3 ms·
I didn’t see an attack on rank and file away at all. This article was squarely aimed at Google’s later leaders ie Sundar. He’s a peacetime general and he misse
by xivzgrev 3y ago
I didn’t see an attack on rank and file away at all. This article was squarely aimed at Google’s later leaders ie Sundar.
He’s a peacetime general and he missed the coming war. He also has continued, like past leaders, a strategy of letting inmates run the asylum (“talent” driving their own projects without a firm connection to overall strategy and customers).
“Talent” will do what you tell it to do. My current company also believes in hiring talented people, but our CEO is also extremely clear about overall strategy and customer orientation, so I rarely find that people wander too far off in unproductive directions.
- tsunamifury 3y agoThat talent you are insulting literally created the breakthrough LLM technology which then was ignored by Sundar for years. What this author has completely wrong was that the talent actually came up with tons of great products that with focus could grow and add revenue. But that was nothing compared to vaporware on stage at IO for execs.
- AlbertCory 3y agoSo it's: "we, the talented, made great products, but the management screwed them up." ??? ok then.
- tsunamifury 3y agoI think the response here shows both your lack of seriousness and experience here. And a note of elitest bitterness. I was an snr leader, not the talent. I am freely admitting where the value came from. Brilliant workers smarter than me. I really question why you’d argue with that when it was ICs who did breakthrough work like transformers that are now fundamentally changing computing. What an arrogant and foolish perspective.
- kortilla 3y agoTake a deep breath, you’re reading into it far much more than is actually there. Nobody said anything about lack of pockets of cutting edge research. This is about products. LLMs are a perfect example of them being squandered because nobody converted them into a useful product that could be “sold as a vision” by execs. The people working on them were arrogant enough to think that LLMs would sell themselves and building a tool for users was someone else’s job. The product managers weren’t innovative enough to come up with a product to let people interact with LLMs in a useful way. The execs were too blind to not see the vision of AI doing everything, which is a narrative that drove nvidia to a trillion dollar company. The people who implemented LLMs will be famous… as academics. The machine they are a part of completely failed to execute on them.
- Timon3 3y agoDo you have any examples of the engineers and scientists who developed the Transformer architecture stating anything close to this? > The people working on them were arrogant enough to think that LLMs would sell themselves and building a tool for users was someone else’s job. I'd love to see their arrogance with my own eyes. I don't think it exists, but maybe I'm wrong.
- tsunamifury 3y agoIt’s completely made up.
- kortilla 3y agoYou’re asking for evidence of a lack of evidence. It would have leaked out if there was some huge vision of AI assistants that was being ignored by execs.
- Timon3 3y agoI am not "asking for evidence of a lack of evidence". I am asking for evidence that the engineers held this arrogant position. There is no "lack of evidence" described in this supposed arrogance.