Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011) • Hacker News Board

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#81

Post by michaelochurch » Fri, May 03, 2013, 2:25 AM UTC

nostrademons wrote: post #80

michaelochurch wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references. I don't know what you're talking about. You need to get over this delusion that Google is wrong and and you are right Not delusion. All I have said is that they're badly run and that most of the corrosion is in the middle-management…

" The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references. I don't know what you're talking about." He's talking about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5625659 "Yes, I have taken aim at Google's management. If you are an engineer, you aren't in this fight and you should stay out,…

It sounds like you have a good manager, so we have different experiences.

Let me explain my Google manager. His MO was, about 1-2 months in, to use fake performance problems to get people to disclose health problems, then use knowledge of their health issues to toy with them. I have tons of evidence for a pattern of this with him. I also have (verbally) that HR knows it to be a long-standing problem, but does nothing because if a manager has a reputation for "delivering", that's carte blanche to treat reports however one wishes.

HR's job is to step in and right things when managers fail, and at Google, they refuse to do that. They see their job as to protect managers. I know that most companies are this way, but it's disgusting.

There are a lot of abuses of power by management at Google, and HR does nothing about it. The going ideology is that if a manager is "delivering", his word is gold. Combine this with a Kafkaesque nightmare of closed allocation, and you get a lot of ugliness.

I have nothing but respect for the vast majority of the engineers I met at Google. But I cannot respect a management structure that thinks closed allocation is appropriate for a tech company, or that making political-success reviews part of the transfer process is morally acceptable. Google's performance review system is a play-for-play copy of Enron's. This has completely fucked up what should otherwise be an awesome technology company.

I would actually support a class-action suit by Google's shareholders against the managers who instituted closed allocation and calibration scores (breach of fiduciary duty). Those assholes are guilty of destroying several billion dollars worth of value, and justice should be sought against them. Employees who were burned by that horrible system should also be plaintiffs in this suit, because that shit fucks up peoples' careers, too. It's just all-around wrong.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#82

Post by potatolicious » Fri, May 03, 2013, 4:25 AM UTC

10ki wrote: post #78

potatolicious wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't the sort of thing author is talking about. We're talking about the nasty, mean-spirited, no-holds-barred evisceration of each other by hiding behind the guise of criticism. Take a few days ago: "GitHub Gracious Helps Female Programmers Cower in Fear"[1] Nobody is saying you have to agree with everything GitHub does re: sexism, or that they are above criticism. Nobody is saying you should be patting everyon…

> Presentation matters. Criticism wrapped in vitriol becomes just vitriol, and vitriol wrapped in criticism still doesn't become good criticism. As if it would help you prove your point, that's completely braindead. What you describe is just a different form of shooting the messenger; you don't like the way they said it so you ignore what they said. For example if I point out your solution is N^2 and you're an idiot…

> "but if you throw that away because of the flame title then you've lost that"

Yes, and rightfully so. I have no problems with the author's views, I have every problem with people being assholes and douchebags with each other.

I have zero qualms about missing the thoughts of people who haven't the least modicum of respect for their fellow man. I don't care how smart you are, at the end of the day intelligence, or being right, is not the measure of a human being.

> "you don't like the way they said it so you ignore what they said"

Yes. Like I said, presentation matters.

The antisocial, the arrogant, the whatevers of the world who cannot massage their thoughts into something worth communicating will rage impotently at the fact that no one is listening to them. Us nerds have a bad habit of letting this turn into a superiority complex, but no matter how superior you might feel, still no one is listening.

At the end of the day, we're each only on this lonely rock for a short amount of time. Many of us have figured out that we'd much rather be good to one another with our time than to spend it stroking our egos by seething with rage about everything.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#83

Post by kyllo » Fri, May 03, 2013, 4:54 AM UTC

michaelochurch wrote: post #81

nostrademons wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references. I don't know what you're talking about." He's talking about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5625659 "Yes, I have taken aim at Google's management. If you are an engineer, you aren't in this fight and you should stay out,…

It sounds like you have a good manager, so we have different experiences. Let me explain my Google manager. His MO was, about 1-2 months in, to use fake performance problems to get people to disclose health problems, then use knowledge of their health issues to toy with them. I have tons of evidence for a pattern of this with him. I also have (verbally) that HR knows it to be a long-standing problem, but does nothing…

HR's job is to step in and right things when managers fail, and at Google, they refuse to do that.

No, that's a labor union's job. HR's job is to protect the company by mitigating risk from L&I related lawsuits. Period.

Programming can be considered a trade, and I think 99% of the shit you complain about could be solved by programmers unionizing. But of course, that would bring its own new set of problems.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#84

Post by yuhong » Fri, May 03, 2013, 5:54 AM UTC

kyllo wrote: post #83

michaelochurch wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you have a good manager, so we have different experiences. Let me explain my Google manager. His MO was, about 1-2 months in, to use fake performance problems to get people to disclose health problems, then use knowledge of their health issues to toy with them. I have tons of evidence for a pattern of this with him. I also have (verbally) that HR knows it to be a long-standing problem, but does nothing…

HR's job is to step in and right things when managers fail, and at Google, they refuse to do that. No, that's a labor union's job. HR's job is to protect the company by mitigating risk from L&I related lawsuits. Period. Programming can be considered a trade, and I think 99% of the shit you complain about could be solved by programmers unionizing. But of course, that would bring its own new set of problems.

michaelochurch has blogged on this matter: http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/11/18/programmers-d...

