4 ms·

This comment[1] provides a good explanation on why this analogy is absurd: > Chats at google by default have 24 hours of chat history. (That is, after 24 hours

This comment[1] provides a good explanation on why this analogy is absurd: > Chats at google by default have 24 hours of chat history. (That is, after 24 hours, the chat history is delelted.) You can opt in to having 30 days of chat history instead. And when under a legal hold, Google continues to delete chats in the 24 hour history mode, but will not delete chats in the 30 day history mode. > That is, Google's theory here seems to be that if you have a policy to destroy certain letters and memos 24 hours after receiving or creating them, then you don't need to stop doing that and preserve them even if under a court ordered legal hold. But if your policy is to destroy certain documents 30 days after creating them, then you must stop deleting them and retain them if ordered by a court. > Which is....a.....theory! [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35587100 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35587100

_huayra_ 2y ago
I haven't worked at Google, so maybe there are better channels than "chat that's holding everything together", but I can't imagine that being unable to search a chat and look at who said what and when is useful. I use it all the time to look up some random useful command a coworker told me long ago that I neglected to write down, for instance, or to follow up with a long-stale thread to revive it. I suppose that's what email and design docs are for, but I feel a lot of that "organizational glue" in chat is quite valuable. How do Googlers live without it?
- mike_d 2y ago
  Everyone bitches about it when they first start and eventually learns a better way. The culture is about creating explicit artifacts of knowledge (design docs, documentation, commit/review messages, etc) rather than trying to dig around in streams of consciousness hoping to find the bits of info you need later.
  - rwiggins 2y ago
    Exactly this. It's not uncommon to ask a coworker how to do something, get a response, and then send them a follow-up CL adding that information to a playbook or doc somewhere so others can reference it. Heck, sometimes I responded to questions with a CL adding that info to docs. The internal search engine helps drive a lot of this, too - if you want to know how to do something, docs (via search) are like the #1 choice. So, everyone's pretty incentivized to make it a good resource.
  - saagarjha 2y ago
    This is such a Googler comment, because it applies to basically everything at the company. “Everyone hates this when they join, but eventually they’re enlightened of the better way to do things, and it’s all good.” Dude, no. People write docs about stuff they care about but nobody writes docs about the weird error they got once that they needed a workaround for or whether their internal tool is named after a Pokémon or their favorite food. Believe me, I worked there, it was a massive pain. To say nothing of sending your boss something at 4 PM on a Friday and it being as if you never messaged them when they opened their laptop on Monday.
    - asvitkine 2y ago
      > People write docs about stuff they care about but nobody writes docs about the weird error they got once that they needed a workaround for Google has an internal stackoverflow-style site as well as bug reports and mailing lists that are all preserved for longer than 1-1 chats.
      - saagarjha 2y ago
        Walk me through this interaction. Do I search your team’s chats for that one time the intern found your build was flaky, or do I take to YAQS to discuss my build failure? Because the interaction is going to go like this: Me: I’m trying to build //big/important/project, but I’m getting this error on my Mac: “GShoe 1.3 required, but not found.” I depend on it here in my BUILD file: cl/42069. Can someone help me? A: We deprecated GShoe last year, what are you trying to do? This isn’t something we support. Say, who are you? Don’t you work in a completely different org? We do all our builds on Cloudtop anyways… Me: I was just trying to get acquainted with the code, this GShoe integration is something that I was interested in playing with. A: Wait, this isn’t even your job? Hang on, why does your CL add butts.txt? Me: Uh, I’m doing a thing…for Memegen? A: … More seriously though, checking your chats is something I can do myself without imposing myself on you, and it includes basically everything you’ve ever talked about rather than just what you see fit to publish and stand behind. I don’t need to have to wait until I’m stuck enough to ask a question, make sure you understand what I want, nor do I have to argue with you whether what I’m doing is appropriate or not. Or, more likely, I’m not going to get anyone spending time to reply anyways, because your promo committee is not going to search you on MOMA to see how many people you made happy online. So I’d really rather just trawl your chats and send you back documentation or questions based on that rather than you taking a moral stance that deleting your chat history means my life is better or easier.
