Live data from Hacker News

My Google Internship

goldsborough.me

251–260 of 270 posts

Re: My Google Internship

#251
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google is a 'de-facto' monopoly, and they print money. They are super, super rich, and literally have billions more than they know what to do with. > So it's easy to justify a lot of extra expenses I see how it can look like that from outside, but from within Google is pretty serious about expenses and costs. All the perks and benefits are an investment to acquire and retain the employees, and to allow them to be a…

" Google is pretty serious about expenses and costs" Which validates my point: the value of the 'free food' is a calculation. It's based on employee productivity gains, retainment etc.. If it wasn't an economic value-add, it would be canned. "Google stock doesn't give dividends: all profits are reinvested in the projects" Sorry to be picky but this statement is not true at all. 1) It does not matter whether a company…

The definition of retaining earnings is reinvesting profits in the company's projects; I'm not sure what made you think only non-profits do it. It's pretty common for companies that are growing. In any case, that was just one easy way to show you you're wrong in thinking this:

> [Google] literally have billions more than they know what to do with

Google knows exactly what to do with it, and from my understanding hasn't ran out of business ideas for that since its founding.

Re: My Google Internship

#252
post #238
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really that difficult to address people how they wish to be addressed? If someone said to you, "Please call me Matt" do you respond with "But your birth certificate says Matthew! How am I supposed to handle this cognitive load? What's the benefit for me, Matthew?"

"Matt is coming with us. He said he'd be at four. Jemima is also coming they said they'd be here at five." Matt is coming at five? No Jemima is coming at five. Matt is coming at four. Also Sarah is coming with her partner Zoe. Ze said ze would be here at 4 also zey're getting a ride with Matt. Umm. Ok. Not to mention that now when I talk about women, I have to also consider every other gender non binary person as req…

If you don't quite remember, or are unsure about, their preferred pronoun, it doesn't matter. Really, don't sweat it.

What we're trying to tell you here isn't "you should concentrate harder, learn it by rote, and never ever say it wrong". Rather: "just give it as much thought as you'd give someone telling you to call them Dave." No more, because nobody wants to make your life any harder, and any sane person would understand it if you forget. This is a preference, not an imposition.

And also no less, because at the end of the day it's a very little thing for you, and might mean a lot to them.

Grammar and plurals become weird? - You've already given it more thought than I think I'd have :) In my case, because I'm not a native speaker, I would have probably messed the grammar anyway.

Re: My Google Internship

#253
I must admit I'll drown a bit if I check all the comments, so I'm not sure if this has already been said.

IMHO, the author is playing the "I like you very much and I'm going to be agreeable with just about everything you say and do, so you won't go wrong if you pick me to come back" game. At least they're demonstrating they have a good understanding of social networking.

This reads like it's supposed to be an experience review, but it's incredibly over-positive and unbalanced/unfair. There are no real negatives mentioned. So I can only experience it as "I want to come back very much".

That the author has gone to this extent (and only mentioned their successes) suggests either insecurity (impostor syndome) or - likelier - fear they won't be accepted back. The author did mention that their reviewers showed them some instances where they went wrong, I'm wondering if this is the main reason for this or whether it was simply the overwhelming environment.

--

On another note, since everyone's added their opinions of actually working at Google I might as well join in.

First of all, I took a look at the link noted in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13086051 and I don't agree with any of the points raised in there; most of that article can be adequately explained as conspiracy theory and provocation/incitation, I don't think the points they raise (and attempt to inflame) have much substance.

That said, I do have some concerns of my own.

The issue that's likeliest to have the biggest practical impact for me personally is that I have absolutely no foundation in math, due to the fact that I was born with severe learning difficulties that I only began to correctly identify around 18-22 and which I'm still in the process of learning how to counter for (I'm 26 now).

This means that while I'm well-developed in more areas today than ever, math is an area I'm so far behind on I have zero incentive to catch up because I'd have so much foundational stuff to deal with. For example, I was at the supermarket a few months ago basically pushing all the buttons on my calculator as I couldn't remember what operator(s) to use to figure out how many onions I could buy for the amount of money I had. This wasn't a cognition problem - it was simply the fact that I am that ignorant about math as a subject.

