Live data from Hacker News

Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

qz.com

281–290 of 498 posts

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1,000x yes! My productivity comes in intense bursts of effort, with quiescent periods of research and reflection between them (or what looks like goofing off to rigidly process-oriented sorts). Combine that variability with mandatory daily scrum meetings and it makes me want to figuratively slit my wrists.

I'll even go a step further. I have a reputation as one of those people who has an ability to get things done at an incredible pace, but there's definitely days where I'm flat-out procrastinating and being lazy. For me, personally, and I suspect other people like me, it comes down to an ability to perform remarkably well under pressure, along with a lack of ability to perform well when the pressure is off. If there's…

I'm glad that I am not the only one. I had this impression that I'm a bad developer because I'm not consistent.

During my internship, I did quite a lot of work but in similar manner. Implement an interesting feature, then a week of laziness. Another feature and laziness.

However the other replies to your comment also make me afraid about some psychological problem. I think I need to visit a doctor! :)

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#282
post #280
post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But last I checked SV and California in general pumped out more innovation than the rest of the country combined, and is preparing to colonize another planet and electrify transport. This is what people refer to as a 'reality distortion field'.

Reality distortion fields don't emit actual products that work. It's a field alright, and it does have some reality-distorting side effects, but there is actually a "there" there. If I had to boil it down I'd say it's this: (1) California believes in the future. People in California (stereotypically) think about what they can do tomorrow, building on what they have today. Everyone else thinks about what they already…

Reality distortion fields don't emit actual products that work.

I'm not saying that a lot of great stuff doesn't come out of California/SV (just like Apple, for whom the 'reality distortion field' thing was first coined, also produces great products). The casualness with which you suppose that California alone is producing more innovation the entire rest of the country suggests that you're overwhelmingly focused on a very, very specific definition of 'innovation'.

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#283
post #128
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It boggles my mind, given the big money involved, why so many people continue to bet huge sums of cash on the proven short-term penny-wise/pound-foolish idiocy of MBA-think. I mean sure-- if your company is under cash flow pressure you have to pinch pennies. You have no choice. Spreadsheet says so, and spreadsheet's the boss. But if you're not, you should be investing and thinking long term cause the other guys proba…

You are sooooo right on with this. The top-10 MBA cult is awful. These are usually those people you knew in high school/college who were excellent at studying for and passing tests. Excellent at getting great grades on projects. Excellent at everything except building ANYTHING. I think that the people who are best at building things that people want don't want to get an MBA. They instead choose to spend their time bu…

The root cause of this is company ownership. Even if Page wants to follow an innovative approach, he might not be able to convince the board and the big shareholders to invest long term because they want to see their shares "appreciated".

If you want to keep innovating, the company need to stay nimble, with the owner(s) only interested in innovation. I don't know, maybe that's why the startup eco system works.

Another model that seems to work as well is the "duel roles". For example, Jeff Bezos lets the MBA optimize the hell out of Amazon, while he can play with Blue Origin in his spare time and focuses on more innovative technology ideas. Again, this is possible because Bezos probably has far more influence at Amazon than Page at Google.

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#284
post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How awesome is the food?

I like it a lot. I eat about 10 meals a week there, have lost about 25 pounds, and I hate going out to restaurants because you have to pay and the food isn't as good.

You're probably going to crappy restaurants.

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#285
There are a lot of good remarks in this thread.

I will try to add a point I haven't seen here yet:

Once I was in a big company with a big, famous research lab.

The group I was in, just three of us, was led by a guy who had taken some technical work and published some papers. The journals were peer-reviewed but semi-popular so reached some ordinary business customers. The papers fit in with a lot of hype at the time.

So, some of the customers picked up a phone and called our group for more information. So, presto, we got contact with real customers otherwise essentially forbidden in research.

Why forbidden? Because the sales/marketing guys wanted to be the guys who had total control over all contact with customers.

Eventually our little group broke up, and I wanted to do some research that would lead to products to be sold to customers. I started to discover that no one in the company wanted that. The big guys in research wanted to throttle all contacts outside research and mostly didn't want any. The people in sales, marketing, product development, and product production didn't want to deal with anything new from research. No one wanted a research worker bee talking to real customers.

Next, when research did come up with something that might be of interest to real customers, no one wanted to pursue that opportunity. Again, the marketing people wanted to be the source of all new product/service initiatives. No one in research wanted a research worker bee to get credit/blame having a product go from research to success/failure in the market.

In the end, research was forced to be essentially irrelevant to the business. Finally research was turned into a patent shop so that lawyers could take the big patent portfolio, go to companies, claim patent infringement, and 'license' the patent portfolio.

Point: Generally, a business organization, given a nice new product/service to offer their customers, has multiple layers of organizations and people, processes, reasons, etc. why they just do not, not want to come out with anything new. Period.

