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

Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

thecoder.cafe

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 147 posts

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#31

Post by tuyiown »

braza wrote: post #10

One of my pet peeves with the usage of complex(ity) out of the traditional time/space in computer science is that most of the time the OPs of several articles over the internet do not make the distinction between boundaried/arbitrary complexity, where most of the time the person has most of the control of what is being implemented, and domain/accidental/environmental complexity, which is wide open and carries a lot o…

I think this is addressed with the complex vs complicated intro. Most problems with uncontrolled / uncontrollable variables will be approached with an incremental solution, e.g. you'll restrict those variables voluntarily or involuntarily and let issues being solved organically / manually, or automatisation will be plain and simple being abandoned.

This qualify as complicated. Delving in complicated problems is mostly driven by business opportunity, always has limited scaling, and tend to be discarded by big players.

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#32

Post by dgb23 »

socalgal2 wrote: post #28
Phelinofist wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are peer-bonuses?

Something designed to remove all intrinsic motivation from employees

Bonuses make a lot of sense in the financial sector, because the whole endeavor is about making money. Intrinsic motivation and making more money align. Historically it got introduced in order to mitigate cheating customers for personal gain. Also it helps that individual contributions are trivially quantifiable to a very large degree.

Obviously there are other professions that share some of these characteristics, like sales. Or if you narrow down a goal or task to "save us money".

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#33

Post by [deleted] »

braza wrote: post #10

One of my pet peeves with the usage of complex(ity) out of the traditional time/space in computer science is that most of the time the OPs of several articles over the internet do not make the distinction between boundaried/arbitrary complexity, where most of the time the person has most of the control of what is being implemented, and domain/accidental/environmental complexity, which is wide open and carries a lot o…

[deleted]

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#34

Post by __alexs »

blitzar wrote: post #30
dijit wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is if someone helps you in a really big way that you’re able to reward that. So you can ask the company to give the person either credits for an internal store, or a direct addition to their salary for one month. Obviously, there are limits to how many pay bonuses you can give out and if it’s direct money or store credits. Directly asking for a peer bonus’ is not very “googly” (and yes, this is a term they u…

> The idea is if someone helps you in a really big way that you’re able to reward that It never ceases to amaze me how (early) big tech embraced and even promoted things that would have been considered "career limiting" in traditional big corporations.

By systematising/gamifying this stuff you actually help distract people from participating in the realpolitik going on within the executive team. If you stop other non-exec level realising the real way power is exercised within the company with these distractions it removes a potentially very large pool of competitors for power within the org.

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#35

Post by decimalenough »

Phelinofist wrote: post #16
dijit wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably the most accurate statement possible. “I just want to store 5TiB somewhere” “Ha! Did you book multiple bigtable cells” https://youtu.be/3t6L-FlfeaI?si=C5PJcrvLepABZsVF

What are peer-bonuses?

Basically a way to "tip" people for going out of their way to help you, except that the "tip" comes out of the company's pocket, not yours.

To prevent obvious abuse, you need to provide a rationale, the receiver's manager must approve and there's a limit to how many you can dish out per quarter.

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#36

Post by repeekad »

kubb wrote: post #24
braza wrote: post #10

One of my pet peeves with the usage of complex(ity) out of the traditional time/space in computer science is that most of the time the OPs of several articles over the internet do not make the distinction between boundaried/arbitrary complexity, where most of the time the person has most of the control of what is being implemented, and domain/accidental/environmental complexity, which is wide open and carries a lot o…

I’d wager 90% time spent at Google is fighting incidental organizational complexity, which is virtually unlimited.

The phrase thrown around was “collaboration headwind”, the idea was if project success depends on 1 person with a 95% chance of success, project success also had a 95% chance. But if 10 people each need to succeed at a 95% chance, suddenly the project success likelihood becomes 60%…

In reality, lazy domain owners layered on processes, meetings, documents, and multiple approvals until it took 6 months to change the text on a button, ugh

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#37

Post by simianwords »

kubb wrote: post #24
braza wrote: post #10

One of my pet peeves with the usage of complex(ity) out of the traditional time/space in computer science is that most of the time the OPs of several articles over the internet do not make the distinction between boundaried/arbitrary complexity, where most of the time the person has most of the control of what is being implemented, and domain/accidental/environmental complexity, which is wide open and carries a lot o…

I’d wager 90% time spent at Google is fighting incidental organizational complexity, which is virtually unlimited.

Equally important is the amount of time they save because of available abstractions to use like infra, tooling etc

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#39

Post by cmrdporcupine »

dmoy wrote: post #5

> My immediate reaction in my head was: "This is impossible". But then, a teammate said: "But we're Google, we should be able to manage it!". Google, where the impossible stuff is reduced to merely hard, and the easy stuff is raised to hard.

Or "How many MDB groups do I need to get approved to join over multiple days/weeks, before I can do the 30 second thing I need to do?"

Do not miss

Re: Working on complex systems: What I learned working at Google

#40

Post by p_v_doom »

ggm wrote: post #18

I think there are two myths applicable here. Probably more. One myth is that complex systems are inherently bad. Armed forces are incredibly complex. That's why it can take 10 or more rear echelon staff to support one fighting soldier. Supply chain logistics and materiel is complex. Middle ages wars stopped when gunpowder supplies ran out. Another myth is that simple systems are always better and remain simple. They…

Agreed. The problem is not complexity. Every system must process a certain amount of information. And the systems complexity must be able to match that amount. The fundamental problem is about designing systems that can manage complexity, especially runaway complexity.
Post reply on HN