81–90 of 120 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
~Gmail: acquisition~ EDIT: nope, I remembered wrong; PB did it while at Google. GSuite: a product of several acquisitions Android: acquisition YouTube: acquisition Nest: acquisition Sure, they may have improved them. But definitely not spawned from blooming flowers.
> Gmail: acquisition Wasn't Gmail someone's 20%-time project, within Google?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>What value can they possibly add? Maybe something to squash, say, DocuSign? Not that you need a blockchain to do that, but I can see a Google or Apple DocuSign product growing fast because they own the mobile OSes.
Google is almost a 2 trillion market cap company. Docusign is 20 bill. If some exec inside Google suggested building a team to "squash docusign" they'd be... silly.. and recognized as such.
Perhaps you meant too small to occupy the entire new "Blockchain Unit"? Perhaps, but I assume they would be working on several things rather than just one.
I guess this means the hype has finally peaked? This seems like a late, reluctant adoption and a nail in the coffin for the tech (honestly, good riddance -- Merkle trees have their uses but sheesh).
There's a bit more to it than Merkle trees though
It's possible that this project was created as a sort of L8+ engineer/manager retention program. There's been some reporting that high level execs have been leaving GAMMA companies for blockchain/crypto projects with high payout potential[1]. I wonder if Google is heading in this direction to toss these people a bone with the hopes they'll stay. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/20/technology/silicon-valley...
Doesn't really make sense. People leave for cryptocurrency projects because they’re promised a huge portion of the tokens or pre-mined coins. The idea is that they just need to make the project work well enough to hype enough people into buying the coins, at which point they can unload them at huge returns and then move on to the next crypto project to repeat the process. It doesn’t make sense that Google would keep…
Google is Web 2.0 "get off my lawn" Mecca, they ignored this space until Meta.
People go there because they just caught on to the compensation packages and are going to catch on to Web3 compensation packages just as late. They already work on overly complicated stacks for useless cogs on useless products that Google shuts down randomly.
Have you seen what "backend" competency entails these days? Its absurd!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is GAMMA the new FAANG? * Google * Amazon * Microsoft * ??? * Apple
Google is Alphabet tho, so its MAAMA or MAMAA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't really make sense. People leave for cryptocurrency projects because they’re promised a huge portion of the tokens or pre-mined coins. The idea is that they just need to make the project work well enough to hype enough people into buying the coins, at which point they can unload them at huge returns and then move on to the next crypto project to repeat the process. It doesn’t make sense that Google would keep…
This is silly. There are many, many true believers. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29140393
/S?
Given this is "according to an email viewed by Bloomberg News", I can't help but be reminded of the "An Anatomy of a Bitcoin Price Manipulation" article that was posted here recently. [1] https://www.singlelunch.com/2022/01/09/an-anatomy-of-bitcoin... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29966533
My first thought as well. Rumors like this seem to come in droves whenever Bitcoin prices tumble. I can believe that Google hired a distributed technologies lead somewhere. Spinning it as blockchain/crypto seems to be the work of journalists trying to make it sound more interesting to the average viewer (more clicks)
Any evidence you can point us to?