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

What is Google doing with its open source teams?

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–339 of 339 posts

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#331

Post by unity1001 »

riku_iki wrote: post #261
unity1001 wrote: post #94

So the problem with Google's earnings was that its exorbitant profit did not stay or grow at the same rate. During a pandemic followed by a global crisis prompted by a war. And they are laying off people. To make hedge funds and shareholders happy. ... What a destructive 'growth at all costs' economic culture. I guess those hedge funds and shareholders will pick up the slack in those open source projects...

> its exorbitant profit did not stay or grow at the same rate I think their profit margin reduced, so company became less healthy and balanced.

However you look, their exorbitant, humongous profits have declined a slight bit !during a recession caused by a war!. This should not be a concern for any sane investor but the ones who want growth at all costs.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#332

Post by thedorkknight »

agentofoblivion wrote: post #325
thedorkknight wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just the "stop complaining, there's starving kids in Africa so shut up" argument. Most employers don't care whether or not you hate yourself going into a soul-sucking job as a worker drone and will absolutely regress to that in the few industries that don't have it currently the moment market forces allow them to. There's a reason that sociopathy rates are higher amount CEOs than the general population. Call…

No, that’s not the argument. I’m calling out your false comparison that positions it as if modern tech workers are in some sort of proletarian struggle against their oppressors. I’m sorry if being in one of the most lucrative and cushy jobs in history still leaves you feeling like there’s a big hole in your life. That’s an existential crisis. That’s not corporate oppression. You’re not in the same situation as oppres…

I feel like we're miscommunicating here somehow. I don't think you read my comments correctly. I appreciate the blip I get to be in where my employer has to treat me like I have an actual soul. I'm complaining about the fact that those same employers are just waiting for the market forces to allow them to start treating us like drones again, and seeing news about the market moving in that direction and being reminded that in all likelihood I'll be forced into the "shit pay plus 2 hour commute per day, sit for nine hours in a tiny cubicle" life before I am allowed to retire.

"You’re not in the same situation as oppressed workers of the past." I don't have to be to recognize that a soul-sucking job sucks... If we're just comparing levels of oppression, then yes, you are making the "just shut up and be glad you only have one boot on your face instead of two" argument.

If you can, without comparing levels of oppression, make an actual argument for why I should be gung-ho happy about about the future of work reverting back to being shitty, then I'm all ears. "Someone else had it shittier" does nothing for me.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#333

Post by thedorkknight »

smsm42 wrote: post #328
thedorkknight wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just the "stop complaining, there's starving kids in Africa so shut up" argument. Most employers don't care whether or not you hate yourself going into a soul-sucking job as a worker drone and will absolutely regress to that in the few industries that don't have it currently the moment market forces allow them to. There's a reason that sociopathy rates are higher amount CEOs than the general population. Call…

You can whine all you like, at least until Zuckerberg buys HN and starts to ban wrongthinkers. It's just that using "struggle of the downtrodden workers under the boot of the capital" doesn't sound as impressive when the downtrodden makes 10x more in a year than his average compatriot. I don't want to diminish anybody feelings, but I feel there should be a sense of proportion of things being not exactly hellscape yet…

There's a miscommunication here. I'm not complaining about people being "over"-paid (though they'd save way more by cutting executive pay). I'm complaining about the signs that our overlords who have been briefly forced to treat people decently are eagerly awaiting any chance to reduce that and get back to treating everyone like shit. And I'm cynical that I absolutely find this stuff to be potential early signs of the end of the blip.

Side note, but it also strikes me as a sign of how normalized corporate treatment of people is that people is when we're on a thread about an article that talks about an exec making over 5 times a googlers salary per day and instead of people going "what the fuck? If that's true, 500k should be the norm for more people!", I get pushback on my comment about how this is a bad omen for the rest of us and called whiny.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#335

Post by temp-goog »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #283
temp-goog wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here’s some reliable second-hand information I’m posting on this one-off account. Take this with whatever degree of salt you wish. My understanding from somebody in a position to know is each VP was given a target/quota of cuts. Then they basically had big spreadsheets with salaries and performance ratings, and then pseudo-blindly cut teams or people to make quotas without input from directors/managers, and gave thos…

Yep. I think it really is the end for them as a company with a reputation for attracting really bright people. They were in decline over the last 6-7 years, but now Sundar really really blew it. The sheen will just wear off more and more until they just look like any another spent SV company from the past. There was I'm sure a way to make a whole restructuring or cost cutting process happen in a way that could have s…

[dead]

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#336

Post by temp-goog »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #285
temp-goog wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What, exactly, makes Sundar qualified to be CEO? In my view, nothing. He’s at best a figure head for Ruth who actually calls the shots. He’s done nothing as CEO other than keep Larry and Sergei’s piggy bank full. He’s just a moderately intelligent man way over his head, doing what other people tell him, without ever making a tough call.

