How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006) • Hacker News Board

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#101

Post by 6d0debc071 » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 12:57 PM UTC

You can't judge infantile behaviour from the presence of dinosaurs. I'm a woman in my mid 20s, I still have a fluffy snake from when I was 12 that I like to stroke when I'm thinking.

Oh no! People derive pleasure from things you no-longer do.

There's a difference between being mature and being solemn. Far too often I see the latter being treated as the former. Being mature is about responsibility, managing your own life, growing to understand what you enjoy and how you relate to others. A lot of people who think they're very adult, just because they don't have fluffy snakes and the like any more... a lot of them I don't see as adults; who've thought about their happiness and responsibilities; I see sad teenagers.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#102

Post by DavidWanjiru » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 1:17 PM UTC

In times like these, I'm minded to beware the echo chamber. Coz I'm very poor at telling when I've fallen into one.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#103

Post by wpietri » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 1:52 PM UTC

yuhong wrote: post #71

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I work on Google Fiber. You give us money, we give you an Internet connection. ...so that there's a pretty good chance that [you] will use Google Search, and [we] will then show you ads. Also, [we] inadvertently created a channel for analysis on [your] Web browsing habits if [we] were so inclined, which would enable [us] to refine advertising even more, among other things. If those are not the entire rationale for…

The ads are not bad by themselves.

The point of my ad is to manipulate your behavior, typically your purchasing behavior. I understand people differ on this, but I'm pretty comfortable saying it's bad to manipulate others for your own profit.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#104

Post by wpietri » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 1:53 PM UTC

michaelt wrote: post #97

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would contend that advertising, marketing, and consumerism are not noble causes for humanity, and engineers who devote their lifespan to enabling such things are wasting their precious allotment of time. Google's revenue driver is putting products in front of eyeballs. Imagine a world in which such a thing was not a market. Yes, you need awareness of products for people to buy said products. I get that. But no, you…

Does your assessment of the value of advertising include the things that are funded by adverts? That covers almost all print journalism, a lot of full-time internet content creators (from the onion to full time youtube content creators) not to mention Google Search, Gmail, Google Maps, Chrome and Youtube. If advertising includes everything paid for by adverts, advertising is useful to humanity. If advertising doesn't…

We happen to currently fund some things via ads. But that's an accident of history. If we didn't have ads, there's no reason to think we wouldn't have found another way.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#105

Post by o0-0o » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 2:23 PM UTC

michaelt wrote: post #97

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would contend that advertising, marketing, and consumerism are not noble causes for humanity, and engineers who devote their lifespan to enabling such things are wasting their precious allotment of time. Google's revenue driver is putting products in front of eyeballs. Imagine a world in which such a thing was not a market. Yes, you need awareness of products for people to buy said products. I get that. But no, you…

Does your assessment of the value of advertising include the things that are funded by adverts? That covers almost all print journalism, a lot of full-time internet content creators (from the onion to full time youtube content creators) not to mention Google Search, Gmail, Google Maps, Chrome and Youtube. If advertising includes everything paid for by adverts, advertising is useful to humanity. If advertising doesn't…

I would encourage you to support nonprofit journalism. High-end journalism is dying. Check out NPR or ProPublica. The lack of ads is refreshing.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#106

Post by general_failure » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 2:33 PM UTC

Very silly article. There are so many things wrong but i will comment on the first para. T any about living your life when most people seem to be outsourcing even bringing up children in the bay area since they have to work. Laundry and food are hardly about living your life.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#107

Post by n1ghtmare_ » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 3:14 PM UTC

I recently got an interview with Google (didn't get it), I'd kill to work with them. Even if they pay a bit less than what I'm currently getting, if it means I'll work on something less boring than what I'm doing now (typical business corporate bs where I'm working pretty much by myself).

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#108

Post by badman_ting » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 3:25 PM UTC

alvarosm wrote: post #96

cromwellian wrote: post #64

I'm 42. Most of the people I work with are in the 30s and 40s and have children. The stereotype of Google hiring nothing but Stanford grads has been over for a while. As much as I like Aaron, here he is guilty of excessive generalization. Even in 2006 the claims don't match reality. I lived through the first dot.com boom in CA, where companies were falling hand over fist to offer perks, many of them financially unsus…

You're comfortable in the Matrix, good for you. Just don't evangelize please.

Madness.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#109

Post by raldi » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 3:47 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #92

bmmayer1 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for saying "incidentally" instead of "ironically." You are one in a million.

Ironically, I was wrong about the buildings.

Incidentally, I believe the building has ironic columns.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#110

Post by foobarian » Wed, Dec 25, 2013, 4:18 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #75

derwiki wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised at how polarizing no offices vs open offices is. My first job at IBM, I had an office with two co-workers. They were great, but on days they were out it was sooo isolating. When I quit and took a job at a start up in SF with an open office plan, I loved it immediately. I could look across the room and see if the systems guy was there or getting coffee, instead of pinging into the Sametime void. So, I'm…

There's open space and then there's open space. If there are cube walls and other de facto barriers separating my space from the space of others in my team, and higher walls separating my team's space from the rest of the company, I'm happy. But if I have to choose from one extreme or another, I'd rather have my own separate space with an office and a door that closes rather than sitting at a conference table elbow t…

+1

At our company we have cubicles with walls just high enough that you can't see anyone sitting down, but you can see all across the space when standing up. If I need to ask someone a question I can pop up and see if they are there. If don't mind getting interrupted I switch my desk to a standing configuration, or if I need zone time I sit down and go at it. I prefer this kind of office design.

I also worked in both a real open space without dividers, and a shared office. I hated both. The open plan was too distracting and loud, while in the shared office the officemate got on my nerves, yet it was way lonely when she was out. Also people tended to keep their doors closed so there wasn't that feeling of community.