Live data from Hacker News

Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

ln.hixie.ch

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#721
post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you - also why target someone who has been there for only 2 years.

It seems she, being his direct manager, was a large part of the reason he decided to leave after 18 years. There is probably a lot of anger and frustration. I do agree this part of the post could have been phrased better.

Where does the author say that this VP is his direct manager?

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#722

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of professionals resist the urge to call out their manager on a blog after they quit a job. Even without Googlegeist.

so things like glassdoor shouldn't exist? or people shouldn't warn of bad managers/jobs?

I've derived some entertainment from the crappy Glassdoor reviews one of the shitty companies I worked at gets. There's a world of difference between those anonymous reviews on Glassdoor, which are sometimes useful and almost never call out by name anyone below the executive level, and what we're talking about here today.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google hasn't created a new major product in years Indeed, and this goes back even further in time than you might think. All their best products came from acquisitions: Maps (KeyHole), Android, YouTube, Google Docs. The only truly original Google products that I can think of, other than Search, are GMail and Chrome (which was largely powered by WebKit anyway). But they do deserve credit for nurturing those products…

Not to be an egghead/navel gazer about it, but I’ve grown skeptical of “innovation” as an end in itself: was Facebook innovative, or was it just another small iterative improvement on an existing form? Same with Google and search. My gut tells me companies should focus on more concrete measures of success rather than the abstract “innovation”. It’s probably not semantically wrong to say that these two cases really we…

Yeah, "innovation" has always been a rather nebulous term for iterative improvement, and more particularly, the iterative improvement that people remember in retrospect. Often the same "innovation" appears almost simultaneously from multiple companies (or inventors, or mathematicians... this phenomenon has existed for a long time). But usually only one of them can win, and it seems relatively arbitrary who it is. Certainly once they're perceived as winning, they benefit from a compounding effect.

Really, "innovation" is a matter of hard work, timing, and luck. You need to work hard to ship a product or publish a theory. You need to recognize the opportunity and execute on it at the right time. And you probably need some luck to get your initial boosts. But even after all that, you still need to be mature and capable enough to turn your small golden egg into a golden goose. It's still a long slog from initial hit to resting on your laurels.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#724

Around 2008 when I was starting college, I was really excited about Google and wanted to work there. By 2013 I began to feel like they weren’t the same anymore and no longer interested me. By 2023, I can say that Not pursuing a job at Google was my best career decision. You can go watch old Google Tech Talks circa 2010 and they’re fabulous. I can’t imagine them putting out that kind of content these days. It’s rather…

What are you up to now and what did you join instead?

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#725
post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was an intern at Google circa 2010, there was a guest lecture from a business professor who described exactly this process. At the end of it, he made a comment like, "Of course none of this will happen to Google. You're too innovative." But literally every single prediction of his came true, and I witnessed some of them happening in front of my own eyes even in just the months that I was there (and certainly i…

On paper, Google's throw-everything-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks strategy (that has lead to a substantial Google Graveyard) seems like it was intended to allow for some parts of the company to innovate while keeping the core products stable and boring. In practice, many of those innovations (Google Inbox, anyone?) were not deemed profitable enough to keep around. Others were never given the resources to grow beyon…

If I recall past discussions on this topic correctly, it wasn’t just about profits. I believe the incentive structures are setup around launches and not maintenance. If that’s correct, then that would lead to people launching, collecting rewards (bonuses, promotions, etc) and then abandoning.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#726
post #13

> “Much of these problems with Google today stem from a lack of visionary leadership from Sundar Pichai, and his clear lack of interest in maintaining the cultural norms of early Google.” Ouch. I know a lot of outsiders believe that, but to have someone who spent 2-decades at Google saying it publicly is rough.

Sundar became CEO in 2015. The author quit this year. Was his "lack of visionary leadership" not that obvious for 8+ years? Or did the author stay because the stock price and his TC kept going up?

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#727
Nicely written. Can't tell you how many times I've seen companies ruined by too many middle managers; some of whom are greatly under qualified to make certain decisions they do.

Unrelated, does anyone here or OP have a ballpark ETA on when Google's Quantum and AI might meet and become friends? I'm really hoping to see this in my lifetime.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I left in 2021, only 3 years tenure. The company was extremely chaotic. We had multiple calls to walkout, unionization, Sundar locking down communication in the wake of people fighting on memegen. We had company wide drama all the time. I had a list of every major dramatic happening and it grew to like 5-6 things in a year. I showed my manager and we laughed about how crazy it was. I left and from what I hear it just…

Its pretty heartening that among all this drama and activism I've never heard of a users data being maliciously leaked from Google. To me thats the strongest signal that user data is pretty safe at Google (one of the authors points).

They did have one incident though - https://www.thedailybeast.com/google-engineer-stalked-spied-...

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#729
It’s very difficult to assign credit or blame to outcomes in a large organization. It's like trying to see which weight in a large neural net caused a specific outcome.

That said, IMO what Elon Musk did to Twitter can be done to Google and many other bloated tech companies.

There are so many technically weak middle management and executives that need to be removed.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#730
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think “rediscovering” the old ways of operating is a charitable interpretation that makes it sound like these patterns are somehow better. Silos and fiefdoms don’t benefit the company, they benefit the professional managers that are using them to grow their careers. I subscribe to the interpretation that sufficiently successful companies inevitably attract ladder climbers whose goals are personal advancement at all…

As the other commenter mentioned, silos are not inherently bad. Indeed, in a large company, they're necessary to avoid dysfunction. You want stable groups of competent people who share priorities and lore, who own well-defined parts of the business, and who have the autonomy to set the strategy for their thing. "Founder-led" companies are more dynamic mostly because they're smaller. Once they get to 100,000 employees…

Sounds like encapsulation in OO. You don't want to let other people poke around in your bits except through well defined interfaces.
Post reply on HN