For me the decline began when Ruth took over from Patrick, and when the whole Alphabet-ization thing was (clumsily) executed. It was clear at the time they had no idea what they were doing. At all-hands Larry & Sergey couldn't answer basic questions about the strategy and how it would affect large parts of the company (I was in the 'Access' PA at the time -- the PA that ran Fiber, and launched Google WiFi, et -- and…

[dead]

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#337

Post by AStellersSeaCow »

lumb63 wrote: post #330
AStellersSeaCow wrote: post #189

Current Googler, I have no insider info at all, found out about this the same Friday morning as everyone else. Everything expressed here is speculation based on my own observations and conversations with HR leaders at Google and other companies involved in this round of industry layoffs. It's unfortunately not surprising that some current and rising stars in the open source world were impacted by this. There's an imp…

I’m still stunned by how many Googlers think they are not in the “wealth class”. Half, even maybe a quarter, of a normal-length career is enough for a Googler to retire.

People making $250k on average getting laid off is admittedly less of a tragedy than people making $75k on average getting laid off. The former would have more opportunity to save and potentially less impact on their lifestyle and financial stability.

But the laid off workers have a lot more in common and a much closer standard of living with each other than with the billionaires whose wealth their layoffs are serving to marginally increase.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#338

Post by smsm42 »

thedorkknight wrote: post #332
agentofoblivion wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that’s not the argument. I’m calling out your false comparison that positions it as if modern tech workers are in some sort of proletarian struggle against their oppressors. I’m sorry if being in one of the most lucrative and cushy jobs in history still leaves you feeling like there’s a big hole in your life. That’s an existential crisis. That’s not corporate oppression. You’re not in the same situation as oppres…

I feel like we're miscommunicating here somehow. I don't think you read my comments correctly. I appreciate the blip I get to be in where my employer has to treat me like I have an actual soul. I'm complaining about the fact that those same employers are just waiting for the market forces to allow them to start treating us like drones again, and seeing news about the market moving in that direction and being reminded…

Soul sucking job sucks, but if it also makes you a millionaire, then I think feeling oppressed is not entirely earned by your reality. You can always take you million and go on a spiritual quest in Himalayas for next 10 years. Somebody who earns the median wage in the US - which is a lot of people - may not have this option. So I don't think framing it in these terms makes much sense.

> I'll be forced into the "shit pay plus 2 hour commute per day, sit for nine hours in a tiny cubicle"

That's not exactly how jobs in Bay Area at least look. I mean 2 hrs commute can happen, if you live in a cheap place and not in walk distance from Google campus, but the pay likely would be not "shit" at all, especially for somebody who worked at good salary in Google.

> make an actual argument for why I should be gung-ho happy about about the future of work reverting back to being shitty,

That's it, from the point of view of about 99.9999% of Earth population, it will still be dream come true. From the point of somebody who has been living in the paradise, they will be living in a bit less luxurious paradise, and that would, I agree, sting and be very distressing. I mean, it is natural for people to strive for perfection, and for improvement of their own conditions. If you are hungry, you want to be sated. If you are never hungry, you want tasty food. If you have tasty food, you want it prepared specially well, be of appropriate spiciness, be healthy, have variety, maybe get some exotic foods from foreign lands, or authentic food from specific region, or prepared in some special ways by uniquely creative cooks. There's always something that can be better. Or, as it happens, worse. But if somebody who had access to Michelin three-stars restaurants, now has to eat in star-less ones, he shouldn't complain he is dying of hunger. His soul may be distressed, but it's not distressed in the same way as would be if he was actually hungry. Yes, there are levels, and yes, understanding them is good.

> "Someone else had it shittier" does nothing for me.

Maybe that's why somebody else has to tell it. As they say, you can't tickle yourself. So maybe you realize this point, and maybe realize that the suffering that you are feeling may be caused by framing, and also cured by framing too.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#339

Post by ugh123 »

AStellersSeaCow wrote: post #189

Current Googler, I have no insider info at all, found out about this the same Friday morning as everyone else. Everything expressed here is speculation based on my own observations and conversations with HR leaders at Google and other companies involved in this round of industry layoffs. It's unfortunately not surprising that some current and rising stars in the open source world were impacted by this. There's an imp…

>layoffs _must_ be done without regard to performance, because otherwise they aren't layoffs, they are mass firings.

Call it what you want, but layoffs serve multiple purposes. Starting with low performers should be table stakes for any layoff, otherwise you disincentivize high potential employees.

Post reply on HN