CA is being abandoned. I'm thinking I should leave and not be left behind.
Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
41–50 of 205 posts
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't have to do that, though - founders still retain control so could ignore shareholders.
Not quite - just because the founders have majority control doesn't mean that the BS financial duty "laws" don't apply to the company executives. They have a duty to all the shareholders, not just the controlling ones.
There is no duty to maximize profits though, that is a myth.
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
>What happened to being a forward thinking and innovative company? Google went public is what happened. You literally cannot make good decisions when you have to base everything around what will make the most profit for the shareholders this quarter.
I’m sometimes cynical about publicly-traded companies, but Google seemed more forward-thinking in its pre-Alphabet era, and Apple seemed to be very forward thinking from 1997-2011 when Steve Jobs was running the company. Being a publicly-traded company doesn’t automatically mean resorting to bean counting and other bad forms of management.
You're absolutely right that being public doesn't automatically making bad choices--but it does eventually mean making poor choices. As long as you have a strong CEO, they can weather the storm of shareholder requests, but once you get to third or fourth generation leaders it typically becomes a race to the bottom. See: Every company in every industry.
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google floor plans were ridiculously dense. I don’t have hard numbers on my fingertips but I recall that the sf business press systematically underestimated the number of employees in San Francisco based on industry average floor space per employee that was far too high. They constantly moved us from one floor to another always with smaller desks. As for question B, Moffett Place alone was 1.9 million square feet, so…
I was in what amazon called double high density once. one guy had to duck under anoterh guys desk to get to his. so basically against fire code. the better way i've seen it there was where you will not quite bump into the person behind you if you push back. I was only in that once. usually I had an extra foot. I'm in low density right now it's good. Amazon never gave us smaller desks, they were always door desks. Tha…
An entire door? Luxury!
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#45Google looked at how sailors share space on a sub and were like "yeah, that's the ticket". Hot-desking is the worst way to be in-office, on top of the worst way of working which is in-office. What happened to being a forward thinking and innovative company? These "geniuses" can't use their superior big brains just barely hiding under those infantilizing propeller hats to figure out a way to make remote work effective…
Have you considered that maybe your priors are just wrong? I don't know a single person who prefers in-office work who thinks that remote is more effective, but I know many who have the opposite opinion but prefer the flexibility. Maybe there isn't a realistic way to make remote as productive. I'm honest enough to say that the social pressure that people bemoan makes me significantly more productive. I wish it didn't…
> The inability to tap on someone's shoulder reduces group productivity, regardless of what those who don't want to be interrupted think.
If you know a person does not like being interrupted don't be selfish and write a message. Why does your productivity matter more than mine?
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#46Google looked at how sailors share space on a sub and were like "yeah, that's the ticket". Hot-desking is the worst way to be in-office, on top of the worst way of working which is in-office. What happened to being a forward thinking and innovative company? These "geniuses" can't use their superior big brains just barely hiding under those infantilizing propeller hats to figure out a way to make remote work effective…
Have you considered that maybe your priors are just wrong? I don't know a single person who prefers in-office work who thinks that remote is more effective, but I know many who have the opposite opinion but prefer the flexibility. Maybe there isn't a realistic way to make remote as productive. I'm honest enough to say that the social pressure that people bemoan makes me significantly more productive. I wish it didn't…
[flagged]
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
>What happened to being a forward thinking and innovative company? Google went public is what happened. You literally cannot make good decisions when you have to base everything around what will make the most profit for the shareholders this quarter.
Things weren’t like this for a long time after it was already public. I used to work there more than 5 years after ipo and their office environment (especially in zurich) was really good
You're right, and I addressed this in another reply, but keeping a good company culture requires a very special leadership team, and it can't and won't last forever.
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#48Google looked at how sailors share space on a sub and were like "yeah, that's the ticket". Hot-desking is the worst way to be in-office, on top of the worst way of working which is in-office. What happened to being a forward thinking and innovative company? These "geniuses" can't use their superior big brains just barely hiding under those infantilizing propeller hats to figure out a way to make remote work effective…
> on top of the worst way of working which is in-office. It's funny how both sides of this debate present their opinions as fact
Hotdesk is the biggest bullshit ever. Can you imagine arriving at your office having to think, will I be able to seat next to team? Having to do conference call because no meeting room available just for the poor guy who cannot be there by 8? Best part, people consider their desks as they own it, I have seen people moving stuff just because some dared to seat there before they arrive with management approval.
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not quite - just because the founders have majority control doesn't mean that the BS financial duty "laws" don't apply to the company executives. They have a duty to all the shareholders, not just the controlling ones.
There is no duty to maximize profits though, that is a myth.
They have no legal duty to do so, but why do people buy stock if not to produce a return?
Re: Google cuts office space in Bay Area by more than a million square feet
#50Google looked at how sailors share space on a sub and were like "yeah, that's the ticket". Hot-desking is the worst way to be in-office, on top of the worst way of working which is in-office. What happened to being a forward thinking and innovative company? These "geniuses" can't use their superior big brains just barely hiding under those infantilizing propeller hats to figure out a way to make remote work effective…
Google has turned into the "new IBM" for years now. I've worked with Google engineers and managers from different "generations". It's shocking how the newer engineers are just your average consultancy engineer with leet code practice. They have little abstracting capabilities and would be pissed-off if you use some tool/workflow that's not "The Google Way™" (and that includes things like Github for code reviews (instead of Gerrit or a Gerrit-clone), multirepos or monorepos without Bazel, anything else than gRPC...).
And the managers... Oh, the managers... They just act for the sake of their own promotion even if that means damaging someone's else career or the company in the long term. And will complain about things not being done the "Google Way", even if the proposed Google Way failed multiple times in that context (startups and scaleups, in my case). But what's really shocking is how they have no interpersonal skills, to the point of making you constantly question yourself: how, why, did this person ended up in a management track in a supposedly Y-career company? How not only did they got there but also promoted multiple times for this role?
Google, as a company, is as cool as Oracle nowadays.