8 ms·

Advice from someone who had a similar choice and went the startup route: choose the Google option. It will not only open doors for you for all your future jobs,

Advice from someone who had a similar choice and went the startup route: choose the Google option. It will not only open doors for you for all your future jobs, but you can invest the money now and create a nice start for yourself. There will never be any shortage of interesting startups to work for in the future.

m_ke 8y ago
+1 for that. Later either join a post A round startup with traction or start your own thing.
jhillyerd 8y ago
Google is also a very good learning opportunity; there is lots of training available to employees, you will be working with very talented people, and will get to see how the planet-scale dogfood is made first hand.
- zerr 8y ago
  I've heard that many things are arcane in-house proprietary stuff, not easily transferable knowledge/experience.
  - refulgentis 8y ago
    Put another way, you'll learn much more about how to identify and work with talented people on difficult projects at Google than at a startup. At a startup you're worried about how you'll pack a bologna sandwich for lunch tomorrow, at Google you're a sous chef for a 5 star banquet hall in NYC.
    - dmarlow 8y ago
      I think it goes both ways. There are plenty mundane things at BigCo for people to do.
      - refulgentis 8y ago
        I've done both extremes, and you're absolutely right, but the point still stands no matter how many cases we can find that might hint at the opposite :)
  - mav3rick 8y ago
    That is not true. No matter the shit Google gets on HN it's a tremendous place to learn and grow. All the large scale systems you see now were first invented at Google and now are replicated at Facebook etc.. The code reviews alone will make you a better programmer and working with senior people will give you an appreciation for designing complex systems. It's a great place to work IMO.
  - tastyham 8y ago
    > arcane in-house proprietary stuff Just like any other successful company that does something interesting and has been around more than a couple of years.
  - Mr_P 8y ago
    This used to be the case, but these days many fundamental Google tools are open. Borg is Kubernetes, flume is externally available as Google Cloud Dataflow (it's basically Apache Beam), Tensorflow is open source, many of Google's internal java libraries and tools are available externally (Guava, Guice, Dagger), and absl (c++ common libraries) are also available externally. More importantly, assuming you land on a team with strong software engineering culture (this is likely, but admittedly not guaranteed, even at Google), the general skills you pick up for software design, planning, testing, etc. are transferable anywhere. That said, all of this applies mostly to software engineers. If you're applying for an SRE position, then I've heard the experience is less transferable, but it's not something I could comment on first hand.
    - skj 8y ago
      Borg is not very much like kubernetes from the config or run side. Maybe underlying both are containers, but it's really pretty different.
    - mk89 8y ago
      Flume is not comparable to Google cloud dataflow nor beam. But I understand your point.
  - daveFNbuck 8y ago
    That's true about many of the specific tools you learn, but you also learn a lot of generic development skills that no one will take the time to teach you at a startup.
  - modeless 8y ago
    Google's CI system is proprietary, but learning how a CI system should work is valuable. Google's code review system is proprietary, but learning how code review should work is valuable. Repeat for every proprietary system Google has. When I left Google for a startup, all the tools I took for granted didn't exist. But because I knew how things could and should work, I was able to apply open source and commercially available tools to improve software development practices at my new employer.
  - cynicalkane 8y ago
    Google's in-house tools are generally stronger than the publicly available stuff across the board. Ex-Googlers are more often frustrated not by a lack of ability with those tools, but knowing what they can't do with them. Also, Google's best tools are increasingly open-source.
- pickgoogle 8y ago
  > you will be working with very talented people Do you think they are more talented than other companies, like, say, Amazon?
  - dmarlow 8y ago
    Maybe a higher ratio overall?
    - pickgoogle 8y ago
      I see. Do you think people at Amazon are inferior?
      - dang 8y ago
        The previous account you created to post these is one that we ended up having to ban for trolling. We've banned this account. Please stop creating accounts to do this, or we'll ban your main account as well.
  - Youden 8y ago
    Really, for the most part, the talent goes to the best places to work. That's subjective but the major factors for most people are mission (e.g. charity good, privacy violation bad), working environment and compensation. Amazon isn't really particularly good at any of these, so you'll tend to find more talent at places that do better. Facebook and Google both have better compensation and from what I've heard from friends (who've also had experience with Amazon), both also have a better working environment.
zerr 8y ago
> It will not only open doors for you for all your future jobs Is this true though? I guess it might help with the first contact, but I've heard from x-googlers that they still had to prepare and pass all those whiteboard CS-riddle based interviews again, for next endeavors.
- lfowles 8y ago
  It means they get far enough to have those whiteboard riddler interviews.
- coolwhhip 8y ago
  Sample size of one: my company tends to ding candidates from Google if they have any whiff of the kind of status- or compensation-driven thinking displayed in this comment section. Can sometimes indicate limited independent thinking and low concern for others. Definitely can close doors.
  - bb88 8y ago
    Basically what you're talking about here is arrogance. And typically yeah... that's true. You don't really want arrogant people on your team, unless they're super productive and share their knowledge freely.
