4 ms·

He isn't stating a fact, from what I can tell. The actual quote in the article is "I don’t think it’s crazy to believe that half the white-collar staff at Googl

by debo_ 2y ago

He isn't stating a fact, from what I can tell. The actual quote in the article is "I don’t think it’s crazy to believe that half the white-collar staff at Google probably does no real work." It's not controversial to think that there is likely waste at Google. This particular article, though, has no insight in it. It's an inflammatory statement with no conversation or intelligence about it. Maybe there's something more in the Substack they reference. Then again, I don't think it's crazy to believe that 50% of Substack newsletter content is full of nonsense /joke

paulpauper 2y ago
It's clickbait journalism 101. Make incendiary or big claim in title to get clicks and then hedge and equivocate and walk-back claim in the article
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 2y ago
  Worst of all, I don't think the authors generally get to write the headlines. Can you imagine how frustrating it must be to have your boss make the most salient part of your work contradict the work itself?
kxrm 2y ago
Yea, I went into this article looking for data to back up this claim and found none. While every large company is going to have some waste, saying it's half is quite the claim that needs more data.
labrador 2y ago
Since no one outside Google knows what real work the white-collar staff at Google do, no one can prove him wrong. He may be quoting a disgruntled Google employee. He's using an appeal to authority argument - his own as one half of Andreessen-Horowitz. That's a neat trick.
chmod775 2y ago
> He isn't stating a fact, from what I can tell. The actual quote in the article is "I don’t think it’s crazy to believe that half the white-collar staff at Google probably does no real work." Contrast that with "Half of Google's white-collar staff 'does no real work,' Silicon Valley VC says". So the title of the article is an outright lie. That probably should be flagged?
red-iron-pine 2y ago
> "I don’t think it’s crazy to believe that half the white-collar staff at Google probably does no real work." > I don't think it's crazy > to believe > Google probably does So many hair splitting qualifications so as to be meaningless

by debo_ 2y ago

paulpauper 2y ago

It's clickbait journalism 101. Make incendiary or big claim in title to get clicks and then hedge and equivocate and walk-back claim in the article

6gvONxR4sf7o 2y ago
Worst of all, I don't think the authors generally get to write the headlines. Can you imagine how frustrating it must be to have your boss make the most salient part of your work contradict the work itself?

kxrm 2y ago

Yea, I went into this article looking for data to back up this claim and found none. While every large company is going to have some waste, saying it's half is quite the claim that needs more data.

labrador 2y ago

Since no one outside Google knows what real work the white-collar staff at Google do, no one can prove him wrong. He may be quoting a disgruntled Google employee. He's using an appeal to authority argument - his own as one half of Andreessen-Horowitz. That's a neat trick.

chmod775 2y ago

> He isn't stating a fact, from what I can tell. The actual quote in the article is "I don’t think it’s crazy to believe that half the white-collar staff at Google probably does no real work." Contrast that with "Half of Google's white-collar staff 'does no real work,' Silicon Valley VC says". So the title of the article is an outright lie. That probably should be flagged?

red-iron-pine 2y ago

> "I don’t think it’s crazy to believe that half the white-collar staff at Google probably does no real work." > I don't think it's crazy > to believe > Google probably does So many hair splitting qualifications so as to be meaningless