3 ms·

> The reason I won't work at Google is because Google is incapable of hiring the engineers I want to work with That's a very bold (even arrogant, sorry) statem

> The reason I won't work at Google is because Google is incapable of hiring the engineers I want to work with That's a very bold (even arrogant, sorry) statement about 57,000+ (googled it) employees. So 57,000 are worse devs then you ? This is what i hear from your statement, correct me if I am wrong .. Many extremely talented people want to work for Google. They will take the tests, even if they don't agree with the hiring system at all . Maybe they want to work at Google despite its incapability (according to you) in the hiring and testing process. > it is whether I want to work with the code of people who can pass that interview Have you found any correlation between poor code and being able to pass Google's interview ? (edit: new lines)

unknown2374 10y ago
I don't think he/she means that they are worse. We all want to work with developers who can help us learn and get better. From what I understand, he/she just means that their process of hiring has no correlation to the quality of code that they produce. Their hiring process is incapable by design of hiring those people BASED on those skills he/she is looking to work with, but sometimes they do end up hiring capable engineers with no credit to their process.
countryqt30 10y ago
Just as a matter of correctness: only 1/3rd of Google employees are engineers/development guys.
DonHopkins 10y ago
Since Google is an advertising company that even hires their own chefs, I would not expect 100% of their employees to be software developers. It's more on the order of 20k developers, not 57k. https://www.quora.com/How-many-software-engineers-does-Google-have https://www.quora.com/How-many-software-engineers-does-Googl... >Have you found any correlation between poor code and being able to pass Google's interview ? cough cough Angular 2
- walshemj 10y ago
  Back in the day I worked for a company that had in a single division more engineers that google has employees :-)
  - elliotec 10y ago
    Who? IBM?
    - walshemj 10y ago
      BT Systems Engineering division effectively the heir to Tommy Flowers
- jhall1468 10y ago
  > cough cough Angular 2 There is an enormous difference between poor code and a library you don't like. I may not be a huge fan of Angular 2, but it's certainly not poorly written code.
squeaky-clean 10y ago
57,000 employees does not equal 57,000 engineers, by the way. Google has a lot of people that do things other than code. > So 57,000 are worse devs then you ? This is what i hear from your statement, correct me if I am wrong .. The idea that you can be objectively better or not better at programming, and that it's decidable through one or two simple factors is kinda wrong and goes with OP's point.
literallycancer 10y ago
>So 57,000 are worse devs then you ? This is what i hear from your statement, correct me if I am wrong .. He never said they are worse. >Many extremely talented people want to work for Google. "Most people do/think XYZ." Do I have to explain why that's not a good argument? >They will take the tests, even if they don't agree with the hiring system at all. Other people don't mind shitty treatment, so what?
- lettersdigits 10y ago
  > He never said they are worse This is why i asked for clarifications. the OP said 'Google is incapable of hiring the engineers I want to work with', which implies that the engineers he is looking to work with are NOT there. Google is incapable of hiring them, and since they are top quality devs, someone else (more capable) did. > Do I have to explain why that's not a good argument? Yes, please explain. Because you only took the first sentence of my argument. the second sentence was that those "many people" are going to do what it takes, even if it means taking 'stupid' tests, smuggy interviers, and some other large corp bureaucracy (which to me personally is more concerning, but is not specific to Google, rather to any large corp). And why ? My guess is that it's probably so cool,curious, challenging to work on something like Google Maps/Balloons/Self driving cars that they will be willing to make a lot of sacrifices and tradeoffs. THAT was my argument. > Other people don't mind shitty treatment, so what? please explain, i didn't understand your point (edit: spacing)
  - dleslie 10y ago
    > and since they are top quality devs, someone else (more capable) did. That's an interesting assumption to make. I know many programmers who are excellent at what they do and have also outright refused offers from Google, Amazon and Facebook; it's usually on the principle that such large, bureaucratic organizations are quite defective insofar that they are adept at suffocating those who are happiest with maximal flexibility and responsibility. There's a group who jump from contract to contact, startup to startup, because the thrill of new challenges and little to no barriers from organizational structure is worth the uncertainty in compensation. It also helps that a few aren't willing to relocate to the USA.
uremog 10y ago
> So 57,000 are worse devs then you ? Probably not. There's plenty of better workers than me who I wouldn't want to work with.
roguecoder 10y ago
I never said that they were bad coders, or that I wouldn't want to work with some Google employees. I said they are incapable of hiring many developers I do proactively want to work with, because of their hiring process. It's who they exclude that is the problem; not who they hire. I am also specifically not passing some objective value judgments here. They may very well be hiring the best developers for what they are doing: they just aren't capable of hiring the type of developers I most enjoy working with. This is a subjective preference, not an objective one. There are absolutely talented developers who don't value working with the kinds of developers I want to work with and they won't care that Google can't hire them. I have enjoyed working with Google developers in other contexts, but many of them wasted a bunch of time and energy jumping through Google hoops because they decided it was worth it. It is my opinion that they would be better developers if they had spent that time on something useful instead. Google makes it easy for people I don't care about working with to get hired, and hard for people I proactively want to work with to get hired. Nothing about that is about my skill at all.

