4 ms·

> In my opinion, they have rejected some of the greatest students I have ever taught There's no question that Google is happy to have false-negatives in interv

> In my opinion, they have rejected some of the greatest students I have ever taught There's no question that Google is happy to have false-negatives in interviews. > I believe they purposefully taret the type of people who think working at Google makes you a fundamentally better person than anyone else why would they do this? And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? (this is also an amusing comment because the only group I find more critical of Google than HN is Googlers)

CamperBob2 6y ago
And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? The usual recipe for success in tech: competitors who are even less competent. See also: how Microsoft dominated personal computing back in the day.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Then this would imply that selecting for people who want to work at Google, instead of the "best candidate" is a valid strategy because it leads to better outcomes. Again I think this whole line of thinking is nonsense, but even if you take it at face value, it still doesn't make sense.
- sukilot 6y ago
  >Microsoft dominated personal computing back in the day. By making illegal deals with PC sellers, and by vandalizing apps running on their OS.
glogla 6y ago
> And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? They have almost complete monopoly on online search, web ads, online video, on phone OS, on browsers. And they are not afraid to abuse those to get more, and are getting away with this. You don't need to do anything right when you rent-seek most of the online world.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  How is this rent seeking and not just profit seeking? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    Profit-seeking with market power is rent-seeking.
    - perl4ever 6y ago
      I think it's very destructive of meaningful discussion to redefine a term of jargon in order to exploit the stigma of the original definition while talking about something else.
      - dragonwriter 6y ago
        No, if you have market/pricing (empirical monopoly) power, profit-maximizing behavior is inherently rent-seeking by the standard definition.
  - CamperBob2 6y ago
    In real estate, the value of a property is often tied to the value of the rental income it could bring in, even if it's never been offered for rent. 'Rent seeking' doesn't refer to the same kind of 'rent', of course, but I think the analogy holds up pretty well. All Google has to do is turn a few screws, and the rest of us will have no choice but to sing whatever tune they call.
  - manigandham 6y ago
    Because they can raise the rents anytime and everyone else just has to pay. See Google Maps pricing fiasco for a rather public example.
michaelt 6y ago
> And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? When a company has a lot of money coming in, they can be successful despite decision X, rather than because of decision X. Microsoft can interview people asking about filling airliners with golf balls. Valve can just not bother with Half-Life 3. Google can have zero support and a self-driving car division that keeps avoiding chances to release anything. That the companies are successful doesn't mean all their actions are smart - sometimes it's that their successes are big enough the occasional bad decision doesn't hurt them.

CamperBob2 6y ago

And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? The usual recipe for success in tech: competitors who are even less competent. See also: how Microsoft dominated personal computing back in the day.

joshuamorton 6y ago
Then this would imply that selecting for people who want to work at Google, instead of the "best candidate" is a valid strategy because it leads to better outcomes. Again I think this whole line of thinking is nonsense, but even if you take it at face value, it still doesn't make sense.
sukilot 6y ago
>Microsoft dominated personal computing back in the day. By making illegal deals with PC sellers, and by vandalizing apps running on their OS.

glogla 6y ago

> And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? They have almost complete monopoly on online search, web ads, online video, on phone OS, on browsers. And they are not afraid to abuse those to get more, and are getting away with this. You don't need to do anything right when you rent-seek most of the online world.

perl4ever 6y ago
How is this rent seeking and not just profit seeking? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  Profit-seeking with market power is rent-seeking.
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    I think it's very destructive of meaningful discussion to redefine a term of jargon in order to exploit the stigma of the original definition while talking about something else.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      No, if you have market/pricing (empirical monopoly) power, profit-maximizing behavior is inherently rent-seeking by the standard definition.
- CamperBob2 6y ago
  In real estate, the value of a property is often tied to the value of the rental income it could bring in, even if it's never been offered for rent. 'Rent seeking' doesn't refer to the same kind of 'rent', of course, but I think the analogy holds up pretty well. All Google has to do is turn a few screws, and the rest of us will have no choice but to sing whatever tune they call.
- manigandham 6y ago
  Because they can raise the rents anytime and everyone else just has to pay. See Google Maps pricing fiasco for a rather public example.

michaelt 6y ago

> And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? When a company has a lot of money coming in, they can be successful despite decision X, rather than because of decision X. Microsoft can interview people asking about filling airliners with golf balls. Valve can just not bother with Half-Life 3. Google can have zero support and a self-driving car division that keeps avoiding chances to release anything. That the companies are successful doesn't mean all their actions are smart - sometimes it's that their successes are big enough the occasional bad decision doesn't hurt them.