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

Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

thingist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 89 posts

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#71

Post by dacilselig »

dsowers wrote: post #19

I agree. I think the worst of HN comes out whenever anyone submits a personal blog post. If you read the comments for ANY blog post submitted, you will see how it has become a giant game to discredit everything the author says. I think it's good to be skeptical, and as nerds we have plenty of skepticism to go around, but there are ways to be do it with a little more taste and respect. I've been looking at some of the…

So perhaps, the design of Hacker news itself (or point-based systems) reinforces the cynicism that exists in most of the posts you are referring to.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#72

Post by kyllo »

michaelochurch wrote: post #60
kyllo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is really an extension of "praise in public, criticize in private," which is one of the golden rules of good management. Non-tech management understands this concept better than tech management, perhaps.

Tech people really suck at negotiation and that doesn't stop when they become managers. Which means that they don't realize that "You need to be hard on your reports" is a test and not a directive. When the boss^2 (who does understand negotiation and human dynamics) says "You need to be tougher on your reports", saying "Yes, sir" means you fail the test. If you're not standing up for your reports and selling their ef…

That, and if you're a boss, badmouthing anyone on your team to your own boss sends a message that you can't keep your house in order and maybe you aren't fit to lead a team.

So if you're a manager and you're smart, then when your boss asks you about your reports, the correct answer is always yes sir/ma'am, everyone is doing great--anything less reflects poorly on your ability to manage them. Your boss doesn't want to deal with people-managing your reports, that's why he/she hired you in the first place.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#73

Post by nickevans »

Totally agree. Makes me think of this blog post I read recently where the writer basically generalizes an entire culture of people into a whiny group of people that spend too much of their time complaining about and criticizing other members of that group.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#75

Post by notmchurch »

michaelochurch wrote: post #69
tiredofcareer wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you use specific terms like PIPs and perf, we know who you're talking about. I interviewed at Google recently and asked my interviewers about you, Michael, based on the threads you start here that talk about the management vs. engineers culture at Google. Rather than go "oh, Michael, you're so wrong," I gave you a chance and brought it up as a valid concern to each of my five interviewers. The resounding sentime…

When you use specific terms like PIPs and perf, we know who you're talking about. I wasn't talking about Google. Not for that specific case. That happened at another company, where I didn't work, but I know the story. Lots of companies use PIPs and performance reviews. The resounding sentiment from every single engineer who interviewed me (two of them with more than 8 years at Google) was how badly you misrepresent a…

I'm sorry, Michael, but it is not true that 25% of Googlers view you positively. The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references.

You need to get over this delusion that Google is wrong and and you are right, and that eventually Google will somehow come to its senses and beg for your forgiveness and guidance. It is never going to happen. Ever.

I really think that you should seek professional help. You're not just going to wind up an unemployed pariah at the rate you're going; you're going to wind up in a padded cell.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#76

Post by bmnick »

tene wrote: post #67
Udo wrote: post #30

The worst thing that can happen to a Show HN post is people totally ignoring it. When I post something of my own here, I expect a certain amount of honesty and criticism, as long as it is constructive. Being "constructive" does not mean being congratulatory, shoulder-patting, praising, or anything like that. It means that the feedback itself should provide some kind of value, preferably for the benefit of the project…

> "What's the points of this? I've been doing the same thing since the 80s by piping four shell commands together?!?" - is not really constructive. > Letting people know you are unlikely to use the code/product/gizmo is also constructive, especially if you can manage to tell why. By my reading, these two statements contradict each other. The quote you claim is not constructive seems to me to be saying the author sees…

As an example, this would be a constructive way of saying something similar in my opinion, though some may still find it close to the line:

"I have found my own solution to this problem that involves piping these commands together, so this project isn't for me, but good job for creating a simpler solution for people who don't necessarily need control over every step of the solution, but rather just care about the final result."

This indicates why it's not useful for the poster, but it acknowledges that not everyone is a CLI genius and that the new solution could work for people with different tools requirements.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#77

Post by michaelochurch »

notmchurch wrote: post #75
michaelochurch wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you use specific terms like PIPs and perf, we know who you're talking about. I wasn't talking about Google. Not for that specific case. That happened at another company, where I didn't work, but I know the story. Lots of companies use PIPs and performance reviews. The resounding sentiment from every single engineer who interviewed me (two of them with more than 8 years at Google) was how badly you misrepresent a…

I'm sorry, Michael, but it is not true that 25% of Googlers view you positively. The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references. You need to get over this delusion that Google is wrong and and you are right, and that eventually Google will somehow come to its senses and beg for yo…

The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references.

I don't know what you're talking about.

You need to get over this delusion that Google is wrong and and you are right

Not delusion. All I have said is that they're badly run and that most of the corrosion is in the middle-management layer.

and that eventually Google will somehow come to its senses and beg for your forgiveness and guidance. It is never going to happen. Ever.