Tackling that to get a compsci job just doesn't seem like a good use of my time since I'll be 40 in a bit over 10 years and it may take me that long (or longer) to catch up. Normal kids to start to learn rudimentary math concepts around 8 or so after all. (I tried, but none of it never made any sense.)

So I definitely appreciated all these pictures, knowing I'll never be likely to call a place like this home.

I most also admit I'm more than a little jealous at the "nearly free" store - I could certainly do with changing my trend of having computers that are always 10 years old (my very limited disability support pension prevents me from legally getting a job, while diagnosis and ongoing treatment are unbelievably expensive!). Consistently old tech is one of the major reasons I haven't been able to springboard myself off of my pension and get a job - I've always been incredibly fascinated with animation, the visual arts, 3D, etc, and I'm on computers that swap like mad if I have more than 3 or 4 browser tabs open.

Beyond these issues, there's the very tricky problem of the fact that Google isn't a startup, and I can't say I'm too enthused by the fact that it's generally frowned upon to want to define your own job title - I can see this stifling a lot of innovation (Google Reader, Google Wave, etc) that isn't an immediately apparent hit.

For perhaps obvious reasons I've grown up always looking at the long view, and Google's corporate culture seems to have a very short attention span.

Nobody is likely to ever read this but I thought I'd leave this here as a real-world example of why someone might not be a good fit for an environment like Google.

If someone from Google ever wants to prove me wrong I'd be very happy to hear about it! :D

Re: My Google Internship

#254
post #250
post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But see that betrays the hypocrisy in the request. Tight fitting clothing highlights the sexual organ. The absence of clothing does the same thing (and yes in the minds of others). Why you are comfortable with google's insistence of clothing but uncomfortable with the request of others to not wear something that has a similar effect? So whether I'm interested in your genitalia or not is beside the point. You were try…

I don't think anything I say will convince you that I merit being accorded with dignity, so I'll leave it at this: you're welcome to apply and come try to convince us otherwise! You know where to find us. I recommend Cracking the Coding Interview and lots of whiteboard practice. :)

That's disappointing, I was hoping for a robust defense of your stance and I don't believe I didn't treat you with dignity but I'm sorry if there was a misstep on my part.

p.s. I'm a big fan of Google, they helped me to quit being an employee for good, but I appreciate the advice :)

Re: My Google Internship

#255
post #254
post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anything I say will convince you that I merit being accorded with dignity, so I'll leave it at this: you're welcome to apply and come try to convince us otherwise! You know where to find us. I recommend Cracking the Coding Interview and lots of whiteboard practice. :)

That's disappointing, I was hoping for a robust defense of your stance and I don't believe I didn't treat you with dignity but I'm sorry if there was a misstep on my part. p.s. I'm a big fan of Google, they helped me to quit being an employee for good, but I appreciate the advice :)

If your starting position is "you're not worthy of being referred to in accordance with who you are", then I'm not interested in negotiating with you.

I don't quite know what you're implying. If you got rich on our stock, good for you. If you actually used to work here, you are fundamentally different from the people I've met so far and I'm glad you're not here any more.

Re: My Google Internship

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are several things to unpack here, but I'm going to stick to one. The primary difference, in practice, between something like Gay Pride and something like "Straight Pride", would be the power dynamic between the two. Historically, and even to some extent currently, the people with more power have been those who would be in the latter parade. "Punching up" is what it's called when you are challenging a group mor…

This is the usual story, but power is more complicated than that. "up" and "down" assume a linear dimension. > Historically, and even to some extent currently Surely only the current situation matters? Why should the people now care about the power dynamic of the past?

Sure, it's not necessarily one dimensional, but it also doesn't just scale in terms of total magnitude summed across all dimensions (e.g. a bit of power in 50 axes is not comparable to the same quantity of power in one axis).

The reason to care about the dynamic of the past is that people are influenced by the past - in particular, people's actions in the present are often based on things that they did or that were done to them in the past.

