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

Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 300 posts

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#231

Post by prbuckley »

lugg wrote: post #210
delucain wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's a VERY extreme example of "First World Problems" or whatever the meme is, but do you want a job when the offer is a con from the start? What kind of relationship with your employer does that create?

I've been feeling for a while now, software developers need agents. I only talk to one recruiter. If I want a particular job I know is going I will direct him to it and he will handle any side lining from other recruiters. Works a treat.

My friend Altay started a software developer agency. Altay is a great guy and YC alum. You might want to check it out, http://www.10xmanagement.com/

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#232

Post by ajarmst »

ovulator wrote: post #82
MCRed wrote: post #41

For 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…

"What's wrong with this country? Can't a man walk down the street without being offered a job!?"

I think it's more "What's wrong with this country? Can't a man walk down the street without someone trying to get him to give up something of value for less than it's worth?" The issue's not with being offered a job, it's the "here's a smart person making money for themselves, let's see if we can get them to make money for us instead!" attitude.

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#233

Post by chris123 »

raverbashing wrote: post #64
MCRed wrote: post #41

For 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…

I think Google alienated too much people (see the whatsapp case) now they're trying to get founders of startups onboard rather than people that go through their dog and pony show.

Recruiting a founder of a startup also serves to nip (or at least slow down or delay) a potential rival employers (actually convert him/her to attracting people for your team).

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#234

Post by [deleted] »

SEMW wrote: post #159
Guillaume86 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe add beeps and use them like a sonar to refine distance measurement?

5m room size / speed of sound in air = around 15ms. Unless the amount of variation in latency in the phone's speaker + microphones is much less than that -- which I suspect it isn't -- that wouldn't be particularly accurate either. (Even that aside, it's going to be rather non-trivial to get anything useful at all with a non-directional speaker in an enclosed room with several other walls, ceiling, floor, and other o…

[deleted]

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#235

Post by simi_ »

czbond wrote: post #184
simi_ wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm CTO at a small startup in a small-ish city in Germany. Every time we advertise a position we get _tons_ of applicants, and yet that doesn't mean anything. Good and reliable engineers are _very_ hard to find and recruit. We've managed to crop together a rock solid team, but only by sheer dumb luck (and getting burned several times).

As a separate, off topic note, I'm looking to move to Germany from the states (CTO of two prior 'smaller' startups). Where would you look for positions? I'm a damn good engineer - but I can't NOT lead - and all I'm seeing thus far are junior/senior dev positions.

AngelList. That's how I got my job.

If you can afford the travel, come and mingle at some startup events. Berlin is obviously the best city to do that, although Cologne (where I'm located) and, I imagine, Munich/Dusseldorf/Hamburg are pretty good too.

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#236

Post by Intermernet »

voodoomagicman wrote: post #67
potatolicious wrote: post #29

Earlier 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…

"This was a few years ago so sensors may have improved"

Apparently they're much better than previously. When I first tried this around 3 years ago, I had the same problems you did. The errors get cubed by the double integration. Software Kalman filters and other tricks didn't really help.

A lot of the newer sensor chips now do "sensor fusion"[1] on the chip itself, which means that the raw data is much more useful, and requires almost no post-processing.

I assume that this, in combination with higher sampling rates, means that the errors are small enough for the output to be useful over "human interaction" scale.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensor_fusion

Examples:

http://www.kionix.com/sensor-fusion

http://www.invensense.com/mems/technology.html

http://www.st.com/web/en/catalog/sense_power/FM89?sc=mems

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#237

Post by zobzu »

tymekpavel wrote: post #149
ahelwer wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's pretty broad. What, $150k base for a good engineer then $50k cash bonus and $50k stock? That gets us to the lower end, and it's already way above the upper end of what I've heard. Are we talking about your average engineer in mid-career, or is this 10x 100x rockstar 0.1% could-totally-happen-to-you-though BS?

I've seen interns regularly get offered full-time positions with 100-120k base + 100k RSUs. It's not at all unusual.

Ive had an intern of another company (the one I worked for) and he got offered exactly that (and he got hired, the guy aint crazy - its an awesome first job offer)

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#238

Post by peteretep »

api wrote: post #44

"It’s a ridiculous idea — touch your phone against each wall and get a floor plan." Uhh... no it's not. Make that actually work and show it to some architects, interior designers, and real estate people. Be sure to have a mop on hand for drool.

    > Make that actually work
You, uh, have seen he has a working app for this, right?

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#239

Post by peteretep »

tlrobinson wrote: post #179

Googler #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.

    > Googler #1 doesn’t do M&A for [Famous Named Googler].
Surprised it doesn't say on her LinkedIn profile what she does

Re: Hi, It’s Google Corporate Development

#240

Post by [deleted] »

tlrobinson wrote: post #179

Googler #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.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN