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

Google to reduce workforce by 12k

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#661

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

marvin wrote: post #609
xiphias2 wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google of 2008 didn't do this, I was there. The difference is that current Google is full of non-tech non-sales people who fight with eachother to reorganize tech people who are trying to build things. Other tech people change the API for no reason and give work to 1000 more people to ,,upgrade to the newer system'' and stop maintaining the old system. Also the new CEO is not a software engineer, so he doesn't unders…

> The difference is that current Google is full of non-tech non-sales people who fight with eachother to reorganize tech people who are trying to build things. Is this true? If so, how can a historically disruptive and innovtive tech company like Google make that kind of blatant mistake?

It was a response to real issues that had to be addressed. When 3 different teams ship 3 different chat apps over the course of just 5 years, that’s the kind of thing that typically signals more leadership and better organization is needed.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#662

Post by charles_f »

wheels wrote: post #197
eCa wrote: post #51

I guess someone has to write this comment: > I take full responsibility for the decisions that led us here As usual, he says nothing more what the consequences for him are. It seems like all of the FAANGs have made severe strategic cockups when it comes to hiring lately. I wonder if it will affect their longterm attraction as employers.

I think calling them cockups is a stretch. A few points: - Flexibility of the US labor market is one of the things that makes it attractive relative to labor markets of other rich countries: it's easy to hire more people when demand goes up, and fire them when it goes down. - Demand just went down, all over the interwebs, since people miss doing things in real life. - It's an easy time to fire a bunch of people witho…

> calling them cockups is a stretch

The gap between hot-as-hell hiring and firing is lower than 6 months, I don't think it's a stretch.

Now from their point of view, it's not a big problem. You gotta think long term, and long term it's good. Operational expenses going down, and will help lower wage! Awesome outcome! But hiring/firing isn't free so it would have been better to not hire ; there's also the human side of things but I think the conscience weight on their shoulders for beheading 12k people is marginal at best. So tis a cock up in the same sense you would call trashing an expired milk carton from your fridge a cockup.

From a dev perspective, the story is different, and I think cock up is probably a euphemism.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#663

Post by moffkalast »

yamtaddle wrote: post #654
xiphias2 wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google of 2008 didn't do this, I was there. The difference is that current Google is full of non-tech non-sales people who fight with eachother to reorganize tech people who are trying to build things. Other tech people change the API for no reason and give work to 1000 more people to ,,upgrade to the newer system'' and stop maintaining the old system. Also the new CEO is not a software engineer, so he doesn't unders…

Around '08 or '09 is when IMO it became visible from the outside that Google's culture had shifted radically. I've read comments before claiming that when Google acquired DoubleClick, Google became more DoubleClick than the other way around. Basically, that the Google we liked was destroyed by that acquisition, and something new emerged. That certainly squares with the timeline.

> DoubleClick Inc. was an advertisement company that developed and provided Internet ad serving services from 1995 until its acquisition by Google

Checks out alright.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#664

Post by AYBABTME »

radu_floricica wrote: post #464
AYBABTME wrote: post #422

Every time I read stuff like: > "Over the past two years we’ve seen periods of dramatic growth. To match and fuel that growth, we hired for a different economic reality than the one we face today." I feel taken for a fool. Every damn body knew that the last 2 years were not representative of the future. Everybody knew that free-money, COVID and related phenomenons were a phase. I can't believe that Google, Shopify, C…

Really? Cause I'm making a public note here that I didn't know. I fully expected WFH and automation to continue to fuel the need for software development, albeit at a slower rate. I'm also making a public note that even if I foresaw a crash after printing free money, I didn't expect it to be compounded by the most drastic eco-legislation ever, plus a war in Ukraine. And I sure as hell didn't expect the last two to be…

I think WFH and automation gained a boost from the pandemic and while the pendulum will continue to balance back, the overall effect will be more WFH and automation than if the pandemic hadn't hit.

