51–60 of 129 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>but it's a well known phenomena I'm a bit dubious when the top google link of this well known phenomenon is an urban dictionary definition.
That says more about you than the term, it's not top in an incog search.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's geolocation-based.
I work at Google in MTV and this is very exciting to me. I think the higher-ups at this company have the vision to pull this off, I hope I stay engaged here long enough to see it. The real concern (which Google can't fully solve) is housing. If you add 10k or 20k more employees in these beautiful new offices, where do they all live? I guess Google could build apartments too but that's not ideal, I don't want to live…
The cool thing about Google building housing is, it benefits you even if you don't want to live at work. Plenty of people (myself likely included) would enjoy living close to work in a lively apartment building surrounded by like-minded people. But if you're not one of them, you still win, by virtue of not having to compete with these people for housing elsewhere.
I'd work in a filthy basement in the middle of Kansas for a company/project that’s worth it.
I worked at a place that was doing important work, and when I started I had a nice office on the 5th floor. It had a beautiful view.
A couple of months later I, and the rest of the group, was moved to an underground office. Now, I don't mean basement. I mean the "company" had emptied out a huge underground oil bunker[1], built a false floor and interior walls, installed fans behind the walls to deal with fumes[2], then build a small cube farm. Radios and cell phones did not work in the new area, and the faint sound of wind behind the false walls was a bit distracting. That is a mighty big negative to balance the worth of a project.
1) it had been used by a electric plant that had been torn down
2) seems oil will "bleed" from concrete walls for some time and the air flow would get rid of the dangerous fumes, or so I was told
I'd work in a filthy basement in the middle of Kansas for a company/project that’s worth it.
I work for Google in Mountain View, and I'd prefer to work in a filthy basement in Kansas. The commute would be better, and the cost of living lower...
But wait, it's not SF? Well, neither is Kansas, and as far as urban life & young people go, Mountain View is a lot better than Kansas.
Also who is going to clean all those windows? New automated self cleaning window robots?
Looks like want to cover big parts of mountain view with a see-thru tent, and turn north-of-101 into a new downtown. Life under the dome. I absolutely hate it.
Castro is nice enough but there are enough people to support another urban center. I'm with you on being skeptical of dome life.
North Bayshore would obviously be better for Googlers, but there seems to be a lot more resistance to building housing there, for whatever reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://www.businessinsider.com/poorly-timed-headquarters-200... Or from a16z: "Pouring huge money into overly glorious new headquarters — “The Edifice Complex” — then repeating two years later. There’s also a danger in signaling to employees “we’ve made it, we’re amazing” (and while everyone hates the cramped but collaborative space when they’re in it, they miss it terribly after the move)."
That's anecdote, not data. Having 10 examples doesn't validate your point. And for the a16z stuff you quoted, the first paragraph says "10 ways to damage your fast-growing tech startup". Thanks for classifying Google as a fast-growing tech startup, but I think the startup phase was over a long time ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://www.businessinsider.com/poorly-timed-headquarters-200... Or from a16z: "Pouring huge money into overly glorious new headquarters — “The Edifice Complex” — then repeating two years later. There’s also a danger in signaling to employees “we’ve made it, we’re amazing” (and while everyone hates the cramped but collaborative space when they’re in it, they miss it terribly after the move)."
That's anecdote, not data. Having 10 examples doesn't validate your point. And for the a16z stuff you quoted, the first paragraph says "10 ways to damage your fast-growing tech startup". Thanks for classifying Google as a fast-growing tech startup, but I think the startup phase was over a long time ago.
Also hopefully they won't throw stones after they move in to their glass house!