5 ms·
When companies pay each engineer X and earn 10 times X on each engineer, this is inevitable. Near as I can tell, this is a strategy that is helping engineers re
by malandrew 10y ago
When companies pay each engineer X and earn 10 times X on each engineer, this is inevitable. Near as I can tell, this is a strategy that is helping engineers retain more of the value they are creating.
If the difference was more subtle such as 2 to 3 times X, then the incentive to go through this much trouble to retain much of the value you create is much smaller.
- jakelarkin 10y agonit: self-driving talent doesn't currently earn anything, but rather holds some long-term strategic value I would summarize this effect as BigCorp HR being much more disciplined/constrained on individual compensation than the M&A department. Naturally, well-positioned and clever employees will capitalize on this.
- mmagin 10y agoI'm pretty sure there are differing accounting/tax consequences in each sort of spending.
- malandrew 10y agoIn light of this observation, Google's current lawsuit could be viewed as an attempt to deter employee defection by signaling liabilities for potential acquirers, which will suppress the valuation of any acquisition. Google was already at the center of the high-tech employee wage-fixing earlier this decade, so filing lawsuits to create deterrence wouldn't be that surprising. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
- Qworg 10y agoOr the lawsuit could be viewed as an attempt to deter industrial espionage by a competitor within a hot field. Between these, which do you think is more likely?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- candiodari 10y agoThe one they were convicted for before and are therefore known to do ?
- autokad 10y agoeither way, google needs to tread carefully. more people are starting to recognize google as a monopoly, and if that continues they will either be broken up or turned into a utility.
- joshvm 10y agoWasn't Google recently on the opposite end of this? They paid their engineers so much that some of them left because they had the financial security to take riskier options.
- poikniok 10y agoThe logic on this statement doesn't really check out, as if this were the case it would be impossible to retain CEOs, they would all leave after a month. Yet somehow companies do so ...
- eitally 10y agoBut it's 100% true: https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/13/14599186/google-waymo-self-driving-salary-compensation-autonomous https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/13/14599186/google-waymo-sel...
- ryandrake 10y agoTo be honest, I don't have any idea why ANYONE keeps working after they have F-YOU money, CEOs or otherwise.
- harmegido 10y agoAt some point, the work becomes the hobby. If you had fyou money, what would you do? Presumably not sit and stare at a wall all day. You'd do something you enjoy I assume. And for some, running one of the world's most powerful entities is enjoyable.
- rjeli 10y agoI could definitely keep myself entertained. Maybe that's why I don't have f-you money.
- yazaddaruvala 10y agoI'd just learn. Learn everything. I have a goal, it is to be better than average at every "skill".
- npelly 10y agoA lot of comments suggesting this is cynical compensation arbitrage by the DeepMap founders. I don't buy it. I expect a startup was the only option to execute on the idea with a decent level of autonomy. Google/Alphabet already have well established teams in the areas of mapping & autonomous driving so you can't just go ahead and start your own multi-engineer effort.
- malandrew 10y agoI believe it's both actually. With the exception of maybe a few small corners, Google no longer has the reputation of a place where you have autonomy.