeing when engineers get completely subjugated by MBA management. But software people should not treat the exhortation to work a full 40 hour week as being whipped by slaves.

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual defense contracting (Boeing/Lockheed, not Palantir) are hugely societally positive in defending the homeland. Unfortunately, Google engineers likely think of these companies as employing lesser people, mostly because they genuinely do pay very poorly.

Which homeland? My view of society extends beyond american borders, and it is not improved by the US drone bombing teenagers a world away.

I agree there's not a consensus on this kind of thing.

My main takeaway is that voting (and organizing votes) really matters a lot.

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#49
post #2

Xoogler here, left in 2015. I don't think Google's offices have been "happy" or "exuberant" for a long time. The big cultural shift was already underway when I left.

Yeah :| my problem right now is that I haven't been outside in a very long time, am paid incredibly well, and really have hyper specialized in getting stuff done at Google.

The things I've done I can only really explain well to googlers. So it's been quite challenging finding a role outside that pays me as well.

Re: Google's once happy offices feel the chill of layoffs

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programmers in my experience are some of the least risky people I know. The majority will absolutely take their talents to the next highest bidder regardless of moral or ethical scruples. I don’t blame em, personally, I also see it as the only logical outcome

In a country with not much of a social safety net and runaway medical/elder care costs is there really another option? You need to sock away massive amounts of money as quickly as possible if you want to reduce tail risk and as a side bonus you might get to reach financial freedom earlier. My choices would be very different if I didn't think I was more or less on my own.

> My choices would be very different if I didn't think I was more or less on my own.

I suspect this is well understood by the forces that shape social structure in the U.S., and that the current state of affairs is largely by design.

Post reply on HN