You are almost certainly right on that one, although I find it pretty obvious. People rarely backtrack on mistakes, and organizations are even more prone to foolish consistency.

Also, how in the fuck am I the crazy one? I don't attack a person I've never met just to uphold the reputation of a gigantic company.

It's actually a bit sickening. Yes, I have taken aim at Google's management. If you are an engineer, you aren't in this fight and you should stay out, because I never did have any problem with you.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#78

Post by 10ki »

potatolicious wrote: post #62
skrebbel wrote: post #32

Seriously, America is going to drown in shoulder-patting and hooray cheering. This taboo on negative opinions is ridiculous. We're teaching entire generations that we cannot fail as long as we try hard enough, and that it's the attempt that counts. Seriously, screw that. It is a vital skill to be able to filter through feedback, take the useful parts to heart, and shrug about low, nasty, useless comments. To learn fr…

This isn't the sort of thing author is talking about. We're talking about the nasty, mean-spirited, no-holds-barred evisceration of each other by hiding behind the guise of criticism. Take a few days ago: "GitHub Gracious Helps Female Programmers Cower in Fear"[1] Nobody is saying you have to agree with everything GitHub does re: sexism, or that they are above criticism. Nobody is saying you should be patting everyon…

> Presentation matters. Criticism wrapped in vitriol becomes just vitriol, and vitriol wrapped in criticism still doesn't become good criticism.

As if it would help you prove your point, that's completely braindead. What you describe is just a different form of shooting the messenger; you don't like the way they said it so you ignore what they said. For example if I point out your solution is N^2 and you're an idiot for doing it that way instead of N log N you may not be an idiot, but the solution is still a bad one.

If vitriol is the motive for the criticism then by banning the vitriol you've also lost the criticism. This is really a huge problem for Hacker News; by banning unkind critics they've lost a lot of actual criticism. The result is HN exists in a bubble of trends and fads because the people who take glee in deflating them get banned.

> [GitHub Gracious Helps Female Programmers Cower in Fear]... author in this case had to go with the most needlessly inflammatory, mean-spirited, and downright asshole-ish comment possible.

This is a good example, but not of what you think. The content of the blog is reasonably and calmly presented, but if you throw that away because of the flame title then you've lost that.

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#79

Post by cwbrandsma »

This isn't a "nerd" issue. And it is a fallacy to believe nerds should act better because we are nerds and live in a vacuum of only dealing with other nerds. The idea should be that we are the only ones acting this way (and no one else does), or that we are better than everyone else.

The negative behavior is actually TAUGHT, and taught early on. This is how everyone in the western world is taught to debate opinions. Look at any high school debate club, political debates, and any other televised debate. The behavior starts there. As a society, people are not taught to be civil when dealing with disagreements. There is just an inherent "You are completely with me and my friend, or we are enemies".

Re: Nerds, we need to have a talk (2011)

#80

Post by nostrademons »

michaelochurch wrote: post #77
notmchurch wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, Michael, but it is not true that 25% of Googlers view you positively. The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references. You need to get over this delusion that Google is wrong and and you are right, and that eventually Google will somehow come to its senses and beg for yo…

The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references. I don't know what you're talking about. You need to get over this delusion that Google is wrong and and you are right Not delusion. All I have said is that they're badly run and that most of the corrosion is in the middle-management…

"The vast majority of Googlers view you as a nutter, especially following your revelation a few days ago that you are thinking about killing people who ostensibly gave you bad references.

I don't know what you're talking about."

He's talking about this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5625659

"Yes, I have taken aim at Google's management. If you are an engineer, you aren't in this fight and you should stay out, because I never did have any problem with you."

I think the reason many Googlers speak up against you is because of basic empathy: we see a group of people being unfairly maligned, and it's not right or ethical to keep secret and let that happen. It's somewhat unfortunate that the response of many of them has been to malign you, but you have to understand that your perception of the company is very different from many other insiders' perception of the company. Yes, it's quite possible you drew a bad manager; they do exist, even at Google. But you paint with an awfully broad brush, making grandiose proclamations about how the company is rotten to the core and run by sociopaths that should be shot, and I and many other Googlers just don't see it.

My manager(s) worked his ass off so that I and his other reports could have an environment where we're free to innovate, free to work on things that interest us, and free to accomplish things. A lot of mid-level managers burn out because of it, eventually getting fed up with having to reconcile so many different constraints and getting zero credit for it. My VPs also seem to usually make good decisions: I disagree with them sometimes (okay, often), but I can usually see the rationale behind them and the market realities that are driving them to those decisions.

Those decisions don't always go my way - I had 3 projects canceled within a span of 6 months in late 2010, and I just had my year-long research project canceled when 2 weeks before I'd been led to believe it was a long-term investment - but when I take a step back and look at the organizational forces, I can usually see how those really were the best decisions for the organization. Sometimes you can have a technically awesome solution that when you try to scale up to a team and bring to the real world, just doesn't work.

Post reply on HN