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

Leaving Google

jayconrod.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 464 posts

Re: Leaving Google

#381

Post by owenversteeg »

otikik wrote: post #367

We live in a finite planet with finite resources. I think every argument for growth (on the scale FAANG companies operate) should also mention that part. I also want to say that it's completely acceptable to work on a place without exorbitant pay, stocks, or promotions every 6 months. A job can be many other things. Different people want different things at different phases of their life. For some of them, a job is j…

While I agree that we should be mindful of our finite resources, it’s worth noting that you can have sustained growth and still consume fewer resources. For example, US per-capita CO2 emissions have declined 30% since 1970, while per-capita GDP has grown more than twelvefold. In recent years, technology has been by far the largest contributor to that widening gap between GDP growth and emissions. That’s not to ignore the impact technology has on the environment from e.x. rare earth mining, but if you look at the big picture I think you’ll be positively surprised.

Re: Leaving Google

#382

Post by kerng »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #302
UncleMeat wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also quite expensive in Hawaii, yet Google pays less well there. Similarly, it is quite expensive in London, yet Google pays less well there too. This is based on Google's model of paying by local market rather than CoL. There are a few regions where this ends up being quite frustrating. No doubt it is difficult to look at a nontrivial pay cut if your housing costs aren't much lower. It has even been frustratin…

Yes, I think we are agreement. There is no such thing as a cost of living adjustment. Or rather, it is better to frame it as “employer offering employee what they think employee will accept because employee will probably have less options to earn more by being in a certain location” Obviously, a highly in demand programmer or whatnot will be able to live wherever they want and demand whatever they want. That is all i…

Good point. Yes, the market (employees) will choose - the posted article highlights this pretty well.

Re: Leaving Google

#383

Post by tbrownaw »

lordnacho wrote: post #191
mavelikara wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Product Management, in many orgs, is the old wine of Taylorism in a new bottle, where there is a "thinking class," and there is a separate "doing class." The stereotype of an engineer with poor social skills who can't grasp the "high-level cross functional relationships and strategies" (from nostrebored's sibling comment) is not very different from Taylor's idea of workers: One of the very first requirements for a ma…

This is exactly right. I studied both engineering and management, so I have experienced both schools. Actually understanding science and manipulating the world is hard. Try to explain to a non techie how a car moves, or how a web request happens. They can never understand it on the required level to fix things. Now try to explain to an engineer how a bond works, or how industrial strategy works. He can do both his ow…

> Actually understanding science and manipulating the world is hard. Try to explain to a non techie how a car moves, or how a web request happens. They can never understand it on the required level to fix things.

I'm pretty sure that being a car mechanic is one of those trades jobs that people are discouraged from pursuing if they're seen as having alternatives.

Also a lot of what comes up on a search for "redneck engineering" is I think not consistent with this assertion.

Re: Leaving Google

#384

Post by Jensson »

rahimiali wrote: post #360
Jensson wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lead by engineers who by and large do not talk to people Do you think the engineer who leads a 1000 man org is not talking to people? I talked to the engineer leading our 500 man org, he talked to a lot of people and wanted their input and tried to understand the whole to make decisions. He had technical expertise so he could talk to low level engineers as well, but also to business people etc.

The engineer you describe sounds like an ex-engineer. That engineer sounds a manager.

Becoming a manager doesn't mean that you no longer are an engineer. That is what engineer lead means, engineers leads the organization rather than people with no technical skills.

They no longer code, but they still take part in technical discussions, so being an engineer is absolutely a part of their job.

Re: Leaving Google

#385

Post by Jensson »

nostrebored wrote: post #352
Jensson wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lead by engineers who by and large do not talk to people Do you think the engineer who leads a 1000 man org is not talking to people? I talked to the engineer leading our 500 man org, he talked to a lot of people and wanted their input and tried to understand the whole to make decisions. He had technical expertise so he could talk to low level engineers as well, but also to business people etc.

