5 ms·

Google blew it with open source layoffs

96 points by transpute 3y ago

whoisthemachine 3y ago
Google making baffling decisions is hardly news these days. The main decision driver at Google is whether that resource/product improves ad revenue. I have a hard time seeing how Google Cloud would drive ad revenue, which likely means leadership at Google doesn't either. I just wish Google's leadership would stop starting projects (and hiring smart people to develop those projects) when they know the projects will not drive their goal of more ad revenue.
- peepeepoopoo5 3y ago
  Admitting they're just an ad company would collapse the delusion that drives their share price.
  - jimsimmons 3y ago
    Everyone knows Google is an ad tech company. Real question is if they can diversify long term to be something beyond. Cloud is a great way to achieve this
    - operatingthetan 3y ago
      You could probably make a stronger point without an attack like this. edit: removed my quote of the attack since OP did.
      - jimsimmons 3y ago
        Good point. Edited
    - Ecstatify 3y ago
      Once companies grow as big as Google nothing really moves the needle. They need to acquire competitors to grow revenue. Any Google service that doesn’t meaningfully impact the next quarterly earnings should start getting ready for the chopping block.
      - adalacelove 3y ago
        First you loose the ability to build things and then you loose the ability to buy good things instead of crap.
    - pfannkuchen 3y ago
      Long term diversification need at this point might be a little bit questionable. Like, will a global information network without ads ever exist? They just need to not lose in ads. Granted, they could lose access to more and more content walled gardens, but they could perhaps focus on penetrating those instead of focusing on distractions?
  - khuey 3y ago
    Alphabet trades at a P/E of 27, hardly delusional.
    - bryanlarsen 3y ago
      During times of low interest rates, 27 is a reasonable P/E. When interest rates are high, it isn't. A P/E of 25 is a rate of return of 1/25 or 4%. TBills return 5% and are a lot less risky.
      - khuey 3y ago
        The S&P 500 as a whole is trading at a P/E of 24. If there are any delusions about equity valuations they're not specific to Google.
      - reducesuffering 3y ago
        When inflation is 5%, stocks are long term immune due to their price being denominated in the inflating currency. T bills will still return 5% but stocks will 4% return + 5% inflation for 9%
  - rektide 3y ago
    It's a bit stickier, in that Google's very existence depends on there being a healthy, compelling world wide web, and there being just not that many people funding or supporting or driving that quest. Google has to be a power for good open source & web. Otherwise they risk losing their whole business to apps & closed Oses, where they have next to no competitive advantage.
    - cageface 3y ago
      This is why I continue to support them despite all their issues. Not because I trust them to do the right thing out of principles at all, but just because their financial interests are more aligned with the open web than the other big tech companies.
      - graftak 3y ago
        I want to agree with you but at the same time I have contempt for Google as they pulled stuff like AMP in an attempt to take hostage of the (open) web. Edit: not to forget Google uses their hold on the browser market share to push many platform APIs that only further their own goals with little care for privacy.
        rektide 3y ago
        AMP had some really awful aspects to it, was a power grab. But it also tackled a very real existential crisis, that sites were being incredibly poorly built with ghastly performance, and they did make an ok toolkit. Going power mad & hosting all the content themselves was obscene though.
    - whoisthemachine 3y ago
      I agree entirely with your reasoning. But just watching what has happened to numerous Google products in the last decade (perhaps starting with Google reader?), it has become clear to me that Google's ad revenue is what wags the dog, so to speak, regardless of long-term considerations.
- transpute 3y ago
  Should the Cloud division live under Alphabet or Google?
- _8j50 3y ago
  Big companies pay millions to GCP, surely that is seen as its own revenue source? I don't see anything that would make want to use their search either after using their cloud stuff.
influx 3y ago
Worst CEO in tech.
- exabrial 3y ago
  I sort of thought he was just a puppet though?
  - jbm 3y ago
    I mean, this was the case for Japanese CEOs too and you can see how Toshiba and Fujitsu are doing as a result. Shadow emperors don't make for good governments.
    - pfannkuchen 3y ago
      More like shadow oligarchy in this case I think.
  - precompute 3y ago
    Who is he a puppet to?
- warning26 3y ago
  I legitimately don't understand why the board hasn't forced him out yet. Does he have any successes at all during his tenure?
  - jimsimmons 3y ago
    Cloud is doing pretty well. YouTube started making serious money. Pixel is a long term product line. Avoid metaberg-esque pivots towards crypto or VR Very few businesses in the last 20 years that can compete with Google ad tech in scale and margins.
    - amir734jj 3y ago
      You are proving the point that google is just an ad company
29athrowaway 3y ago
Part of doubling down on AI seems to be halving on humans. Removing perks, no more Google Code Jam, no more open source, all while talking repeatedly about AI.
zac23or 3y ago
In the past, some people said that Microsoft had the "windows tax" for new projects. If a project maybe got in the way of Windows, it died quickly. Does Google have the Google search tax?
- negermeister 3y ago
  [flagged]
chsreekar 3y ago
What emphasis on quarterly results does to an organization
negermeister 3y ago
[flagged]
isaacremuant 3y ago
Many big companies that are supposed to thing long term seem to be having "strategic leaders" going "I'll be a success in 2023" If I can claimed to have cut N costs, no matter how. I know it sounds hiperbolic but when you remember how, in order to manage, many people in upper management end up focusing on few metrics that mean success or failure, then it's very easy to see how the individual careers of those positions can hurt the long term with these "quick wins". It's not particularly surprising at this point in the year but will still be grating the next time you hear the propaganda.
- anonylizard 3y ago
  High interest rates = cut costs now. That's literally how monetary policy is supposed to work, if economy is overheating with inflation, you force companies to cut costs with high rates. It discounts future revenue, making immediate costs way more important.
  - isaacremuant 3y ago
    Notice that my problem is not cutting costs per se but that it's the only metric looked with no analysis of long term impact. It's the nuclear and daft option instead of actually becoming more efficient. If an incompetent guy fires the competent people and calls it success because they saved X on salaries and ignored the myriad of cost cutting alternatives because he doesn't really understand the domain problems except "less cost" then it's not really "how things are supposed to work". Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do.
    - geodel 3y ago
      > with no analysis of long term impact. And how do you know for sure what analysis was done or not? > Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do. Well its similarly easy to say all competent people never be laid-off/fired when you are not the one paying their salaries.
transpute 3y ago
HN ranking graph for this story: https://hnrankings.info/36016420/ https://hnrankings.info/36016420/
flashgordon 3y ago
I do have another theory. Ok may be a paranoid, jaded conspiracy theory after seeing everything in large sociopathic bureaucracies. What if the hiring of so called "high profile" folks was just symbolic and with golden parachutes and secret handshakes in place. I am not talking about the tenure and level based severance amounts. But like their firing was more of a "request" with some promise to hire back once the dust settles. Use this to claim lack of discrimination in the layoff process. Look. We also laid off these X awesome folks so it could not have been targeted. Those on mat/pat/sick leaves was also just coincidental. For all we know these high profilers may just have wanted to use a sabbatical so why not help the company out in the process.
ece 3y ago
Another take here (from January): https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/27/google_open_source/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/27/google_open_source/ Seems to be investor driven, and algorithm driven if the register is right.
Proven 3y ago
[dead]
sydbarrett74 3y ago
Sundar Pichai continues to enshittify Google.
wg0 3y ago
This is where another project from Google seems like a shaky foundation to build upon - Flutter. It might be abandoned in next few years because of "strategic change in direction" and it is complex enough that just open source enthusiasts can't keep it afloat without some heavyweight funding.