Curiously, yes, some of the people at some of the customer organizations were eager to work with our group in research as a way to look more innovative within their own organizations. Here, of course, they didn't have to work through layers of managers but only had to exercise their own freedom to handle their own responsibilities.

So, lesson: Commonly individuals are ready to do and offer new things to others or try new things from others, but it's the layers of managers who block such things.

So, the blockage of these layers of managers is one of the main reasons and opportunities for entrepreneurship.

Yes, it's dumber than paint, but it's usually the way of the world.

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't mind my asking, what role were you hired for? Were you part of an acquisition? I also joined in 2011 (SWE, normal hiring process) and my experience has been nearly the opposite of yours.

I've gone on about this elsewhere (search my comments), but it comes down to the utter stupidity of blind allocation for experienced engineers. There were projects that literally needed my exact skill set, and engineers on those teams did their best to try and open up a position for me on them, but middle-level management and HR blocked all their efforts. I could have stayed a year and hoped for the best, but by then…

I'm curious - were the projects you wanted to transfer to in niche technical areas or niche products?

It's very easy at Google to transfer from niche to core. If we (in Search) see someone languishing in another part of the company with skills that we want and they want to work with us, we make the transfer happen, and there's nothing HR or another manager can do about it. It's much harder to transfer from core to niche, and it usually requires a solid track record of sustained performance in your original assignment. I know a number of people that transfer from Search to Google-X after 4-5 years, but I know of virtually nobody that can make that transfer after 1-2. (Basically, the company wants to "make back" their initial investment in you before they'll let you work on speculative projects that may not show a return.)

Arguably some of the niche projects would be better done as startups - they don't face the constraints of working at a large, very visible multinational where they don't get resources or attention from higher management - but the entrepreneurial spirit isn't quite dead at Google.

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of this "idiocy" is in fact rational behavior. At many large companies, upper management is rewarded for short-term gains. The fact that microoptimizations that are harmful to the company in a broader perspective are rational on the part of individual mid-level managers working within the incentive framework provided by upper management , doesn't mean they aren't idiocy on the part of the upper management res…

I guess that conclusion would depend on whether the upper managers expected to better off (a) by staying at the same company for life or (b) by pumping the short-term returns and then using them as a shortcut to a better position at some other company, where the long-term consequences won't be felt.

Well, from what I have seen about the business people, their preferred method is b. Since by going to some other company, they can get higher salary, usually higher than the raise they'd be getting.

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#288
post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The top-10 MBA cult is awful." SV technorati pretentiousness is awful. > "MBA people love to go to school and get pieces of paper that say "pay me I'm smart." As opposed to some "Silicon Valley" types that don't have a clue about what it means to run a business, and say "pay me with investors money, I have lots of users!" > "I have to go in and deal with these assholes all the time. I have hard numbers, they have…

SV technorati pretentiousness is indeed awful sometimes, and stereotypical MBAs do not have a monopoly on brain-dead business ideas. But last I checked SV and California in general pumped out more innovation than the rest of the country combined, and is preparing to colonize another planet and electrify transport. There is obviously something fundamental in the "California mindset" that differs starkly from the major…

How much innovation has come out of San Diego, LA, Fresno or Sacramento? How many tech workers moved to silicon valley from somewhere else after college?

I'm not sure 'California mindset' is the right way of framing the innovation inside silicon valley.

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#289
post #168
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I watched them do shit like destroy products that big customers had money in hand ready to pay for when they were inches away from release. I'm watching friends in two different, reasonably large consulting companies (~700-1000 employees) suffer as their respective companies go through the consulting version of this kind of MBA suicide. In one case the company even decided to change their name and go through a rebr…

"At one company I used to work for, I also saw my leadership completely lose their minds and fire off all of the development staff, thinking we could coast with a new sales team and the product we had and pull ourselves into profitability." LOLZ I watched this particular face-plant occur once as well. When they actually got customers the results were hilarious . Hilarious because I was not a direct employee, mind you…

Did the guys at the top ever lose any money?

Re: Google’s “20% time,” which brought you Gmail and AdSense, is now as good as dead

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Michael Church (an outspoken ex-Googler) would disagree with you. One thing I remember him saying that was verified by several other Googlers, both current and ex, is that whether you are allowed 20% time depends on your team and your manager. And in fact, most teams in Google do not get 20% time, so you may be one of the lucky ones.

Michael Church is someone who is not worth listening to. He made massively incorrect assertions while at Google, and continues to after he basically talked himself out of his job in a very public way. Engineers get 20% time period. You can be asked to defer it for a quarter. On the other hand, most don't take it.

Just because he made some massively incorrect assertions while at Google does not mean he is not worth listening to. Everyone says incorrect things sometimes. I mean, can you claim that you are right all the time? Probably not.

I don't know him personally but I read the stuff he writes, and while his character can be a bit abrasive he's an extremely intelligent dude who can make astute observations and connections that other people miss. I think you're doing him a lot of disservice by dismissing him the way you did.

Post reply on HN