unknown2374 10y ago

I don't think he/she means that they are worse. We all want to work with developers who can help us learn and get better. From what I understand, he/she just means that their process of hiring has no correlation to the quality of code that they produce. Their hiring process is incapable by design of hiring those people BASED on those skills he/she is looking to work with, but sometimes they do end up hiring capable engineers with no credit to their process.

countryqt30 10y ago

Just as a matter of correctness: only 1/3rd of Google employees are engineers/development guys.

DonHopkins 10y ago

Since Google is an advertising company that even hires their own chefs, I would not expect 100% of their employees to be software developers. It's more on the order of 20k developers, not 57k. https://www.quora.com/How-many-software-engineers-does-Google-have https://www.quora.com/How-many-software-engineers-does-Googl... >Have you found any correlation between poor code and being able to pass Google's interview ? cough cough Angular 2

walshemj 10y ago
Back in the day I worked for a company that had in a single division more engineers that google has employees :-)
- elliotec 10y ago
  Who? IBM?
  - walshemj 10y ago
    BT Systems Engineering division effectively the heir to Tommy Flowers
jhall1468 10y ago
> cough cough Angular 2 There is an enormous difference between poor code and a library you don't like. I may not be a huge fan of Angular 2, but it's certainly not poorly written code.

squeaky-clean 10y ago

57,000 employees does not equal 57,000 engineers, by the way. Google has a lot of people that do things other than code. > So 57,000 are worse devs then you ? This is what i hear from your statement, correct me if I am wrong .. The idea that you can be objectively better or not better at programming, and that it's decidable through one or two simple factors is kinda wrong and goes with OP's point.

literallycancer 10y ago

>So 57,000 are worse devs then you ? This is what i hear from your statement, correct me if I am wrong .. He never said they are worse. >Many extremely talented people want to work for Google. "Most people do/think XYZ." Do I have to explain why that's not a good argument? >They will take the tests, even if they don't agree with the hiring system at all. Other people don't mind shitty treatment, so what?

lettersdigits 10y ago
> He never said they are worse This is why i asked for clarifications. the OP said 'Google is incapable of hiring the engineers I want to work with', which implies that the engineers he is looking to work with are NOT there. Google is incapable of hiring them, and since they are top quality devs, someone else (more capable) did. > Do I have to explain why that's not a good argument? Yes, please explain. Because you only took the first sentence of my argument. the second sentence was that those "many people" are going to do what it takes, even if it means taking 'stupid' tests, smuggy interviers, and some other large corp bureaucracy (which to me personally is more concerning, but is not specific to Google, rather to any large corp). And why ? My guess is that it's probably so cool,curious, challenging to work on something like Google Maps/Balloons/Self driving cars that they will be willing to make a lot of sacrifices and tradeoffs. THAT was my argument. > Other people don't mind shitty treatment, so what? please explain, i didn't understand your point (edit: spacing)
- dleslie 10y ago
  > and since they are top quality devs, someone else (more capable) did. That's an interesting assumption to make. I know many programmers who are excellent at what they do and have also outright refused offers from Google, Amazon and Facebook; it's usually on the principle that such large, bureaucratic organizations are quite defective insofar that they are adept at suffocating those who are happiest with maximal flexibility and responsibility. There's a group who jump from contract to contact, startup to startup, because the thrill of new challenges and little to no barriers from organizational structure is worth the uncertainty in compensation. It also helps that a few aren't willing to relocate to the USA.

uremog 10y ago

> So 57,000 are worse devs then you ? Probably not. There's plenty of better workers than me who I wouldn't want to work with.

roguecoder 10y ago

I never said that they were bad coders, or that I wouldn't want to work with some Google employees. I said they are incapable of hiring many developers I do proactively want to work with, because of their hiring process. It's who they exclude that is the problem; not who they hire. I am also specifically not passing some objective value judgments here. They may very well be hiring the best developers for what they are doing: they just aren't capable of hiring the type of developers I most enjoy working with. This is a subjective preference, not an objective one. There are absolutely talented developers who don't value working with the kinds of developers I want to work with and they won't care that Google can't hire them. I have enjoyed working with Google developers in other contexts, but many of them wasted a bunch of time and energy jumping through Google hoops because they decided it was worth it. It is my opinion that they would be better developers if they had spent that time on something useful instead. Google makes it easy for people I don't care about working with to get hired, and hard for people I proactively want to work with to get hired. Nothing about that is about my skill at all.