96 points by transpute 3y ago

Google making baffling decisions is hardly news these days. The main decision driver at Google is whether that resource/product improves ad revenue. I have a hard time seeing how Google Cloud would drive ad revenue, which likely means leadership at Google doesn't either. I just wish Google's leadership would stop starting projects (and hiring smart people to develop those projects) when they know the projects will not drive their goal of more ad revenue.

peepeepoopoo5 3y ago
Admitting they're just an ad company would collapse the delusion that drives their share price.
- jimsimmons 3y ago
  Everyone knows Google is an ad tech company. Real question is if they can diversify long term to be something beyond. Cloud is a great way to achieve this
  - operatingthetan 3y ago
    You could probably make a stronger point without an attack like this. edit: removed my quote of the attack since OP did.
    - jimsimmons 3y ago
      Good point. Edited
  - Ecstatify 3y ago
    Once companies grow as big as Google nothing really moves the needle. They need to acquire competitors to grow revenue. Any Google service that doesn’t meaningfully impact the next quarterly earnings should start getting ready for the chopping block.
    - adalacelove 3y ago
      First you loose the ability to build things and then you loose the ability to buy good things instead of crap.
  - pfannkuchen 3y ago
    Long term diversification need at this point might be a little bit questionable. Like, will a global information network without ads ever exist? They just need to not lose in ads. Granted, they could lose access to more and more content walled gardens, but they could perhaps focus on penetrating those instead of focusing on distractions?
- khuey 3y ago
  Alphabet trades at a P/E of 27, hardly delusional.
  - bryanlarsen 3y ago
    During times of low interest rates, 27 is a reasonable P/E. When interest rates are high, it isn't. A P/E of 25 is a rate of return of 1/25 or 4%. TBills return 5% and are a lot less risky.
    - khuey 3y ago
      The S&P 500 as a whole is trading at a P/E of 24. If there are any delusions about equity valuations they're not specific to Google.
    - reducesuffering 3y ago
      When inflation is 5%, stocks are long term immune due to their price being denominated in the inflating currency. T bills will still return 5% but stocks will 4% return + 5% inflation for 9%
- rektide 3y ago
  It's a bit stickier, in that Google's very existence depends on there being a healthy, compelling world wide web, and there being just not that many people funding or supporting or driving that quest. Google has to be a power for good open source & web. Otherwise they risk losing their whole business to apps & closed Oses, where they have next to no competitive advantage.
  - cageface 3y ago
    This is why I continue to support them despite all their issues. Not because I trust them to do the right thing out of principles at all, but just because their financial interests are more aligned with the open web than the other big tech companies.
    - graftak 3y ago
      I want to agree with you but at the same time I have contempt for Google as they pulled stuff like AMP in an attempt to take hostage of the (open) web. Edit: not to forget Google uses their hold on the browser market share to push many platform APIs that only further their own goals with little care for privacy.
      - rektide 3y ago
        AMP had some really awful aspects to it, was a power grab. But it also tackled a very real existential crisis, that sites were being incredibly poorly built with ghastly performance, and they did make an ok toolkit. Going power mad & hosting all the content themselves was obscene though.
  - whoisthemachine 3y ago
    I agree entirely with your reasoning. But just watching what has happened to numerous Google products in the last decade (perhaps starting with Google reader?), it has become clear to me that Google's ad revenue is what wags the dog, so to speak, regardless of long-term considerations.
transpute 3y ago
Should the Cloud division live under Alphabet or Google?
_8j50 3y ago
Big companies pay millions to GCP, surely that is seen as its own revenue source? I don't see anything that would make want to use their search either after using their cloud stuff.