Specifically, here, the reason to care about the past is that, even if/when we reached a point of equilibrium, where a subset of people were no longer in a minority of power, there would still likely be X Pride events for a while after, because the feeling of needing/wanting such things would not go away overnight.

Re: My Google Internship

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Believed that they should" is not necessarily the same as "affronted if they don't". There are, for example, a number of people who would not get an abortion, but believe in the right of others to doso.

But does it matter in that context? Does/should a belief be weighted higher if it causes "offense" - this would mean the easily offended would have their beliefs weighed higher, and thus people would be encouraged to be so.

I don't think a belief should be necessarily weighted higher because it causes offense (or not), no.

I was trying to indicate the difference between "I would never" and "no one should ever" - the former being a belief that attempts to say nothing about what other people should or should not do, where the latter certainly says something about what everyone should do.

Re: My Google Internship

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the usual story, but power is more complicated than that. "up" and "down" assume a linear dimension. > Historically, and even to some extent currently Surely only the current situation matters? Why should the people now care about the power dynamic of the past?

Sure, it's not necessarily one dimensional, but it also doesn't just scale in terms of total magnitude summed across all dimensions (e.g. a bit of power in 50 axes is not comparable to the same quantity of power in one axis). The reason to care about the dynamic of the past is that people are influenced by the past - in particular, people's actions in the present are often based on things that they did or that were d…

> it's not necessarily one dimensional

Or even multidimensional. a "sum across all dimensions" doesn't make sense to me.

We are talking about something (power) that differs across contexts, locations, times etc. Power is as complex as our (human) social organisation, an is not amenable to linear algebra.

> people are influenced by the past

Unless that is is a result of holding this belief; People are never influenced about the past, only by their subjective, current beliefs about the past. It would make more sense to consider what people believe now.

Marxist historical analysis has fallen out of favor for a good reason.

> would not go away overnight

Desire for power will never go away.

The "subset of people" is biased towards how you do your grouping; For example, that I, a white man, am naturally grouped with white slavers of the past, such that modern black Americans have something to resent me for.

Your narrative here relies on these kind of groupings in order to talk about "a point of equilibrium" and "no longer in a minority of power" - you need to identify a group as the same over a period of time in order to make these distinctions.

Re: My Google Internship

#259
post #255
post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's disappointing, I was hoping for a robust defense of your stance and I don't believe I didn't treat you with dignity but I'm sorry if there was a misstep on my part. p.s. I'm a big fan of Google, they helped me to quit being an employee for good, but I appreciate the advice :)

If your starting position is "you're not worthy of being referred to in accordance with who you are", then I'm not interested in negotiating with you. I don't quite know what you're implying. If you got rich on our stock, good for you. If you actually used to work here, you are fundamentally different from the people I've met so far and I'm glad you're not here any more.

That's a cheap mischaracterization of my position and probably yours(?)

You'll either learn to appreciate the other parts of the spectrum of thought that exist at google or you'll form cliques.

And I wasn't implying, just responding to your suggestion and advice.

Let me also offer some unsolicited advice - I don't recommend encouraging people to leave because you disagree with them. I also don't recommend assuming to represent google and the thousands of people who work there.

Re: My Google Internship

#260
post #259
post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your starting position is "you're not worthy of being referred to in accordance with who you are", then I'm not interested in negotiating with you. I don't quite know what you're implying. If you got rich on our stock, good for you. If you actually used to work here, you are fundamentally different from the people I've met so far and I'm glad you're not here any more.

That's a cheap mischaracterization of my position and probably yours(?) You'll either learn to appreciate the other parts of the spectrum of thought that exist at google or you'll form cliques. And I wasn't implying, just responding to your suggestion and advice. Let me also offer some unsolicited advice - I don't recommend encouraging people to leave because you disagree with them. I also don't recommend assuming to…

You should try having this conversation with those trans friends you ostensibly have. I can assure you it's not a spectrum, and yours isn't a position so much as a retrograde claim about who I am. I'm not claiming to represent Google but your position is thankfully not one I've heard here. I'm happy to amend the epitaph I'm pretty sure you don't actually have to reflect your opinion, if you'd like.
Post reply on HN