Yes -- within engineering typically! That is a the role of a PE/Staff Eng.

Right, and in an engineering lead organization the PM etc are subordinate to engineers. Their job is to research the market and present the results to engineers so engineers can better understand what to build. This is opposite to non-engineers leading and hiring engineers to build the product they want. Ultimately the end result is the same, its just creates a different perspective.

So it is easy to evaluate companies like this. Did technical people hire business people to do those tasks for them? Or did business people hire technical people to create a product for them? The first is engineering lead, the second is the standard enterprise.

Re: Leaving Google

#386

Post by ido »

ghaff wrote: post #373
ido wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn’t Craigslist did basically that? I’m not familiar with recent developments but for decades they stayed small and focused and seemed to have done well.

Yes. They've stayed small and focused but while AFAIK they're still doing OK, the latest numbers I've seen on them listed about 50 employees. And I'm willing to bet most of them aren't unusually well compensated. I'm also not sure when I last heard Craigslist come up in conversation although I expect especially people in urban areas still use them for classified advertising.

Yeah, that was my point - they chose to stay small (this is both in focus of the company as well as number of employees).

I’d personally probably be happier in a small company than in one that is eternally chasing infinite growth (both in goals and in number of employees).

Re: Leaving Google

#387

Post by theptip »

Thorrez wrote: post #161
theptip wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, the one-person strikes tend to be less effective.

I interpreted "with fellow employees" as in cooperation with fellow employees, so that wouldn't be a one-person strike. Although I guess it could be interpreted as against fellow employees.

In this case, I think the initial ultimatum delivered to management was in the vein of “I will quit if you don’t do X” (not “we will quit”), but she was also trying to collaborate/mobilize with others in the company to pressure management. So a bit of both?

Re: Leaving Google

#388

Post by [deleted] »

mdwelsh wrote: post #54
cletus wrote: post #19

Why did he leave? The tl'dr is the L6 glass ceiling and the remote pay cut. I can speak to both of those: First, for those that don't know, new grads get hired at L3, PhDs at L4 (which IMHO is actually a mistake but that's another issue) and there is an expectation of getting promoted to L5 (Senior Software Engineer). There's no set time frame for this. I've known people who stayed L4 for many years and were quite ha…

Long-time former Googler here, author of go/l6talk (internal presentation on getting promoted to L6). While there I coached a lot of people on the L5-to-L6 promotion process. It seems a lot of Googlers get disillusioned about getting promoted above L5. Broadly speaking Google's culture is heavily focused on levels and promotions, which is too bad, since many L5's are doing just great and getting paid extremely well.…

[deleted]

Re: Leaving Google

#389

Post by lotsofpulp »

sokoloff wrote: post #353
lotsofpulp wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owners do not want dividends. I do not want dividends from my tech stocks if I’m simply going to turn around and reinvest in them. That is just paying extra short term capital gains taxes when you do not have to.

Qualified dividends (which represent the vast majority of them) are taxed as long-term capital gains to avoid this concern.

True, but it does not seem like investors are clamoring for dividends either way. Personally, I would just take the dividend money and reinvest it so it’s all the same to me.

Re: Leaving Google

#390

Post by ghaff »

ido wrote: post #386
ghaff wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. They've stayed small and focused but while AFAIK they're still doing OK, the latest numbers I've seen on them listed about 50 employees. And I'm willing to bet most of them aren't unusually well compensated. I'm also not sure when I last heard Craigslist come up in conversation although I expect especially people in urban areas still use them for classified advertising.

Yeah, that was my point - they chose to stay small (this is both in focus of the company as well as number of employees). I’d personally probably be happier in a small company than in one that is eternally chasing infinite growth (both in goals and in number of employees).

I worked for a very small company for a number of years and it was a pretty good run for the most part. That said, I'm in a significantly better place financially having worked for a reasonably big public company for about the past decade.
Post reply on HN