TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Google has no visionary leaders and a pervasive sense of nihilism

133 点作者 vhiremath4超过 1 年前

20 条评论

NikolaNovak超过 1 年前
I guess I&#x27;m at a point in my life where <i>&quot;people go home on time and nobody wants to work entire weekend just for funsies!! :-&lt;&quot;</i> is no longer as scary portent of doom as it may have been intended by the author.<p>Other note - I understand the author&#x27;s point of &quot;we don&#x27;t have executive vision, engineers do random things and sometimes it works&quot;. But I&#x27;ve also read posts complaining of &quot;engineers are not allowed to try things, we are forced to follow executive orders&quot;.<p>Google is a massive organization. The only thing that&#x27;s likely true of majority of the disparate, heterogeneous, wildy different teams, is that they&#x27;re unlikely to feel like a 5 person early-stage startup. At that size there&#x27;ll be governance and HR and investors and stakeholders and SEC and politics and competing priorities and layers of middle management etc. All of which is not everybody&#x27;s cup of tea granted. But not all of which is necessarily nihilism and doom.
评论 #39083163 未加载
评论 #39084134 未加载
评论 #39083034 未加载
评论 #39083124 未加载
评论 #39083116 未加载
评论 #39083010 未加载
d_burfoot超过 1 年前
What is particularly puzzling to me about the decline of Google is that <i>the founders are still alive and active</i>. It&#x27;s not strange to me to hear that IBM is in decline: it&#x27;s just too old, the founders are long-dead, etc. Why don&#x27;t Page and Brin step in to revive the once-magical company they built?
评论 #39082969 未加载
评论 #39082947 未加载
评论 #39084172 未加载
评论 #39082966 未加载
评论 #39083022 未加载
评论 #39082970 未加载
holoduke超过 1 年前
Its taken over by mba types of people and people from elite backgrounds. The image of leading engineers is gone.
评论 #39083006 未加载
评论 #39083136 未加载
globallyunique超过 1 年前
Joined Google in 2014 - from the people on my team I heard the place was much more magical in the years before. When Sundar started I remember the first thing people were upset about was the handling of the holiday gift - Google changed it to a donation to charity instead and the communication of it upset. It wasn’t that we were not getting a holiday gift anymore (everyone acknowledged we had grown too large for that to last forever). It was that things were communicated as if it was not a cost saving measure and instead phrased that it was net generosity. IMO those kinds of things are what snowballed into Google becoming less of a magical place to work over time.
neilk超过 1 年前
I feel like no one is willing to face up to the obvious truth: founders are not magical, they’re lucky. There isn’t a magic spark that gets lost. They get lucky with breakthrough products. They are incredibly smart annd hardworking but also lucky. Even under ideal circumstances of fostering and developing new ideas, there is no reason to believe their luck will continue, no matter how much talent there is under one roof.<p>And this is not even considering the other structural barriers to innovation! The vast income streams create their own disincentives to disruption. Coordination is hard when you need to get buy-in of many departments. And despite best efforts, at scale, you end up promoting people good at politics or appearances. But even if all that were somehow eliminated, and true startup-style innovation was possible inside a giant company, the company must be careful to defend their existing winners.<p>If Google ever started to enter a death spiral like Apple in the 90s, maybe they could pivot if they were lucky enough to get visionary leadership. But now? Why would they?<p>I worked at Google briefly during the post-IPO period. It was a kind of wonderland, I won’t deny that. But all the really big hits were acquisitions or extensions of Google’s core competencies: search and ads. Everything else was unfocused and half-baked, and this especially applied to ideas that came directly from the founders. (Anyone remember Google Base?)<p>If you really want Google to return to those days you’d have to tolerate a lot of crap that gets abandoned later. (Which is the other complaint that people have about Google. Too experimental or not experimental enough, make up your minds!)
评论 #39083193 未加载
hintymad超过 1 年前
I think Google&#x27;s situation is due to its promotion culture. As Hasting of Netflix said, culture is all about who gets rewarded and who punished. When so many people got promoted for so-called impact and complexity yet their project ultimately failed, many employees&#x27; mentality simply changed to chase short-term personal gain instead of what&#x27;s right for the company.