  - pyrale 2y ago
    > The culture is about creating explicit artifacts of knowledge In the case of Google, the culture was, explicitly, about destroying potential evidence of wrongdoing [1]. [1]: https://ia601707.us.archive.org/28/items/gov.uscourts.cand.364454/gov.uscourts.cand.364454.385.0.pdf https://ia601707.us.archive.org/28/items/gov.uscourts.cand.3...
  - makeitdouble 2y ago
    You're still losing a ton of info, including who said what to who. It happens a ton that an exchange is misunderstood and the wrong action is taken. I can't image having only some resume of the whole thing and no logs of who participated, who said what at what time, and replay it all to get back on track from where it went off the rails. Sure you can just have the same discussion again, but that's such a waste of time IMHO.
  - CamperBob2 2y ago
    The culture is about creating explicit artifacts of knowledge That's a poor culture, then. The company's original ethos -- organizing existing, organic knowledge in ways that make it searchable, accessible, and useful -- was much better for everyone, both inside Google and outside. Or at least it was better for everyone inside Google until they started breaking the law. Then it became a liability, which is why you were told that the culture was about "creating artifacts."
- barrkel 2y ago
  Chat isn't a good way to store information.
  - SoftTalker 2y ago
    I agree. It's about as bad as relying on shell history (which I don't keep either). If you do something to solve a problem, that should go into a ticket or into a note file or even into a paper notebook. I'm older, maybe this is partly generational. I find chat to be almost uniformly annoying, and I use it very rarely. I sometimes go days without even launching my chat client. I prefer email which doesn't have the expectation of "drop what you're doing an pay attention to ME!!" that chat does.
  - _huayra_ 2y ago
    While I clearly agree, what I've experienced in my career (including other non-G FAANG / MAGAM / whatever it's called now companies) is that one will get some help over chat to fix some issue, but think "this is such a small issue that will only happen once" or just get too busy with other stuff and neglect to properly write up documentation or put it in one's PKM effectively. Having chat history and being able to type "chat:"Bob Joe" mitigation jitter identity server" or whatever search query to dredge up the single useful command that slipped through the PKM cracks is so useful. I guess one is forced to be disciplined about it, but I wonder if Google knows whether this chat-curtailment policy is basically costing them millions in wasted dev time because they have to re-ask for help and bother people. However, in my current company (using Teams), I still get re-asked for help all the time and usually quote reply my prior message saying "please search for this before asking. I found it easily".
- assbuttbuttass 2y ago
  It's annoying. I just copy anything important from chat messages into a big text file
- toast0 2y ago
  > I can't imagine that being unable to search a chat and look at who said what and when is useful It might be the bright side of a dystopia, but this is actually pretty useful in practice. If you can't reference previous chats, you don't have to spend time doing it. Instead, you rememeber you had a chat about how to do X, and then do X however you like, because there's nothing to say that's not how to do it. When someone asks you a question on chat, you don't have to be sure about the answer, unless they're going to use it right away, because they'll just do whatever they wanted after the chat expires anyway. This is freeing, in the same way that an autoclosing bug tracker is freeing.
ars 2y ago
Presumably it would be better if it was a phone call? Does a legal hold require recording all calls? > > Which is....a.....theory! I guess their theory is these ephemeral chats are like phone calls, as opposed to written communication.
- rokkitmensch 2y ago
  Wall Street records all calls. Has forever, since long before storage was cheap.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    Banks are required to by the SEC
- bastawhiz 2y ago
  Something has to go out of it's way to explicitly delete a chat. Phone calls aren't stored by default in the first place. If all phone calls were recorded and deleted after 24 hours, then yes, it would probably be a violation of the legal hold to continue deleting them after 24 hours.
  - lokar 2y ago
    And every time you view a website you make a copy? The implementation can be considered independent from the UX
  - paulddraper 2y ago
    Voicemails have a copy which are typically deleted after a period of time
    - bastawhiz 2y ago
      If a court determined that someone was intentionally leaving voicemails so that their messages would get destroyed while their company was subject to a legal hold, that would be illegal. I think pretty generally, courts are sympathetic that humans are human, but they're decidedly unsympathetic to malintent.

