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

Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

ln.hixie.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

991–1000 of 1001 posts

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#991

Post by PessimalDecimal »

rizky05 wrote: post #733
e_y_ wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Microsoft today is more innovative than google IMO. They keep executing bold and controversial strategies, even though being older than google.

At roughly similar points in their lives, Microsoft and Google initiated video gaming platforms. Microsoft stuck with Xbox through seven years (iirc) of still-unprofitable growth to what it is today. Google abandoned Stadia after three years.

Yeah, I think Google is looking more like an IBM in the long run, while Microsoft manages to innovate despite its age and size.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#992

Post by hot_gril »

trustyhank wrote: post #975
hot_gril wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has passed up too many great opportunities that don't even take a visionary to see. Biggest examples, we let Zoom, OpenAI, and even Microsoft (Teams) steal our thunder. Microsoft, that company we make fun of as a dinosaur, moves faster than we do! I remember the discussions around the office right when ChatGPT came out. "Bard performs better," "we're more ethical," etc. Nope, they ate our lunch.

Could add AWS and Azure to that list

I thought about that, but my list was focused on things that Google was leading in but let the market get away. Amazon got into cloud before Google did.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#994

Post by CareyDRasmus »

What I don't understand is that Ian has been at Google for 18 years with little to no real recognition for his work except that he was a tech writer for HTML5. Is it that Ian has the problem? This seems to be the sentiment of all his leaders over the last 18 years.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#995

Post by khazhoux »

detourdog wrote: post #867
khazhoux wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have the history backwards. Ads in early 2000s > Mega-valuation

Could be, they also had a pre-iso valuation that needed justifying. The signal to me that it was really over was when they stopped supporting jabber/XMPP and look where it go them. I never experienced Google as a stock. My only experience with google is as a search engine and a mail delivery system that broke all the rules of polite society. Could be "Don't be evil" was the answer to the business model question of ea…

They were making massive jaw-dropping revenue years years before IPO. Secretly — the public or press were unaware.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#996

Post by Eridrus »

johnluigi wrote: post #788
sgu999 wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the same story with ChatGPT: Google had the tech but not the freedom to let it loose. I wouldn't be so sure, in my case ChatGPT passes the bar of being mildly useful but Bard is still absolutely useless. I can see two equally likely explanations for this: they simply can't manage to pull it off due to their culture or they can't release something that isn't massively more nerfed than the competition.

This story that Google would be destroyed if they had released GenAI tech before OpenAI is BS. Most people I know were instructed to tell people it was because of “responsibility” that GenAI was not out yet, while the entire company was freaking out and playing catch up with OpenAI (a 770 people company!) and promising non existent things to customers. There was nothing ready or thought through. Many people at Google…

> There was nothing ready or thought through.

This was not my view being somewhat close to the technologies there. Lamda did exist internally for several years, with pretty good demos.

It was clearly not GPT-4, but there was a lot of exec-level fear about releasing these systems and having them say something offensive.

"Responsibility" is kind of bullshit, but fear of bad press is very real.

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#998

Post by sabinfigero »

ob-gyn wrote: post #982
screye wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> series of bad-to-disastrous leaders at the Director, VP, and SVP level Isn't that exactly the job of an org executive? To hire and align competent senior leadership ? I don't think he is criticizing her in particular as much as the archetype that she represents. She is a person who has never had a coding job & spent her early career quite far from the people who write code. I can't for the life of me figure out why…

I find it fascinating how you speak with so much authority. I know Jeanine Banks and I've been really upset with all the "diversity hire" nonsense coming from many of you who cannot hold a candle next to her. For your information she had been programmingor since high school and was hired into a government agency as a high school programmer-intern. That internship was her introduction into the worlf of technology. She…

[flagged]

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#999

Post by immibis »

JSavageOne wrote: post #835
immibis wrote: post #822

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not a problem, either. Turnover is natural. Nobody but the investors care very much whether Kodak pivots to digital cameras, or whether Kodak remains the leading film camera company as the industry shrinks, and a different company makes digital cameras. In fact the latter is often better for the economy and consumers, due to the better specialization.

Yes it is a problem if a company is failing not just for the investors but the workers. Nobody wants to work for a sinking ship. Can't believe this even needs to be said.

It doesn't have to sink. Isn't Kodak still a respected company in the niche realm of film cameras?

Re: Reflecting on 18 Years at Google

#1000

Post by alsetmusic »

KaiserPro wrote: post #937
kelnos wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, agreed. My view is that the people on the inside often can't see the forest for the trees. They look at their immediate team/group, love the autonomy/transparency/"don't be evil"-mandate/etc. that they have and follow, and look around and see some of that in other groups, and think, "wow, this company is great, doesn't care about all that big-bad-company stuff". But people outside can look at a company that gets…

As a Cynic that also works at a FAANG, I sometimes see instances of the "outside" reading too much into an action that the company takes. However. From the inside you have to keep an eye on how your actions might look to the outside with little to no context. The research my team does could be pulled in one of two ways: "wow thats really useful" and "wow that's fucking intrusive." Its down to us to demonstrate to the…

> Apple for enabling child porn at industrial levels and undermining encryption in the process.

I'm late in cleaning up old browser tabs, so I understand if there's no reply to this in a week-old discussion. How would you support the first half of this statement? Surely, there's far more CSAM on social networks than on iMessage (assuming that's where you were alluding).

Post reply on HN