评论 #39085002 未加载
CPLX超过 1 年前
The issue here is actually fairly straightforward.<p>Google in its present form is illegal, or at minimum is the outcome of a series of illegal anti-competitive actions that for various reasons we decided not to prosecute for an entire generation.<p>Antitrust laws exist for precisely this reason. Because markets don’t function without active competition.<p>The monopoly power Google holds over many of its markets insulates it from market pressure and has removed the pressure of competition.<p>The outcome of this is as predictable as summer. Google doesn’t innovate because it doesn’t have to. That’s not how it makes its money any more.
评论 #39083327 未加载
occidentalcoder超过 1 年前
Former Googler here. It&#x27;s worse than this. Google&#x27;s perf&#x2F;promo culture ensured that good ideas from the bottom never made it anywhere and created a disincentive for anyone to collaborate across teams. It&#x27;s not a fun place to work. The pay is good and you get free food and massages and that sort of thing, but it&#x27;s such a toxic work environment that those things don&#x27;t make up for it unless you really only care about the money.
greyface-超过 1 年前
At IPO, Google set a 20 year expiration date. August 19, 2024 is less than a year away. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reuters.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;us-google-executives&#x2F;top-google-execs-pledged-to-stay-20-years-report-idUSN3026301220080131&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reuters.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;us-google-executives&#x2F;top-goo...</a> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;money.cnn.com&#x2F;2008&#x2F;01&#x2F;18&#x2F;news&#x2F;companies&#x2F;google.fortune&#x2F;index.htm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;money.cnn.com&#x2F;2008&#x2F;01&#x2F;18&#x2F;news&#x2F;companies&#x2F;google.fortu...</a>
评论 #39083666 未加载
zeroCalories超过 1 年前
Looking at the writings of people like Sussman, it seems to me that Google is in an identity crisis. Management is half clinging to the old culture of brilliant PhD engineers creating ambitious new products, but the reality is that this doesn&#x27;t happen anymore. The reason Google is starting to feel like a conventional company is because Googlers are conventional employees. Many of their best and brightest have left to found their own companies, and they&#x27;re left wondering why the remaining tier 2, or 3 engineers can&#x27;t carry them anymore.
sidibe超过 1 年前
People are begging for Sundar to do something unexpected or ambitious, his job is just to manage things uncontroversially as possible for a company that with that size and influence. The Google doomerism here is strong (as it&#x27;s been for 10+ years) but don&#x27;t be surprised when they roll over the LLM competition this year. They still have enormous advantages that people are inclined to look over in their infra and just the number of people doing research no matter how much faster everyone thinks they should be.
emodendroket超过 1 年前
It was never a realistic expectation to become one the biggest companies on earth and remain &quot;innovative&quot; for years and years.
thrw4w4y0超过 1 年前
This generally describes every software only company I’ve worked at for the last 8-10 years.<p>Anyone can spin up an AWS app and so they do, and aim junior engineers at a vague “billion dollar market” waiting for those juniors to spin gold from the BS an empty eyed MBA emits.<p>I am done with software “brands”. I took a job fixing cars for a little less pay (fortunately for me I grew up fixing cars and have an EE BSc, not a CS degree).<p>I tinker at home on AI and LLM projects but will never work for a company focused on software development as their main business ever again. Such a joke and waste of human effort.
kyrra超过 1 年前
This is just a screenshot of this LinkedIn Post: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.linkedin.com&#x2F;posts&#x2F;dhtheriault_my-hot-take-google-does-not-have-one-single-activity-7153269568893775872-9xzp&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.linkedin.com&#x2F;posts&#x2F;dhtheriault_my-hot-take-googl...</a>
评论 #39083070 未加载
评论 #39083121 未加载
评论 #39083135 未加载
评论 #39083346 未加载
评论 #39083072 未加载
评论 #39083120 未加载
gandalfgeek超过 1 年前