  - mav3rick 8y ago
    What's compensation driven thinking ? There's a difference between only caring about money vs asking for what you deem fair. Startups always abuse the naivete of new grads and low ball them by saying they are working for a grander cause. That is BS too.
    - jstandard 8y ago
      This isn't a fair assessment. Startups can't pay BigCo wages because they don't have the money to. They have to leverage other, harder-to-value benefits which BigCo generally can't offer. Increased responsibility, fewer "rules" on how to execute, more tightly focused mission are a few. Naturally this differs company to company and there are always bad actors. The compensation equation works out differently for each individual. Not everyone should work at a startup.
alistproducer2 8y ago
I never had such an option but I agree. I picked a big company and after a couple years was able to leave in a much better place, financially, than I went in.
rdlecler1 8y ago
I couldn’t agree more—I would add live below your means because you don’t want to get used to that lifestyle/level of income where it would be impossible to step back later if you wanted.
- cabalamat 8y ago
  > I would add live below your means This is good advice in general
- ibejoeb 8y ago
  >impossible to step back later Life finds a way. -2008 joeb (Being real, this is good advice. Find the lowest-cost digs you can get; stay flexible, lease; don't get involved with securities you can't unload. Remember that you're on a 5-year plan.)
manquer 8y ago
It really depends on kind of person OP is, Personally I never want to work at any large corporation especially Google, the benefits do not outweigh the drawbacks for me. Apart from what others mentioned in the thread In the startup choice the biggest benefit not going the Google for me is that I choose to work in a domain(by choosing the startup) where I am passionate about, slim chance of it happening in a large organization. OP has to understand what he gets and does not get at both outside of pure comp and then figure out how much of value they are to him
- humbledrone 8y ago
  IMO one of the best things about working for Google is that it's so easy to move between teams to e.g. find the domain you want to work in. While it's true that you may not have many options for your first team (unless you are already a domain expert, in which case you may get funneled into your domain), if you are performing well for your current team, it is extremely easy to move around. I say this a a Googler who was originally slotted into a team that was fun but not what I was really into. I swapped teams a couple of times and found something much better for me.
  - marssaxman 8y ago
    So easy relative to what, I wonder? I was slotted into a team which was neither fun nor anything I am into, and never managed to transfer. They said my manager wouldn't be able to block me from transferring, but he did so anyway, and I ended up leaving Google. There was nothing about the process which felt like it was any easier or less political than what I've seen at other megacorporations.
    - humbledrone 8y ago
      Well, easy relative to a startup which has just one engineering role (wear all the hats). In the startup world, changing roles generally means going through the interview process at a new company, starting over on seniority, vesting schedules, etc. I'm sorry to hear about your bad experience at Google. It is a large company, so I don't doubt that there are dusty corners with bad management. But I've seen a pretty broad cross-section of the company and find most of it to be quite great in terms of mobility.
hef19898 8y ago
I second that. Maybe one more point to add abich was already hinted at in other comments. Working for company like Google allows to develop a dgree of professionalism that a start-up simply cannot. This is something you can build up on for the rest of your career. But since you are thinking about joining a start-up, I assume you are not preparing to stay at Google until you retire, one last suggestion. Prepare for an exit strategy already basically from day one. Not to take it negative at being with Google. Just be aware that this is not your last job in your life.
clubm8 8y ago
>There will never be any shortage of interesting startups to work for in the future. You forgot to factor in the blatant age discrimination in most startups. OP could build a nice nest egg at Google, but have a severe lack of free time + not be working on "interesting" work, and come out of it financially stable but unable to compete with fresh out of college grads with no lives, willing to work 24/7 and who have all the time in the world to mess around with the latest and "greatest" new foo
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- vanilla_nut 8y ago
  I understand the risks you're talking about here, but it's not like OP will start working at Google and suddenly his technical skills will atrophy. It is still a very competitive place to get into and a place where great work takes place. Even if OP doesn't get extremely interesting projects, a more established company is often better in terms of mentorship. Not to mention the fact that financial stability as well as the job security of working at such a large company have their own benefits. I think OP could work at Google and have a promising career start, while taking on the risk of working on slightly-less-interesting projects. At the same time, OP could work at this startup and make a bucketload of money through equity while working on fascinating projects. But the work could also be boring API stitching. Or the hours could be really long, and OP might have no outside life. They're both good options. But back to the point I was originally trying to make: it's not like OP is going to work at Google and then never get hired by a startup again. In fact, working at Google is such a positive signal on a resume that it might actually make it easier to work at startups in the future.
pierre_d528 8y ago
Yep: +1

m_ke 8y ago

+1 for that. Later either join a post A round startup with traction or start your own thing.

