6 ms·

I think it is disingenuous to say that the lead programmer of Swift and Director of Machine Learning won't make a difference. I know if my company lost two imp

by baldfat 10y ago

I think it is disingenuous to say that the lead programmer of Swift and Director of Machine Learning won't make a difference. I know if my company lost two important people in one week would be very significant.

Gargoyle 10y ago
I have faith a company like Apple can replace them with people every bit as talented and competent.
- nugget 10y ago
  It's not always that simple. Execs like this take entire teams of talented subordinates with them. The headline focuses on one person but the real brain drain occurs when that person turns around and starts to poach the absolute best talent from their previous orgs. I've found recruiting and hiring at the very top to be as much (or more) about the individual exec/manager than the company itself.
  - Gargoyle 10y ago
    No one said anything about it being simple, just that it can be done when you have the resources and reputation of a company like Apple.
  - rwc 10y ago
    For what it's worth, Chris Lattner specifically said in his farewell email [1] that "we don’t expect it to impact day-to-day operations in the Swift Core Team in any significant way." If you take him at his word, presumably that would mean the brain drain will be a nonevent. [1] https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20170109/030063.html https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mo...
    - fpgeek 10y ago
      Or it may just mean that the brain drain won't have a direct day-to-day impact, just an indirect, growing decay in capacity and capability as people leave and the team struggles to replace them.
  - bfstein 10y ago
    FWIW, a lot of companies have non-solications in place to try and prevent this kind of behavior. They're far from fool-proof, and there is nothing stopping an employee from leaving of their own volition, but I would guess both of them have some sort of agreement in place not to poach talent directly.
    - rhizome 10y ago
      What you're describing is not only illegal, but also something for which Apple recently contributed to a half-billion dollar settlement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... a lot of companies have non-solications in place to try and prevent this kind of behavior If you know of other companies engaging in backroom nonsolicitation agreements with each other, the responsible thing to do for your fellow STEM workers is to call the Department of Justice Antitrust Division and let them know that the Apple/Google/etc. settlement didn't achieve its intended effect.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - nostrademons 10y ago
        The type of "no-solicit" that bfstein is talking about is very different from the one you're referring to. The no-solicit contracts that are common in Silicon Valley mean that you, as an ex-employee, cannot directly approach a current employee that you know there and offer them a job at your current employer. The no-solicits that they got in trouble with in the HTEAL were where the company's HR department refused to approach employees at other tech companies. The former is a contract between you and your employer, which is legal and enforceable. The latter was a verbal contract between competitors to the detriment of their employees, which is illegal. In practice, what most big companies do is they ask incoming employees for the names and personal contact info (and only that) of good employees that they have worked with in the past, and then pass that info on to HR, for a corporate recruiter to make the initial contact. Has the same effect, but no contracts are broken, since the corporation does all the soliciting.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
devy 10y ago
Not entirely sure about the back story of Chris Lattner joining Tesla. But according to Techcrunch, Gross first found his way to Apple after Cue, formally called Greplin, was acquired by the company for $40 million back in 2013 for its predictive search capabilities. After spending the last three years in Cupertino, Gross was ready to get back to his entrepreneurial roots. It's possible that agreement during that acquisition Gross has a 3 year vesting period and it's not very surprising that some founders leave after certain stock vesting events. This is purely my speculation but it's possible. And the timing of it might just be a coincidence.
bunchspoiler 10y ago
Lattner was indeed THE lead programmer of Swift, but Gross was A Director working on Machine Learning not THE guy in charge of company wide machine learning efforts ("Director" at Apple basically means second level manager).
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
haberman 10y ago
Sorry this is off-topic, but I really dislike the overuse of the word "disingenuous" in tech discussions. It means you think the person is being insincere or duplicitous in what they are saying. It's much more likely that they just have a different opinion than you. Questioning a person's sincerity is unproductive and usually unnecessary. It makes discussions needlessly personal and unpleasant.
- elastic_church 10y ago
  yeah but it was used correctly though I sometimes say 'cognitively negligent' as a synonym, but for retarded.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- baldfat 10y ago
  > It means you think the person is being insincere or duplicitous in what they are saying. That was exactly what I meant to say. I felt that he was making presenting a positive spin on a tech company he likes. Anyone that spins a story that they know they are spinning are being "disingenuous" to themselves.
  - haberman 10y ago
    Someone could just as easily say you are presenting a negative spin on a tech company you dislike. It doesn't make for very interesting or productive discussion.
    - baldfat 10y ago
      > It doesn't make for very interesting or productive discussion. So what your saying is Hacker News isn't interesting when two biggish names leave a company for other companies? Some of us think it is significant. The reply was someone talking about my disuse of an english word. I replied that was exactly what I intended to use. I can't seem to figure out if your defending another person or attacking me or both/neither.
gigatexal 10y ago
I agree. When is this exodus at Apple going to end? Maybe they saw the next set of products and said "meh".
to3m 10y ago
"Naive" might be the word you're looking for. And indeed, whenever important people leave, it is always significant. In fact, it can be significant even when they're not important at all. But you do need to wait a year to find out whether it makes a difference! You might be surprised at who can leave without ultimately causing a problem.
KKKKkkkk1 10y ago
Based on Apple's performance in machine learning, I would say some change in management has long been warranted.