influx 3y ago

Worst CEO in tech.

exabrial 3y ago
I sort of thought he was just a puppet though?
- jbm 3y ago
  I mean, this was the case for Japanese CEOs too and you can see how Toshiba and Fujitsu are doing as a result. Shadow emperors don't make for good governments.
  - pfannkuchen 3y ago
    More like shadow oligarchy in this case I think.
- precompute 3y ago
  Who is he a puppet to?
warning26 3y ago
I legitimately don't understand why the board hasn't forced him out yet. Does he have any successes at all during his tenure?
- jimsimmons 3y ago
  Cloud is doing pretty well. YouTube started making serious money. Pixel is a long term product line. Avoid metaberg-esque pivots towards crypto or VR Very few businesses in the last 20 years that can compete with Google ad tech in scale and margins.
  - amir734jj 3y ago
    You are proving the point that google is just an ad company

29athrowaway 3y ago

Part of doubling down on AI seems to be halving on humans. Removing perks, no more Google Code Jam, no more open source, all while talking repeatedly about AI.

zac23or 3y ago

In the past, some people said that Microsoft had the "windows tax" for new projects. If a project maybe got in the way of Windows, it died quickly. Does Google have the Google search tax?

negermeister 3y ago
[flagged]

chsreekar 3y ago

What emphasis on quarterly results does to an organization

negermeister 3y ago

[flagged]

isaacremuant 3y ago

Many big companies that are supposed to thing long term seem to be having "strategic leaders" going "I'll be a success in 2023" If I can claimed to have cut N costs, no matter how. I know it sounds hiperbolic but when you remember how, in order to manage, many people in upper management end up focusing on few metrics that mean success or failure, then it's very easy to see how the individual careers of those positions can hurt the long term with these "quick wins". It's not particularly surprising at this point in the year but will still be grating the next time you hear the propaganda.

anonylizard 3y ago
High interest rates = cut costs now. That's literally how monetary policy is supposed to work, if economy is overheating with inflation, you force companies to cut costs with high rates. It discounts future revenue, making immediate costs way more important.
- isaacremuant 3y ago
  Notice that my problem is not cutting costs per se but that it's the only metric looked with no analysis of long term impact. It's the nuclear and daft option instead of actually becoming more efficient. If an incompetent guy fires the competent people and calls it success because they saved X on salaries and ignored the myriad of cost cutting alternatives because he doesn't really understand the domain problems except "less cost" then it's not really "how things are supposed to work". Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do.
  - geodel 3y ago
    > with no analysis of long term impact. And how do you know for sure what analysis was done or not? > Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do. Well its similarly easy to say all competent people never be laid-off/fired when you are not the one paying their salaries.

transpute 3y ago

HN ranking graph for this story: https://hnrankings.info/36016420/ https://hnrankings.info/36016420/

flashgordon 3y ago

I do have another theory. Ok may be a paranoid, jaded conspiracy theory after seeing everything in large sociopathic bureaucracies. What if the hiring of so called "high profile" folks was just symbolic and with golden parachutes and secret handshakes in place. I am not talking about the tenure and level based severance amounts. But like their firing was more of a "request" with some promise to hire back once the dust settles. Use this to claim lack of discrimination in the layoff process. Look. We also laid off these X awesome folks so it could not have been targeted. Those on mat/pat/sick leaves was also just coincidental. For all we know these high profilers may just have wanted to use a sabbatical so why not help the company out in the process.

ece 3y ago

Another take here (from January): https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/27/google_open_source/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/27/google_open_source/ Seems to be investor driven, and algorithm driven if the register is right.

Proven 3y ago

[dead]

sydbarrett74 3y ago

Sundar Pichai continues to enshittify Google.

wg0 3y ago

This is where another project from Google seems like a shaky foundation to build upon - Flutter. It might be abandoned in next few years because of "strategic change in direction" and it is complex enough that just open source enthusiasts can't keep it afloat without some heavyweight funding.