jhillyerd 8y ago

Google is also a very good learning opportunity; there is lots of training available to employees, you will be working with very talented people, and will get to see how the planet-scale dogfood is made first hand.

zerr 8y ago
I've heard that many things are arcane in-house proprietary stuff, not easily transferable knowledge/experience.
- refulgentis 8y ago
  Put another way, you'll learn much more about how to identify and work with talented people on difficult projects at Google than at a startup. At a startup you're worried about how you'll pack a bologna sandwich for lunch tomorrow, at Google you're a sous chef for a 5 star banquet hall in NYC.
  - dmarlow 8y ago
    I think it goes both ways. There are plenty mundane things at BigCo for people to do.
    - refulgentis 8y ago
      I've done both extremes, and you're absolutely right, but the point still stands no matter how many cases we can find that might hint at the opposite :)
- mav3rick 8y ago
  That is not true. No matter the shit Google gets on HN it's a tremendous place to learn and grow. All the large scale systems you see now were first invented at Google and now are replicated at Facebook etc.. The code reviews alone will make you a better programmer and working with senior people will give you an appreciation for designing complex systems. It's a great place to work IMO.
- tastyham 8y ago
  > arcane in-house proprietary stuff Just like any other successful company that does something interesting and has been around more than a couple of years.
- Mr_P 8y ago
  This used to be the case, but these days many fundamental Google tools are open. Borg is Kubernetes, flume is externally available as Google Cloud Dataflow (it's basically Apache Beam), Tensorflow is open source, many of Google's internal java libraries and tools are available externally (Guava, Guice, Dagger), and absl (c++ common libraries) are also available externally. More importantly, assuming you land on a team with strong software engineering culture (this is likely, but admittedly not guaranteed, even at Google), the general skills you pick up for software design, planning, testing, etc. are transferable anywhere. That said, all of this applies mostly to software engineers. If you're applying for an SRE position, then I've heard the experience is less transferable, but it's not something I could comment on first hand.
  - skj 8y ago
    Borg is not very much like kubernetes from the config or run side. Maybe underlying both are containers, but it's really pretty different.
  - mk89 8y ago
    Flume is not comparable to Google cloud dataflow nor beam. But I understand your point.
- daveFNbuck 8y ago
  That's true about many of the specific tools you learn, but you also learn a lot of generic development skills that no one will take the time to teach you at a startup.
- modeless 8y ago
  Google's CI system is proprietary, but learning how a CI system should work is valuable. Google's code review system is proprietary, but learning how code review should work is valuable. Repeat for every proprietary system Google has. When I left Google for a startup, all the tools I took for granted didn't exist. But because I knew how things could and should work, I was able to apply open source and commercially available tools to improve software development practices at my new employer.
- cynicalkane 8y ago
  Google's in-house tools are generally stronger than the publicly available stuff across the board. Ex-Googlers are more often frustrated not by a lack of ability with those tools, but knowing what they can't do with them. Also, Google's best tools are increasingly open-source.
pickgoogle 8y ago
> you will be working with very talented people Do you think they are more talented than other companies, like, say, Amazon?
- dmarlow 8y ago
  Maybe a higher ratio overall?
  - pickgoogle 8y ago
    I see. Do you think people at Amazon are inferior?
    - dang 8y ago
      The previous account you created to post these is one that we ended up having to ban for trolling. We've banned this account. Please stop creating accounts to do this, or we'll ban your main account as well.
- Youden 8y ago
  Really, for the most part, the talent goes to the best places to work. That's subjective but the major factors for most people are mission (e.g. charity good, privacy violation bad), working environment and compensation. Amazon isn't really particularly good at any of these, so you'll tend to find more talent at places that do better. Facebook and Google both have better compensation and from what I've heard from friends (who've also had experience with Amazon), both also have a better working environment.

zerr 8y ago

> It will not only open doors for you for all your future jobs Is this true though? I guess it might help with the first contact, but I've heard from x-googlers that they still had to prepare and pass all those whiteboard CS-riddle based interviews again, for next endeavors.