Will hit 18 yrs as a SWE at Google in a couple of months. Some thoughts, all my subjective opinion of course:<p>- break up the timeline into two eras: the triumvirate era TE(Page&#x2F;Brin&#x2F;Schmidt), and the Sundar era SE.<p>Financials<p>TE CFO Pichette&#x27;s job was to point the money hose at places that needed the gusher, and do it quickly. He had almost no control on the tap.<p>Every year at the last TGIF before Christmas he would come to Charlie&#x27;s with his famed bright orange backpack full of cash to give Googlers their $1k holiday bonus in cold hard cash. It was grossed up to make sure it was 1k after taxes.<p>The financial tone is set by the folks at the top. L+S never really cared about money. To them it was just fuel to do more cool stuff, not some number to chase. Schmidt was supposed to be the counterweight to this youthful optimism, but he was still a technologist at heart, and by background. They were certainly not profligate, but also viewed it as worthwhile to fly the entire company to Tahoe to ski for a weekend every year.<p>SE CFO Ruth Porat, of Morgan Stanley pedigree, was a &quot;real&quot; CFO. A real message that Google needs to shed it&#x27;s &quot;playground for PhD hackers&quot; image, start acting like a responsible adult.<p>Please understand that I&#x27;m not judging either era as &quot;good&quot; or &quot;bad&quot;, a trap I see many commenters (inside and outside Google) fall into. I&#x27;m not sure a public corporation with the size and scope of Google could viably continue and grow under TE attitudes. SE is in many ways an aggregate expression of the competitive, financial, legal and regulatory environment. But others have made the opposite case, go read them.<p>Work environment<p>The layoffs, two Januarys in a row, have made the mood somber. The hope that Jan 2023 was a one-time rare correction is utterly dashed. SVPs and up should excise the word &quot;excited&quot; from all their communications.<p>BUT-- if you wiped history clean and looked at it objectively today, among its big tech peers, Google remains a great place to work.<p>If you ask most Googlers they will tell you that whatever misgivings they harbor about leadership direction, their immediate team is good&#x2F;great. That says something.<p>Technology<p>15 yrs ago Google was a decade ahead in raw tech. It laid the hardware and software foundation for how to do planet-scale reliable distributed computing, and built giant apps like search and gmail on top of that. Mapreduce, GFS, BigTable, Borg etc. But by now that knowledge has diffused.<p>Seems like an eternity ago, but up until a year ago, the perception was Google had a similar lead in AI. Yes, the transformer architecture was invented at Google. But OpenAI ran away with it.<p>Many insiders are worried that OpenAI is doing to Google what Apple did to PARC. Note that even after copying the GUI from PARC, it was miles ahead in raw innovation.<p>Personal<p>Mourn not a change in culture that you have little control over. Figure out what you want your career arc to be, chase that. Try to be useful in the meanwhile.<p>Be kind to those you interact with. Keep your skills sharp and options open. I know this is easier said than done, but if at all possible, try to live a lifestyle not inflated by big tech comp.<p>If you are a manager, do your best to mentor and inspire your reports. Sometimes you have to shield them, but also know when to explain hard truths. Don&#x27;t coddle.
评论 #39105167 未加载
foogazi超过 1 年前
&gt; nobody works late anymore<p>is this even the right flex?<p>I can’t speak to the leadership part but is stuff not getting done in time and engineers need to work more hours?
renewiltord超过 1 年前
I mean. They had massive success. Today, they will tell you how hard they work aligning stakeholders on their Q1 goals to unify systems and clear tech debt. That&#x27;s what winning gets you when you rest. You lose a step.<p>But they still keep winning. I doubt there are more than a handful of engineers there who are any good in a sense of achieving objectives. Perhaps fewer than in 2005 even. But the product suite is great: search ads, contextual ads, targeted ads, own platform.
mugivarra69超过 1 年前
google dna is now cost cutting this is what u get when u have mackenzie peneterate u
thr0away超过 1 年前
For all the shady stuff Google is doing it might not be a bad thing that it is slowly dying! Seems like a natural progression of things!
jauntywundrkind超过 1 年前
The whole &quot;let engineers do whatever idea&quot; seems like it hasn&#x27;t been very true for a <i>long</i> while. Yet there&#x27;s also no vision from above, no hooks to engage folks well.<p>There&#x27;s been a lot of poo pooing the letting engineers go free idea, but the follow up questions of whether there&#x27;s been any support, any servant leadership... is the company supporting free ideas, or is it disinterested &amp; just letting chaos &amp; churn happen? That&#x27;s was a question.<p>How do you both provide support &amp; coalesceing, while also not becoming a command organization? How do you have upper levels of management that don&#x27;t turn into real politick political gamesmanship? I feel like there&#x27;s such a beautiful idea of anarchy that we wanted to love, and there such obvious failure now, but I feel like we went to blame the idea at large (of engineering free orgs) without spending a moment to consider it&#x27;s execution &amp; or how the org adapted or failed to adapt to this notion.<p>Do y&#x27;all think we&#x27;ll see notable winners, who again live the more anarchistic or less top down engineering mentalities again? How much has the window closed; how much of a negative impact has the legacy of Google left?