4 ms·

It's a common pattern: The main revenue source (in this case licensing money from Google) isn't cutting it/drying up, so the company tries all sorts of things t

by m12k 6y ago

It's a common pattern: The main revenue source (in this case licensing money from Google) isn't cutting it/drying up, so the company tries all sorts of things to try to come up with another success. In reality they're just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks, which is usually not a recipe for success, but you also can't really fault them for trying - when no really good plan B ever materializes so you can just go all in on that, you're left with the scattershot approach, or just lying down and dying.

bronson 6y ago
Or C, shrink down to the size you should have been all along.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  This is unlikely to occur due to management incentives (grow clout, influence, status, etc).
  - cutemonster 6y ago
    What's a way to find/hire people who are immune to such things
    - thatguy0900 6y ago
      I would think you'd have to hire someone who doesn't want the job to begin with
      - cutemonster 6y ago
        Hmm, My thoughts are more like hiring someone who cares a lot about the company's higher goals and vision, more than about his/her own career. Maybe that's not possible to find in traditional profit maximizing companies, because who cares about maximizing the shareholders' profits
        thatguy0900 6y ago
        I was thinking more along the lines of old political leaders who willingly gave up power, like george Washington or Marcus Aurelius. Yeah, I agree. Maybe you could find someone who cared about some companies, but most companies don't have a vision at all. Is there anyone who actually deeply cares about nestles higher vision? I think if you could find someone both willing and able to do will as ceo while being completely uninterested in being a ceo it would go well, but there can't be many of those people.
        cutemonster 6y ago
        George Washington seems like a good example to me -- then I understand what you mean. (I read on Wikipedia about Marcus Aurelius but didn't find anything except for that he was a stoic thinker? What that now means) And maybe it's possible to find such people, like GW, for non executive roles, too. What if maybe Nestle doesn't actually have a vision? If they just picked words that sound good, as a PR thing, to sell more?
        thatguy0900 6y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Quinctius_Cincinnatus https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Quinctius_Cincinnatus probably because I was thinking of this guy, Marcus Aurelius just said he didn't want to be emporer but did it as a duty to the state, got them mixed up. I think nestle not having a vision is the reason it won't ever have a moral ceo, though, there's no reason for anyone to push a moral person to the top when morality will probably produce less results. Even if you find such people it's hard to promote them without a sense of ethics at the top I think.
        cutemonster 6y ago
        Thanks for the link, interesting to read :-) Hmm yes maybe in a way, some organizations can be "immune" to becoming more ethical / less depraved Maybe the way to handle that, is to start another organization and try to out complete the wicked one
- whizzter 6y ago
  The biggest problem is that they're still doing B but they threw C under the bus (without a security team i don't see a bright future once the exploits come rolling in and when they finally realize C was the option all trust will be gone)
  - dblohm7 6y ago
    Contrary to Twitter speculation, we never had just one single security team, nor did we eliminate it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24659174 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24659174
- causality0 6y ago
  Or D, go back to what built the organization in the first place instead of trying to be a non-evil version of Google.
krspykrm 6y ago
> The main revenue source (in this case licensing money from Google) isn't cutting it/drying up If Firefox weren't bleeding market share this wouldn't be a problem in the first place.
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  The market-share bleed is ... amplified or mitigated, depending on your viewpoint ... by the absolute dominance of handheld Android devices (defaulting and manditory intalls of Google Chrome). Firefox has slid some on desktop, but not nearly as much as broad numbers suggest. Put differently: desktop is increasingly irrelevant to the modern Web. Which itself is likely not a good thing. _______________________________ Late edit: Safari's marketshare, overall and by desktop/mobile segment, is virtually identical with its device share. Party like it's 1998. Which suggests Mozilla's attempt at a mobile OS was not entirely misguided. It's preloads, bundling, and tying all over again.

by m12k 6y ago

bronson 6y ago

Or C, shrink down to the size you should have been all along.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
This is unlikely to occur due to management incentives (grow clout, influence, status, etc).
- cutemonster 6y ago
  What's a way to find/hire people who are immune to such things
  - thatguy0900 6y ago
    I would think you'd have to hire someone who doesn't want the job to begin with
    - cutemonster 6y ago
      Hmm, My thoughts are more like hiring someone who cares a lot about the company's higher goals and vision, more than about his/her own career. Maybe that's not possible to find in traditional profit maximizing companies, because who cares about maximizing the shareholders' profits
      - thatguy0900 6y ago
        I was thinking more along the lines of old political leaders who willingly gave up power, like george Washington or Marcus Aurelius. Yeah, I agree. Maybe you could find someone who cared about some companies, but most companies don't have a vision at all. Is there anyone who actually deeply cares about nestles higher vision? I think if you could find someone both willing and able to do will as ceo while being completely uninterested in being a ceo it would go well, but there can't be many of those people.
        cutemonster 6y ago
        George Washington seems like a good example to me -- then I understand what you mean. (I read on Wikipedia about Marcus Aurelius but didn't find anything except for that he was a stoic thinker? What that now means) And maybe it's possible to find such people, like GW, for non executive roles, too. What if maybe Nestle doesn't actually have a vision? If they just picked words that sound good, as a PR thing, to sell more?
        thatguy0900 6y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Quinctius_Cincinnatus https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Quinctius_Cincinnatus probably because I was thinking of this guy, Marcus Aurelius just said he didn't want to be emporer but did it as a duty to the state, got them mixed up. I think nestle not having a vision is the reason it won't ever have a moral ceo, though, there's no reason for anyone to push a moral person to the top when morality will probably produce less results. Even if you find such people it's hard to promote them without a sense of ethics at the top I think.
        cutemonster 6y ago
        Thanks for the link, interesting to read :-) Hmm yes maybe in a way, some organizations can be "immune" to becoming more ethical / less depraved Maybe the way to handle that, is to start another organization and try to out complete the wicked one
whizzter 6y ago
The biggest problem is that they're still doing B but they threw C under the bus (without a security team i don't see a bright future once the exploits come rolling in and when they finally realize C was the option all trust will be gone)
- dblohm7 6y ago
  Contrary to Twitter speculation, we never had just one single security team, nor did we eliminate it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24659174 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24659174
causality0 6y ago
Or D, go back to what built the organization in the first place instead of trying to be a non-evil version of Google.

krspykrm 6y ago

> The main revenue source (in this case licensing money from Google) isn't cutting it/drying up If Firefox weren't bleeding market share this wouldn't be a problem in the first place.

dredmorbius 6y ago
The market-share bleed is ... amplified or mitigated, depending on your viewpoint ... by the absolute dominance of handheld Android devices (defaulting and manditory intalls of Google Chrome). Firefox has slid some on desktop, but not nearly as much as broad numbers suggest. Put differently: desktop is increasingly irrelevant to the modern Web. Which itself is likely not a good thing. _______________________________ Late edit: Safari's marketshare, overall and by desktop/mobile segment, is virtually identical with its device share. Party like it's 1998. Which suggests Mozilla's attempt at a mobile OS was not entirely misguided. It's preloads, bundling, and tying all over again.