lfowles 8y ago
It means they get far enough to have those whiteboard riddler interviews.
coolwhhip 8y ago
Sample size of one: my company tends to ding candidates from Google if they have any whiff of the kind of status- or compensation-driven thinking displayed in this comment section. Can sometimes indicate limited independent thinking and low concern for others. Definitely can close doors.
- bb88 8y ago
  Basically what you're talking about here is arrogance. And typically yeah... that's true. You don't really want arrogant people on your team, unless they're super productive and share their knowledge freely.
- mav3rick 8y ago
  What's compensation driven thinking ? There's a difference between only caring about money vs asking for what you deem fair. Startups always abuse the naivete of new grads and low ball them by saying they are working for a grander cause. That is BS too.
  - jstandard 8y ago
    This isn't a fair assessment. Startups can't pay BigCo wages because they don't have the money to. They have to leverage other, harder-to-value benefits which BigCo generally can't offer. Increased responsibility, fewer "rules" on how to execute, more tightly focused mission are a few. Naturally this differs company to company and there are always bad actors. The compensation equation works out differently for each individual. Not everyone should work at a startup.

alistproducer2 8y ago

I never had such an option but I agree. I picked a big company and after a couple years was able to leave in a much better place, financially, than I went in.

rdlecler1 8y ago

I couldn’t agree more—I would add live below your means because you don’t want to get used to that lifestyle/level of income where it would be impossible to step back later if you wanted.

cabalamat 8y ago
> I would add live below your means This is good advice in general
ibejoeb 8y ago
>impossible to step back later Life finds a way. -2008 joeb (Being real, this is good advice. Find the lowest-cost digs you can get; stay flexible, lease; don't get involved with securities you can't unload. Remember that you're on a 5-year plan.)

manquer 8y ago

It really depends on kind of person OP is, Personally I never want to work at any large corporation especially Google, the benefits do not outweigh the drawbacks for me. Apart from what others mentioned in the thread In the startup choice the biggest benefit not going the Google for me is that I choose to work in a domain(by choosing the startup) where I am passionate about, slim chance of it happening in a large organization. OP has to understand what he gets and does not get at both outside of pure comp and then figure out how much of value they are to him

humbledrone 8y ago
IMO one of the best things about working for Google is that it's so easy to move between teams to e.g. find the domain you want to work in. While it's true that you may not have many options for your first team (unless you are already a domain expert, in which case you may get funneled into your domain), if you are performing well for your current team, it is extremely easy to move around. I say this a a Googler who was originally slotted into a team that was fun but not what I was really into. I swapped teams a couple of times and found something much better for me.
- marssaxman 8y ago
  So easy relative to what, I wonder? I was slotted into a team which was neither fun nor anything I am into, and never managed to transfer. They said my manager wouldn't be able to block me from transferring, but he did so anyway, and I ended up leaving Google. There was nothing about the process which felt like it was any easier or less political than what I've seen at other megacorporations.
  - humbledrone 8y ago
    Well, easy relative to a startup which has just one engineering role (wear all the hats). In the startup world, changing roles generally means going through the interview process at a new company, starting over on seniority, vesting schedules, etc. I'm sorry to hear about your bad experience at Google. It is a large company, so I don't doubt that there are dusty corners with bad management. But I've seen a pretty broad cross-section of the company and find most of it to be quite great in terms of mobility.

hef19898 8y ago

I second that. Maybe one more point to add abich was already hinted at in other comments. Working for company like Google allows to develop a dgree of professionalism that a start-up simply cannot. This is something you can build up on for the rest of your career. But since you are thinking about joining a start-up, I assume you are not preparing to stay at Google until you retire, one last suggestion. Prepare for an exit strategy already basically from day one. Not to take it negative at being with Google. Just be aware that this is not your last job in your life.

clubm8 8y ago

>There will never be any shortage of interesting startups to work for in the future. You forgot to factor in the blatant age discrimination in most startups. OP could build a nice nest egg at Google, but have a severe lack of free time + not be working on "interesting" work, and come out of it financially stable but unable to compete with fresh out of college grads with no lives, willing to work 24/7 and who have all the time in the world to mess around with the latest and "greatest" new foo

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
vanilla_nut 8y ago
I understand the risks you're talking about here, but it's not like OP will start working at Google and suddenly his technical skills will atrophy. It is still a very competitive place to get into and a place where great work takes place. Even if OP doesn't get extremely interesting projects, a more established company is often better in terms of mentorship. Not to mention the fact that financial stability as well as the job security of working at such a large company have their own benefits. I think OP could work at Google and have a promising career start, while taking on the risk of working on slightly-less-interesting projects. At the same time, OP could work at this startup and make a bucketload of money through equity while working on fascinating projects. But the work could also be boring API stitching. Or the hours could be really long, and OP might have no outside life. They're both good options. But back to the point I was originally trying to make: it's not like OP is going to work at Google and then never get hired by a startup again. In fact, working at Google is such a positive signal on a resume that it might actually make it easier to work at startups in the future.

pierre_d528 8y ago

Yep: +1