_huayra_ 2y ago

I haven't worked at Google, so maybe there are better channels than "chat that's holding everything together", but I can't imagine that being unable to search a chat and look at who said what and when is useful. I use it all the time to look up some random useful command a coworker told me long ago that I neglected to write down, for instance, or to follow up with a long-stale thread to revive it. I suppose that's what email and design docs are for, but I feel a lot of that "organizational glue" in chat is quite valuable. How do Googlers live without it?

mike_d 2y ago
Everyone bitches about it when they first start and eventually learns a better way. The culture is about creating explicit artifacts of knowledge (design docs, documentation, commit/review messages, etc) rather than trying to dig around in streams of consciousness hoping to find the bits of info you need later.
- rwiggins 2y ago
  Exactly this. It's not uncommon to ask a coworker how to do something, get a response, and then send them a follow-up CL adding that information to a playbook or doc somewhere so others can reference it. Heck, sometimes I responded to questions with a CL adding that info to docs. The internal search engine helps drive a lot of this, too - if you want to know how to do something, docs (via search) are like the #1 choice. So, everyone's pretty incentivized to make it a good resource.
- saagarjha 2y ago
  This is such a Googler comment, because it applies to basically everything at the company. “Everyone hates this when they join, but eventually they’re enlightened of the better way to do things, and it’s all good.” Dude, no. People write docs about stuff they care about but nobody writes docs about the weird error they got once that they needed a workaround for or whether their internal tool is named after a Pokémon or their favorite food. Believe me, I worked there, it was a massive pain. To say nothing of sending your boss something at 4 PM on a Friday and it being as if you never messaged them when they opened their laptop on Monday.
  - asvitkine 2y ago
    > People write docs about stuff they care about but nobody writes docs about the weird error they got once that they needed a workaround for Google has an internal stackoverflow-style site as well as bug reports and mailing lists that are all preserved for longer than 1-1 chats.
    - saagarjha 2y ago
      Walk me through this interaction. Do I search your team’s chats for that one time the intern found your build was flaky, or do I take to YAQS to discuss my build failure? Because the interaction is going to go like this: Me: I’m trying to build //big/important/project, but I’m getting this error on my Mac: “GShoe 1.3 required, but not found.” I depend on it here in my BUILD file: cl/42069. Can someone help me? A: We deprecated GShoe last year, what are you trying to do? This isn’t something we support. Say, who are you? Don’t you work in a completely different org? We do all our builds on Cloudtop anyways… Me: I was just trying to get acquainted with the code, this GShoe integration is something that I was interested in playing with. A: Wait, this isn’t even your job? Hang on, why does your CL add butts.txt? Me: Uh, I’m doing a thing…for Memegen? A: … More seriously though, checking your chats is something I can do myself without imposing myself on you, and it includes basically everything you’ve ever talked about rather than just what you see fit to publish and stand behind. I don’t need to have to wait until I’m stuck enough to ask a question, make sure you understand what I want, nor do I have to argue with you whether what I’m doing is appropriate or not. Or, more likely, I’m not going to get anyone spending time to reply anyways, because your promo committee is not going to search you on MOMA to see how many people you made happy online. So I’d really rather just trawl your chats and send you back documentation or questions based on that rather than you taking a moral stance that deleting your chat history means my life is better or easier.
- pyrale 2y ago
  > The culture is about creating explicit artifacts of knowledge In the case of Google, the culture was, explicitly, about destroying potential evidence of wrongdoing [1]. [1]: https://ia601707.us.archive.org/28/items/gov.uscourts.cand.364454/gov.uscourts.cand.364454.385.0.pdf https://ia601707.us.archive.org/28/items/gov.uscourts.cand.3...
- makeitdouble 2y ago