Large scale disruptions cause governments to print money, and I think the IRA (which I assume is what you refer to) was in a way predictable, because government historically do infrastructure spending to keep the economy afloat after large scale disruptions. That the Democrats would push infrastructure spending on tech and eco stuff is not particularly surprising. Asian countries have been pouring their R&D in solar panels, chips, batteries, manufacturing, for years. The pandemic very early on made bare the US' dire positioning, versus Asian countries relative advantage in that aspect. I wouldn't have predicted the IRA but it's predictable that an infra bill would have come. That's what happened in prior cases.

I didn't expect the war in Ukraine, but we could expect wars. Trouble times create incentives (disparity) and opportunities. I sadly expect more large conflicts in the coming years. I think the average pragmatic person probably also does.

As for the current economic crisis, I'll go on a limb and guess it'll probably maintain itself for another 2-3-4y horizon, like prior ones did. And the boiling pot it will cause will be fertile ground for conflicts (and innovation).

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#665

Post by [deleted] »

nness wrote: post #382
hsn915 wrote: post #325

I find it odd that most of the comments here are angry, as if at someone who stole the livlihoods of thousands of people. I understand the general public thinks their life depends on a company. I find it odd that this sentiment is so strong on HN.

As an outsider, it often feels like Silicon Valley like organisations have a particularly unique culture compared to the rest of the Western corporate world. It's built from decades of hacker culture, start-up mythos, antidisestablishmentarianism, etc. I think people are angry because they thought that Google (and others) were behaving with the same social contract, acting in their interests. It's a tough pill to rea…

[deleted]

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#666

Post by warning26 »

kderbyma wrote: post #590
xiphias2 wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google of 2008 didn't do this, I was there. The difference is that current Google is full of non-tech non-sales people who fight with eachother to reorganize tech people who are trying to build things. Other tech people change the API for no reason and give work to 1000 more people to ,,upgrade to the newer system'' and stop maintaining the old system. Also the new CEO is not a software engineer, so he doesn't unders…

Pinchai has been a Terrible pick. He made google just worse. Like a passive aggressive leader...

I’ve seen him speak in person, and this is completely correct. He just chases shiny things; there’s no vision for the company at all, just “oh well this seems interesting”.

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#667

Post by dreamcompiler »

ascagnel_ wrote: post #582
boplicity wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That also explains why carriers are obsessed with buying media companies; they just can't let go of their dreams of a walled garden.

Carriers are doing their best to avoid becoming a "dumb pipe" utility-style service where other people make all the money.

I call this "the plumbing law of the internet business."

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#668

Post by karmasimida »

xiphias2 wrote: post #584
EthanHeilman wrote: post #543

The Google of 2005 wouldn't do this. The Google of 2005 would use this as opportunity to monopolize all the talent and move into some new space and eat everything with fantastic software. * I had a good seat to watch google obliterate mapquest and yahoomaps with amazing javascript maps. It was day and night. Yahoo was penny pinching their mapping engineers while Google was buying geographic satellite companies and in…

Google of 2008 didn't do this, I was there. The difference is that current Google is full of non-tech non-sales people who fight with eachother to reorganize tech people who are trying to build things. Other tech people change the API for no reason and give work to 1000 more people to ,,upgrade to the newer system'' and stop maintaining the old system. Also the new CEO is not a software engineer, so he doesn't unders…

Google is too big to be efficient

Layoff would be inevitable. Reading its past history, the current Google is nothing like what is was. It used to be a pretty intense place where creators are eager to work (check the history of Android book, it is very informative on that)

Now it is famous for getting paid without caring

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#669

Post by [deleted] »

eCa wrote: post #51

I guess someone has to write this comment: > I take full responsibility for the decisions that led us here As usual, he says nothing more what the consequences for him are. It seems like all of the FAANGs have made severe strategic cockups when it comes to hiring lately. I wonder if it will affect their longterm attraction as employers.

[deleted]

Re: Google to reduce workforce by 12k

#670

Post by [deleted] »

EthanHeilman wrote: post #543

The Google of 2005 wouldn't do this. The Google of 2005 would use this as opportunity to monopolize all the talent and move into some new space and eat everything with fantastic software. * I had a good seat to watch google obliterate mapquest and yahoomaps with amazing javascript maps. It was day and night. Yahoo was penny pinching their mapping engineers while Google was buying geographic satellite companies and in…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN