4 ms·

I don't think I'll ever understand people like you.

by joshmlewis 14y ago

spaghetti 14y ago
What are you having trouble understanding?
- lazugod 14y ago
  The willingness to believe in conspiracy theories, probably.
  - spaghetti 14y ago
    Sometimes it's OK to let your imagination run wild. Especially when the 20th employee of thriving Google chooses to be the CEO of stagnating Yahoo.
    - tdfx 14y ago
      It may also help to look at it as: stagnating Google employee #20, passed over for promotion, spites Google by taking job at a competitor.
      - lusr 14y ago
        Top job, no less. For somebody who's accomplished as much as she has, it must be difficult finding worthy new challenges. The VentureBeat article on another thread states she's worth $300m. She only continues to work because she loves the challenge, clearly.
    - jakeonthemove 14y ago
      It's probably much simpler than that. You know that study where most people chose to be the top dog of a small group instead of being part of a larger group, but only a subordinate? Same goes here. Besides, maybe she really believes she can turn the company around - who will be laughing if/when that happens?
- eta_carinae 14y ago
  Your conspiracy theory about Google planting Marissa as a spy CEO is absurd. I'm sure Marissa's departure was considered a huge loss at Google, especially to go to Yahoo. No company is ever happy to lose an executive.
  - sahaj 14y ago
    Yea, it's more like her planting herself with the help of the Yahoo! board.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
  - spaghetti 14y ago
    "spy CEO" wasn't my original intention. More like "figure-head whose intention is to benefit Google and whose loyalty is still with Google". Google's leadership is very shrewd and it would be foolish to blindly put this past them. To be fair after reading a bit more and thinking about this it could be a vanity move motivated by the promo skip.
redslazer 14y ago
Im not disagreeing that in most cases these conspiracy theories are complete nonsense but I think it is pretty important that we encourage people to come up with alternate theories to events and actions and not instantly dismiss them. Always trusting the "rulers"(as they would call them) could end very badly in the long term for humanity.
- joshmlewis 14y ago
  Yeah, I definitely am the first to come up with alternate theories and trying to figure out motivations for things, but this was just silly. Now if there was some hard evidence or some very fishy stuff that's one thing, but I haven't seen anything to support it.
  - its_so_on 14y ago
    Also this is Google, so it would be so out of character that it contradicts every single thing anyone has ever learned about Google first-hand, second-hand, or third-hand. This is not how you make a conspiracy theory.
sophacles 14y ago
Here's the thing, it is actually a good question - "Why would a big dog at google, presumably one who has a pile of google stock, go to a floundering competitor?" There are many good obvious reasons to accept a better job at a non-competitor, or a strong competitor, but on the surface, going to a struggling competitor seems odd. It is worth exploring. One thing that keeps coming up in my mind is that Google is regularly mentioned in context of anti-trust stuff. That is a big deal. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Google bigwigs sent Ms Mayer to Yahoo with a blessing, saying "make Yahoo good again, we need competition". Conspiratorial sounding, yeah sure. But at the same time, completely reasonable, and totally explains what would look like an otherwise conflicted loyalty/position. A strong yahoo also helps (everyone really) on the Facebook front. A strong yahoo also will keep Google sharp. All of their best innovations came when they weren't the clear winner, so some competition may help invigorate the innovation again. I wouldn't put it past Sergey and Larry to grok all of this, and say to their trusted people, "look its better if some of you guys move to our competitors, it's good for all of us, you guys can actually make that happen."

I don't think I'll ever understand people like you.

spaghetti 14y ago

What are you having trouble understanding?

lazugod 14y ago
The willingness to believe in conspiracy theories, probably.
- spaghetti 14y ago
  Sometimes it's OK to let your imagination run wild. Especially when the 20th employee of thriving Google chooses to be the CEO of stagnating Yahoo.
  - tdfx 14y ago
    It may also help to look at it as: stagnating Google employee #20, passed over for promotion, spites Google by taking job at a competitor.
    - lusr 14y ago
      Top job, no less. For somebody who's accomplished as much as she has, it must be difficult finding worthy new challenges. The VentureBeat article on another thread states she's worth $300m. She only continues to work because she loves the challenge, clearly.
  - jakeonthemove 14y ago
    It's probably much simpler than that. You know that study where most people chose to be the top dog of a small group instead of being part of a larger group, but only a subordinate? Same goes here. Besides, maybe she really believes she can turn the company around - who will be laughing if/when that happens?
eta_carinae 14y ago
Your conspiracy theory about Google planting Marissa as a spy CEO is absurd. I'm sure Marissa's departure was considered a huge loss at Google, especially to go to Yahoo. No company is ever happy to lose an executive.
- sahaj 14y ago
  Yea, it's more like her planting herself with the help of the Yahoo! board.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
- spaghetti 14y ago
  "spy CEO" wasn't my original intention. More like "figure-head whose intention is to benefit Google and whose loyalty is still with Google". Google's leadership is very shrewd and it would be foolish to blindly put this past them. To be fair after reading a bit more and thinking about this it could be a vanity move motivated by the promo skip.

redslazer 14y ago

Im not disagreeing that in most cases these conspiracy theories are complete nonsense but I think it is pretty important that we encourage people to come up with alternate theories to events and actions and not instantly dismiss them. Always trusting the "rulers"(as they would call them) could end very badly in the long term for humanity.

joshmlewis 14y ago
Yeah, I definitely am the first to come up with alternate theories and trying to figure out motivations for things, but this was just silly. Now if there was some hard evidence or some very fishy stuff that's one thing, but I haven't seen anything to support it.
- its_so_on 14y ago
  Also this is Google, so it would be so out of character that it contradicts every single thing anyone has ever learned about Google first-hand, second-hand, or third-hand. This is not how you make a conspiracy theory.

sophacles 14y ago

Here's the thing, it is actually a good question - "Why would a big dog at google, presumably one who has a pile of google stock, go to a floundering competitor?" There are many good obvious reasons to accept a better job at a non-competitor, or a strong competitor, but on the surface, going to a struggling competitor seems odd. It is worth exploring. One thing that keeps coming up in my mind is that Google is regularly mentioned in context of anti-trust stuff. That is a big deal. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Google bigwigs sent Ms Mayer to Yahoo with a blessing, saying "make Yahoo good again, we need competition". Conspiratorial sounding, yeah sure. But at the same time, completely reasonable, and totally explains what would look like an otherwise conflicted loyalty/position. A strong yahoo also helps (everyone really) on the Facebook front. A strong yahoo also will keep Google sharp. All of their best innovations came when they weren't the clear winner, so some competition may help invigorate the innovation again. I wouldn't put it past Sergey and Larry to grok all of this, and say to their trusted people, "look its better if some of you guys move to our competitors, it's good for all of us, you guys can actually make that happen."