A less popular takeaway from this article, albeit anecdotal, is that Twitter ads work really well when targeted appropriately.
Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
171–180 of 300 posts
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why it's a scam. Isn't an "aqui-hire" pretty standard practice these days?
It's a scam because the author didn't believe there was any 'acqui' part of the 'acqui-hire'. He believed the proposition of an acquisition was a fabrication intended to lure him in for an interview.
$2M as part of a signing bonus seems like an "acqui" to me. It just wasn't enough for the author. Which is fine, but not exactly as much of a scam as he implied.
This article just seems to be a real world example of PG's essay this month about "don't talk to corp dev." [1]
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#173For a period I was heavily recruited by google. Their recruiters tried a great many variations of attempts to trick me into interviewing for a job. It seems weird that they would do this, because pretty soon, it would become obvious that it was a job interview and nothing more. Maybe there are a lot of talented engineers out there who are doing startups but aren't really committed to them and google manages via the f…
It actually goes both ways. In fact, some start-up people welcome this kind of approaches, because they can turn around and show potential investors/employees that "we are validated by Big Names at Google, come and join us". Hell, I've seen this first hand and it was not even an email, just a passing compliment from some reasonably "big name". So it's all a game, don't hate the players, hate the rules. It makes it ha…
>So it's all a game, don't hate the players, hate the rules.
There are no rules. Trying to paint this turd with catchy slogans isn't helpful either.
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
The accelerometer and gyroscope. The double integral of acceleration is displacement. On iPhones/iOS it's extremely accurate to the point where you can integrate displacement from it and not be far off from the real result - over short timespans/distances anyways. One of the lesser-appreciated qualities of Apple hardware (more accurately, hardware and drivers) is the quality and accuracy of their sensors.
I have tried this as well - it was definitely not as simple as taking the double integral. In my experience moving and the stopping the phone would always end up with the two accelerations not exactly canceling out so that the calculated position would drift away from the true position at a constant rate. Even applying a floor to velocity to eliminate the drift, the distances calculated for simple linear motions were…
I have tried this as well - it was definitely not as simple as taking the double integral.
Right. RoomScan requires you to stop and touch the device to the wall frequently. This allows them to re-zero the velocity. Small IC accelerometers and gyros aren't good enough for dead-reckoning over any substantial distance.
What you really want is 3D SLAM, using the cameras. That's been done on Apple devices, for a rather lame "Ball Invasion" game. That team was acquired by Facebook for their VR effort.
There's source code for SLAM. See "slam6d.sourceforge.net". This is the right way to do indoor localization. The better robot vacuums (Neato and Dyson) use it.
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#175Does anyone have similar experiences with Google?
The few times I've interviewed with Google (plain old job interviews, not as an acquisition or acqui-hire), they've always been pretty arrogant. Enough so that I wouldn't interview with them again if they contacted me. The attitude is clearly, "You're going to jump through our hoops and do what we say, because we're Google and we're totally awesome and we can take you or leave you." I don't know if the guy in this st…
> "You're going to jump through our hoops and do what we say, because we're Google and we're totally awesome and we can take you or leave you."
I've met more than my fair share of the Googlers that exhibit an air of arrogance, but are you sure their hoops aren't just Google's standard interview process?
Google has stated their interview process is designed to produce very few false positives, accepting that false negatives are a necessary by-product.
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#176I really don't see how Google or any other company would be so interested in hiring OP or acquiring the product based on what it does. Even in Silicon Valley there are some standards by which valuations are done. This seems like a scam from the other end to gain attention.
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a recruiter, I'd be curious to hear what tricks were played to get you to interview. I'm an independent, so when I speak to people there is never anything ambiguous about our discussions (my clients are not looking to acquire your product if you have one). Is it possible that Google liked your product and subsequently thought you might be a good hire, but didn't like your product as a potential acquisition? That i…
Just a side not, whether you're targeting people with projects or not. The opening phrase recruiters use of "are you looking for a job" or "are you interested in a position" especially when they say they've done background work is all wrong. If I says yes to either of those I've lost the power position. Recruiters should come with reasons why you should join that position, why you should leave etc.
By being the one approached by the recruiter, and not approaching the recruiter yourself, you are in the power position by default. You are being pursued and coveted, and that doesn't change if you admit to being open to a change of job.
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
The few times I've interviewed with Google (plain old job interviews, not as an acquisition or acqui-hire), they've always been pretty arrogant. Enough so that I wouldn't interview with them again if they contacted me. The attitude is clearly, "You're going to jump through our hoops and do what we say, because we're Google and we're totally awesome and we can take you or leave you." I don't know if the guy in this st…
I actually really enjoyed the interview process with Google. It was expeditious and respectful. It was, however, clear they are not used to taking "No" for an answer, and that's when things got a little uncomfortable.
My own interview process was pretty delightful (which is a good part of why I ended up working there), but when I have referred friends or even been an interviewer, I've seen stuff that's so sloppy and disrespectful that I started adopting a "friends don't refer friends to work at Google" policy.
I suspect it may've been because I was hired at the bottom of the 2009 recession, right around when they fired all the temps and all the permanent recruiters were fearful of their jobs and there were virtually no other candidates in the pipeline, while folks who applied in 2007 or 2011-2012 when it was much busier got a terrible experience.
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#179Googler #1 doesn’t do M&A for [Famous Named Googler]. She’s just a recruiter for Googler #2, whom she knew from the outset.
This seems like a risky tactic. [Famous Named Googler] probably doesn't like [low level recruiters] misrepresenting their relationship with him/her.
Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a crucial difference. Acquihires are typically at a much higher price, one reason being that other investors often need to be taken care of for the founder to leave on good terms. The corpdev/recruiter even mentioned $2M as a maximum figure. That's not exactly a typical engineering signing bonus.
It's not a typical engineering signing bonus, but it's far from unheard of.
Seriously? You've heard of engineers being hired for 2M? I want that job! This is a serious question. 2M is just unthinkable for me.