  You're still losing a ton of info, including who said what to who. It happens a ton that an exchange is misunderstood and the wrong action is taken. I can't image having only some resume of the whole thing and no logs of who participated, who said what at what time, and replay it all to get back on track from where it went off the rails. Sure you can just have the same discussion again, but that's such a waste of time IMHO.
- CamperBob2 2y ago
  The culture is about creating explicit artifacts of knowledge That's a poor culture, then. The company's original ethos -- organizing existing, organic knowledge in ways that make it searchable, accessible, and useful -- was much better for everyone, both inside Google and outside. Or at least it was better for everyone inside Google until they started breaking the law. Then it became a liability, which is why you were told that the culture was about "creating artifacts."
barrkel 2y ago
Chat isn't a good way to store information.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  I agree. It's about as bad as relying on shell history (which I don't keep either). If you do something to solve a problem, that should go into a ticket or into a note file or even into a paper notebook. I'm older, maybe this is partly generational. I find chat to be almost uniformly annoying, and I use it very rarely. I sometimes go days without even launching my chat client. I prefer email which doesn't have the expectation of "drop what you're doing an pay attention to ME!!" that chat does.
- _huayra_ 2y ago
  While I clearly agree, what I've experienced in my career (including other non-G FAANG / MAGAM / whatever it's called now companies) is that one will get some help over chat to fix some issue, but think "this is such a small issue that will only happen once" or just get too busy with other stuff and neglect to properly write up documentation or put it in one's PKM effectively. Having chat history and being able to type "chat:"Bob Joe" mitigation jitter identity server" or whatever search query to dredge up the single useful command that slipped through the PKM cracks is so useful. I guess one is forced to be disciplined about it, but I wonder if Google knows whether this chat-curtailment policy is basically costing them millions in wasted dev time because they have to re-ask for help and bother people. However, in my current company (using Teams), I still get re-asked for help all the time and usually quote reply my prior message saying "please search for this before asking. I found it easily".
assbuttbuttass 2y ago
It's annoying. I just copy anything important from chat messages into a big text file
toast0 2y ago
> I can't imagine that being unable to search a chat and look at who said what and when is useful It might be the bright side of a dystopia, but this is actually pretty useful in practice. If you can't reference previous chats, you don't have to spend time doing it. Instead, you rememeber you had a chat about how to do X, and then do X however you like, because there's nothing to say that's not how to do it. When someone asks you a question on chat, you don't have to be sure about the answer, unless they're going to use it right away, because they'll just do whatever they wanted after the chat expires anyway. This is freeing, in the same way that an autoclosing bug tracker is freeing.

ars 2y ago

Presumably it would be better if it was a phone call? Does a legal hold require recording all calls? > > Which is....a.....theory! I guess their theory is these ephemeral chats are like phone calls, as opposed to written communication.

rokkitmensch 2y ago
Wall Street records all calls. Has forever, since long before storage was cheap.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  Banks are required to by the SEC
bastawhiz 2y ago
Something has to go out of it's way to explicitly delete a chat. Phone calls aren't stored by default in the first place. If all phone calls were recorded and deleted after 24 hours, then yes, it would probably be a violation of the legal hold to continue deleting them after 24 hours.
- lokar 2y ago
  And every time you view a website you make a copy? The implementation can be considered independent from the UX
- paulddraper 2y ago
  Voicemails have a copy which are typically deleted after a period of time
  - bastawhiz 2y ago
    If a court determined that someone was intentionally leaving voicemails so that their messages would get destroyed while their company was subject to a legal hold, that would be illegal. I think pretty generally, courts are sympathetic that humans are human, but they're decidedly unsympathetic to malintent.