3 ms·

I mean, they hired the best people. Google just weren’t able to provide an environment where the best people were able to turn their ideas into products.

belter 3y ago
I find the possibility this statement is true, extraordinary in itself, and research material for at least five Phds in Corporate Management and Governance.
- BoxFour 3y ago
  I find it’s not that complicated, particularly if you've had exposure to these firms: 1) They exhibit an exceptionally risk-averse stance from a legal standpoint. Consequently, matters with even the slightest chance of legal repercussions (usually revolving around privacy) undergo an exhaustive examination that can take years. Often things get killed just because of the spectre of legal/privacy review. 2) Gaining unanimous agreement within the company for a particular course of action, especially necessary for projects demanding substantial resources, can truly be likened to an arduous Sisyphean endeavor. 3) Anything that doesn't immediately and unequivocally exhibit the potential to evolve into a multi-billion dollar industry is met with significant doubt.
  - bradneuberg 3y ago
    You’ve exactly hit the nail on the head. I’ve been in larger companies and these 3 dynamics explain well why they have trouble innovating.
  - CMCDragonkai 3y ago
    It's really simple. It's a big ship with a small rudder. And maybe you're the best but you're just one guy. There's hundreds of thousands of people invested in the ship, you can try to push the rudder but you're going to hit resistance no matter what.
ksey3 3y ago
Very few "best" people/"superstars" have a great track record of doing anything useful outside comfy large corp support structure. Its like moving exotic plants out of a specialized botanical garden.
- wildrhythms 3y ago
  Do you think computer engineering breakthroughs come from 10 layers of MBAs dictating "impactful" projects to secure their next promotion?
epups 3y ago
It's too early to say whether they will be able to turn them into successful products themselves.
mistrial9 3y ago
it is amazing to me that such intelligent people here can say "best people" and "best environment" and believe that means anything.. a competitive system of graduate school where some number of people are assigned a ranking number upon completion of the studies != "best people" the most US dollars per year with maximum total compensation != "best environment" this is not only annoying, but creates an echo chamber among management, investors and lots of classes of "camp followers" that assume these numbers are actually the goal. building companies to maximize Total Compensation and Total Return on Investment are exactly the root of unending race to the bottom consumer practices, addictive content and dark pattern customer services. $0.02
- visarga 3y ago
  These are not just some graduate school people, they published one of the most important discoveries in AI. We are talking super star status.

belter 3y ago

I find the possibility this statement is true, extraordinary in itself, and research material for at least five Phds in Corporate Management and Governance.

BoxFour 3y ago
I find it’s not that complicated, particularly if you've had exposure to these firms: 1) They exhibit an exceptionally risk-averse stance from a legal standpoint. Consequently, matters with even the slightest chance of legal repercussions (usually revolving around privacy) undergo an exhaustive examination that can take years. Often things get killed just because of the spectre of legal/privacy review. 2) Gaining unanimous agreement within the company for a particular course of action, especially necessary for projects demanding substantial resources, can truly be likened to an arduous Sisyphean endeavor. 3) Anything that doesn't immediately and unequivocally exhibit the potential to evolve into a multi-billion dollar industry is met with significant doubt.
- bradneuberg 3y ago
  You’ve exactly hit the nail on the head. I’ve been in larger companies and these 3 dynamics explain well why they have trouble innovating.
- CMCDragonkai 3y ago
  It's really simple. It's a big ship with a small rudder. And maybe you're the best but you're just one guy. There's hundreds of thousands of people invested in the ship, you can try to push the rudder but you're going to hit resistance no matter what.

ksey3 3y ago

Very few "best" people/"superstars" have a great track record of doing anything useful outside comfy large corp support structure. Its like moving exotic plants out of a specialized botanical garden.

wildrhythms 3y ago
Do you think computer engineering breakthroughs come from 10 layers of MBAs dictating "impactful" projects to secure their next promotion?

epups 3y ago

It's too early to say whether they will be able to turn them into successful products themselves.

mistrial9 3y ago

it is amazing to me that such intelligent people here can say "best people" and "best environment" and believe that means anything.. a competitive system of graduate school where some number of people are assigned a ranking number upon completion of the studies != "best people" the most US dollars per year with maximum total compensation != "best environment" this is not only annoying, but creates an echo chamber among management, investors and lots of classes of "camp followers" that assume these numbers are actually the goal. building companies to maximize Total Compensation and Total Return on Investment are exactly the root of unending race to the bottom consumer practices, addictive content and dark pattern customer services. $0.02

visarga 3y ago
These are not just some graduate school people, they published one of the most important discoveries in AI. We are talking super star status.