Live data from Hacker News

Why Google Doesn’t Have a Research Lab

technologyreview.com

41–43 of 43 posts

Re: Why Google Doesn’t Have a Research Lab

#41
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A playground for extremely smart people Which is pretty much a definition of a good research lab.

I believe that the second clause in hendzen's reply is the point of the statement. > ... they don't want their competitors to hire. i.e. that the purpose is not to get them to do research for Google, but to stop them doing research or development for anyone else.

Unless they're paying them to goof around on tennis court, I don't think it matters. It's not really important for who they're doing the research (except maybe that Google is the least evil company I can think of), because ultimately whatever they invent will benefit the whole mankind.

Re: Why Google Doesn’t Have a Research Lab

#42
post #40
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can not say that is always true. Microsoft is a software engineering company as well, but they do have a dedicated R&D team and offices.

Who said it was always true? I certainly didn't. I made an assertion about Google, not Microsoft.

> It's a software engineering company.

This sort of implied a generalization.

Re: Why Google Doesn’t Have a Research Lab

#43
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A playground for extremely smart people they don't want their competitors to hire.

X is still very much run by Sergey. On the more experimental projects (i.e. not Glass or self-driving cars) you have a fair amount of freedom to experiment, but if Sergey wants something to happen a certain way, it happens that way. (For that matter, the rest of the company isn't all that different: you have a fair amount of freedom to experiment, but if Larry wants something to happen a certain way, it happens that…

BTW, I sent you an email about meeting Larry/Sergey a while ago. I just added rachelbythebay to the list too.
Post reply on HN