Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 366 posts

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#231

Post by ulfw »

KeenFox wrote: post #145
sumeno wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they're not even attempting to play in the cryptoverse. They aren't even attempting to play in snake oil or astrology either

Crypto is 99% woo, but the 1% is interesting. The interesting stuff isn't world-stompingly amazing, so it gets less press. I like the idea of someday being able to take pennies worth of payments from places where transaction fees alone at traditional payment processors represent a huge % of income. Bitcoin won't be the one to do it, but some of the coins that depend on something other than proof of work might. At lea…

Transaction costs for small payments on Bitcoin are much higher than the 1.5% a credit card processor takes. Crypto has been nothing but dreams (and sadly lots of scams, as I had to personally witness)

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#232

Post by geuszb »

dekhn wrote: post #168
pmart123 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s interesting. I think Google would have been better aiming for something closer to Twitter instead of trying to copy and mimic Facebook with Google+. Google’s core strength has been organizing information as a data first company versus facilating social connections.

The original pitch deck for G+ ( https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-presentation-that-... ) really laid out a compelling view for a social network that worked well for people who had multiple distinct subnetworks ad they didn't want to cross the streams. Personally I thought the presentation was brilliant and I was behind the general strategy until Vic took over and started to wield the plus-hammer.

That strategy is dumb because in practice people don't mind or prefer using distinct apps for each of their subnetworks; and when these networks start overlapping in the same app, they start posting less (Facebook's problem), creating multiple accounts ("finstas" on Instagram), or bifurcating their real friends to another app (Snapchat 3 years ago).

Hell the fact that Snapchat succeeded in growing a credible threat to Facebook with a fraction of the engineering and marketing resources as Google+ should tell you how wrong that strategy was...

Each of the networks grew initially by providing an insanely better experience specific to a subnetwork (FB for alumni networks, Insta for narcissistic hobby photographers with its filters, Snapchat for horny teens who want to send nude pics, or who want to be goofy with its funny face filters...)

There were a few niches where Google+ unintentionally ended up being successful, such as internal to enterprise, and for pro photographers who liked that pictures had an option to be hosted uncompressed. But the vision overall had poor market fit and would never have latched on to a dense enough subnetwork to succeed IMO.

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#233

Post by ulfw »

apl002 wrote: post #22
manigandham wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cryptoverse What exactly is this and what business is doing well in it?

I am assuming he is referring to cryptocurrencies & blockchain tech. There are plenty of businesses doing well but that's irrelevant. Waiting for established businesses in a growing space before jumping in isn't very innovative.

Which one is doing well? Which company has actually delivered something? And what is it?

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#234

Post by gowld »

pmart123 wrote: post #146
dekhn wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of G+ was Page's idea. There was a product manager (who left for facebook!) who did the big pitch deck that got it rolling. Then they put Vic Gundotra in charge and gave him carte blanche to modify multiple products. I agree that was the wrong person for the job. But you can't even imagine the amount of groupthink and ego that Vic surrounded himself with. I don't think it was super-obvious 10 years ago, but soci…

That’s interesting. I think Google would have been better aiming for something closer to Twitter instead of trying to copy and mimic Facebook with Google+. Google’s core strength has been organizing information as a data first company versus facilating social connections.

wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Buzz

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#235

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

basetop wrote: post #160

Eric Schmidt was the anti-privacy leader who dismissed privacy concerns. "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmid... Keep in mind this is the same guy who blackballed CNET reporters for finding personal information on him through google search. https://money.cnn.com/2005/08/05/technology…

> Eric Schmidt was the anti-privacy leader who dismissed privacy concerns.

Well, he did understand how to turn the customers data into a product. He is one of the key persons who formed the whole data economy thing; that's quite a big deal - he formulated the way of making money for the 21st century.

Once upon a time money was in producing stuff, now stuff and people are so much varied so that the main problem is that of pushing adds. This is the way that this age got the tool to keep it going...

Of course the system has its bugs that can be called 'features'

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#236

Post by interfixus »

klyrs wrote: post #216
chacham15 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, I wouldnt send a nude photo to a single stranger (even if they wouldnt send/show it to anyone else).

Strangers, sure. Would you send one to a sexual partner? Medical records are another good example. Most people are squeamish about reproductive and sexual health... but share such info with a doctor.

> Strangers, sure. Would you send one to a sexual partner?

Only if I had made up my mind that I would have no - or only a small - problem with the photo going public. I may conceivably trust the partner. I do not trust partner's ability to keep things under sufficient lock.

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#237

Post by lapnitnelav »

paganel wrote: post #73
dekhn wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other big thing was Larry pushed social on the company without really understanding social as a product, and was absolutely unable to handle the huge negative response both internally and externally to that push. This all happened at the same time Microsoft and Amazon committed to Cloud (which Google has only tepidly adopted). The one time I met with Schmidt to explain my cloud project, he was delighted and encou…

I think Page had the right idea, because if you look nowadays at people under 30 for them the Internet is represented by social networks, be it Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp or even Snapchat, the internet/web represented by the browser and by visiting different websites via Google is no longer that important. I think Page realized that if Google doesn't hop on the social train they'll end up looking from the outside…

I for one would like to thank Larry for messing this up.

While current situation is far from perfect (looking at you Mark Z), I don't think having the Borg being the top dog on both Search and Social would have been a great thing at all.

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#238

Post by person_of_color »

mancerayder wrote: post #58

Google seems to be falling flat on its face growth-wise. Its ad revenue is down, its Pixel 3 platform fell completely flat, it shuttered Google + and had a security breach? How can you have a large scale security breach with a brutal tech hiring process, sky high salaries and a whitepaper-producing workforce? Hell, when you interview at much smaller firms, the tech groups copycat the Google hiring techniques, that's…

> brutal tech hiring process, sky high salaries and a whitepaper-producing workforce

The Google worship around here...

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#239

Post by bitL »

basetop wrote: post #160

Eric Schmidt was the anti-privacy leader who dismissed privacy concerns. "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmid... Keep in mind this is the same guy who blackballed CNET reporters for finding personal information on him through google search. https://money.cnn.com/2005/08/05/technology…

Long before Eric, the SUN's CEO (Eric's previous employer) made a remark that privacy is an illusion and we need to get over it:

https://www.wired.com/1999/01/sun-on-privacy-get-over-it/

This stuff was going on for a long time, FAANG just perfected it.

Re: Eric Schmidt Steps Down from Alphabet’s Board of Directors

#240

Post by skookumchuck »

dekhn wrote: post #9
anyfoo wrote: post #5

This is of course extremely subjective, and I have no knowledge of what Google was and is on the inside except for a short internship almost 10 years ago: I somehow always felt that Google with Eric Schmidt as a CEO was a much different Google than later on. Under Eric Schmidt, Google seemed like this extremely innovative company with the brightest minds in the industry. Afterwards, it seemed to instead grow into jus…

The other big thing was Larry pushed social on the company without really understanding social as a product, and was absolutely unable to handle the huge negative response both internally and externally to that push. This all happened at the same time Microsoft and Amazon committed to Cloud (which Google has only tepidly adopted). The one time I met with Schmidt to explain my cloud project, he was delighted and encou…

> He was a very effective leader (although not everybody agrees- some people think he's an arrogant asshole).

Those two are not at all in conflict, they're orthogonal.

Post reply on HN