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#85

Post by [deleted] » Fri, May 03, 2013, 5:54 AM UTC

kyllo wrote: post #83

michaelochurch wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you have a good manager, so we have different experiences. Let me explain my Google manager. His MO was, about 1-2 months in, to use fake performance problems to get people to disclose health problems, then use knowledge of their health issues to toy with them. I have tons of evidence for a pattern of this with him. I also have (verbally) that HR knows it to be a long-standing problem, but does nothing…

HR's job is to step in and right things when managers fail, and at Google, they refuse to do that. No, that's a labor union's job. HR's job is to protect the company by mitigating risk from L&I related lawsuits. Period. Programming can be considered a trade, and I think 99% of the shit you complain about could be solved by programmers unionizing. But of course, that would bring its own new set of problems.

[deleted]

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#86

Post by kyllo » Fri, May 03, 2013, 7:17 AM UTC

yuhong wrote: post #84

kyllo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HR's job is to step in and right things when managers fail, and at Google, they refuse to do that. No, that's a labor union's job. HR's job is to protect the company by mitigating risk from L&I related lawsuits. Period. Programming can be considered a trade, and I think 99% of the shit you complain about could be solved by programmers unionizing. But of course, that would bring its own new set of problems.

michaelochurch has blogged on this matter: http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/11/18/programmers-d...

Sure, a strong professional association might be better than a labor union then. Point is, though, if you're looking to HR to represent your rights and interests, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#87

Post by userulluipeste » Fri, May 03, 2013, 10:15 AM UTC

Udo wrote: post #30

The worst thing that can happen to a Show HN post is people totally ignoring it. When I post something of my own here, I expect a certain amount of honesty and criticism, as long as it is constructive. Being "constructive" does not mean being congratulatory, shoulder-patting, praising, or anything like that. It means that the feedback itself should provide some kind of value, preferably for the benefit of the project…

> "What's the points of this? I've been doing the same thing since the 80s by piping four shell commands together?!?" - is not really constructive.

> I think using the slightly formulaic "What I liked: X; What could be improved: Y" has a high chance of being constructive feedback.

I think you're confusing critique with mentorship. What you're expecting is something wise to be said, or at least something useful to you. Critique is not necessarily like that. Critique is encompassing pretty much everything that others answer you freely, like it or not.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#88

Post by michaelochurch » Fri, May 03, 2013, 12:04 PM UTC

kyllo wrote: post #83

michaelochurch wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you have a good manager, so we have different experiences. Let me explain my Google manager. His MO was, about 1-2 months in, to use fake performance problems to get people to disclose health problems, then use knowledge of their health issues to toy with them. I have tons of evidence for a pattern of this with him. I also have (verbally) that HR knows it to be a long-standing problem, but does nothing…

HR's job is to step in and right things when managers fail, and at Google, they refuse to do that. No, that's a labor union's job. HR's job is to protect the company by mitigating risk from L&I related lawsuits. Period. Programming can be considered a trade, and I think 99% of the shit you complain about could be solved by programmers unionizing. But of course, that would bring its own new set of problems.

HR's job, I would say, is to keep employment relationships in a state that maximizes shareholder value.

That includes recruiting, compensation fairness, firing of negative-impact personnel, and legal risk reduction. It doesn't align them always with employees, or always with management.

It also means that good employees (who would deliver high value to the company if in a better managerial context) should be protected against bad managers. That's something HR rarely has the courage to do in most companies, but at Google, they don't even try.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#89

Post by 10ki » Fri, May 03, 2013, 6:39 PM UTC

potatolicious wrote: post #82

10ki wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Presentation matters. Criticism wrapped in vitriol becomes just vitriol, and vitriol wrapped in criticism still doesn't become good criticism. As if it would help you prove your point, that's completely braindead. What you describe is just a different form of shooting the messenger; you don't like the way they said it so you ignore what they said. For example if I point out your solution is N^2 and you're an idiot…

> "but if you throw that away because of the flame title then you've lost that" Yes, and rightfully so. I have no problems with the author's views, I have every problem with people being assholes and douchebags with each other. I have zero qualms about missing the thoughts of people who haven't the least modicum of respect for their fellow man. I don't care how smart you are, at the end of the day intelligence, or be…

> Yes, and rightfully so.

I think you meant righteously so. You are saying to discount facts and logic because the person saying them offended your sensibilities. You're just building a bubble of ignorance around yourself by discounting everything unseemly.

The reason why you find 'geek culture' hostile is because geeks tend to value merit more than you value morality. The computer does not care if the n log n algorithm was created by an evil genius or Ned Flanders, and neither do geeks.

There is tons of creative and worthwhile content on 4chan than you'll ever know and will deny exists (or has a right to exist). At the end of the day, there's more humanity on display at 4chan than HN.