by baldfat 10y ago

Gargoyle 10y ago

I have faith a company like Apple can replace them with people every bit as talented and competent.

nugget 10y ago
It's not always that simple. Execs like this take entire teams of talented subordinates with them. The headline focuses on one person but the real brain drain occurs when that person turns around and starts to poach the absolute best talent from their previous orgs. I've found recruiting and hiring at the very top to be as much (or more) about the individual exec/manager than the company itself.
- Gargoyle 10y ago
  No one said anything about it being simple, just that it can be done when you have the resources and reputation of a company like Apple.
- rwc 10y ago
  For what it's worth, Chris Lattner specifically said in his farewell email [1] that "we don’t expect it to impact day-to-day operations in the Swift Core Team in any significant way." If you take him at his word, presumably that would mean the brain drain will be a nonevent. [1] https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20170109/030063.html https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mo...
  - fpgeek 10y ago
    Or it may just mean that the brain drain won't have a direct day-to-day impact, just an indirect, growing decay in capacity and capability as people leave and the team struggles to replace them.
- bfstein 10y ago
  FWIW, a lot of companies have non-solications in place to try and prevent this kind of behavior. They're far from fool-proof, and there is nothing stopping an employee from leaving of their own volition, but I would guess both of them have some sort of agreement in place not to poach talent directly.
  - rhizome 10y ago
    What you're describing is not only illegal, but also something for which Apple recently contributed to a half-billion dollar settlement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... a lot of companies have non-solications in place to try and prevent this kind of behavior If you know of other companies engaging in backroom nonsolicitation agreements with each other, the responsible thing to do for your fellow STEM workers is to call the Department of Justice Antitrust Division and let them know that the Apple/Google/etc. settlement didn't achieve its intended effect.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - nostrademons 10y ago
      The type of "no-solicit" that bfstein is talking about is very different from the one you're referring to. The no-solicit contracts that are common in Silicon Valley mean that you, as an ex-employee, cannot directly approach a current employee that you know there and offer them a job at your current employer. The no-solicits that they got in trouble with in the HTEAL were where the company's HR department refused to approach employees at other tech companies. The former is a contract between you and your employer, which is legal and enforceable. The latter was a verbal contract between competitors to the detriment of their employees, which is illegal. In practice, what most big companies do is they ask incoming employees for the names and personal contact info (and only that) of good employees that they have worked with in the past, and then pass that info on to HR, for a corporate recruiter to make the initial contact. Has the same effect, but no contracts are broken, since the corporation does all the soliciting.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

devy 10y ago

Not entirely sure about the back story of Chris Lattner joining Tesla. But according to Techcrunch, Gross first found his way to Apple after Cue, formally called Greplin, was acquired by the company for $40 million back in 2013 for its predictive search capabilities. After spending the last three years in Cupertino, Gross was ready to get back to his entrepreneurial roots. It's possible that agreement during that acquisition Gross has a 3 year vesting period and it's not very surprising that some founders leave after certain stock vesting events. This is purely my speculation but it's possible. And the timing of it might just be a coincidence.

bunchspoiler 10y ago

Lattner was indeed THE lead programmer of Swift, but Gross was A Director working on Machine Learning not THE guy in charge of company wide machine learning efforts ("Director" at Apple basically means second level manager).

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

haberman 10y ago

Sorry this is off-topic, but I really dislike the overuse of the word "disingenuous" in tech discussions. It means you think the person is being insincere or duplicitous in what they are saying. It's much more likely that they just have a different opinion than you. Questioning a person's sincerity is unproductive and usually unnecessary. It makes discussions needlessly personal and unpleasant.

elastic_church 10y ago
yeah but it was used correctly though I sometimes say 'cognitively negligent' as a synonym, but for retarded.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
baldfat 10y ago
> It means you think the person is being insincere or duplicitous in what they are saying. That was exactly what I meant to say. I felt that he was making presenting a positive spin on a tech company he likes. Anyone that spins a story that they know they are spinning are being "disingenuous" to themselves.
- haberman 10y ago
  Someone could just as easily say you are presenting a negative spin on a tech company you dislike. It doesn't make for very interesting or productive discussion.
  - baldfat 10y ago
    > It doesn't make for very interesting or productive discussion. So what your saying is Hacker News isn't interesting when two biggish names leave a company for other companies? Some of us think it is significant. The reply was someone talking about my disuse of an english word. I replied that was exactly what I intended to use. I can't seem to figure out if your defending another person or attacking me or both/neither.

gigatexal 10y ago

I agree. When is this exodus at Apple going to end? Maybe they saw the next set of products and said "meh".

to3m 10y ago

"Naive" might be the word you're looking for. And indeed, whenever important people leave, it is always significant. In fact, it can be significant even when they're not important at all. But you do need to wait a year to find out whether it makes a difference! You might be surprised at who can leave without ultimately causing a problem.

KKKKkkkk1 10y ago

Based on Apple's performance in machine learning, I would say some change in management has long been warranted.