6 ms·

As a random HN user with no connection to Google who has seen what happens when you comment on stories about Google here (it's a shit storm), might I humbly sug

by sequoia 14y ago

As a random HN user with no connection to Google who has seen what happens when you comment on stories about Google here (it's a shit storm), might I humbly suggest that you consider not commenting on stories about Google? It seems to always turn into The Michaelochurch Show when you do. Not saying your opinions aren't valid, but I think your contributions re: google are unfortunately not useful because they inevitably spawn arguments about your character. Take one for the team and sit out the Google discussions maybe? That way when you have a contribution about some other topic, people will see you as a person and not "that crazy ex googler whose credibility is highly suspect." :)

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
waterlesscloud 14y ago
I don't think he should sit out Google discussions. He had the experience he had. Others have the experiences they have. We're all capable of assessing his reports for ourselves. I might add we're also all capable of assessing the responses of Googlers to his reports for ourselves, and those responses don't always speak well of Google.
- MaysonL 14y ago
  And we've almost all seen what's happened to Gmail, Google Reader, Google Labs and 20% time.
  - daave 14y ago
    Mayson, can you be more specific? What has happened to them? Gmail: I can't think of anything negative that's happened to Gmail in recent times (unless you didn't like the UI redesign - there are certainly mixed opinions on that), and certainly the performance and uptake of Gmail has only improved. Google Reader: Not much new happening, but it's still running. Are you referring to the changes in the sharing model? Whichever sharing model was better, surely you can agree that having one unified sharing experience across Google produces results in a more streamlined product, and at least this was a step in the right direction. Google Labs: Was closed down, yes. I still don't understand how this relates to the parent post. My thoughts on closing down labs: Labs was supposed to be a way to get ideas out there in the wild before turning them into a fully-supported core product. This was great for the engineers who had built these things (they got to see them used), and the early-adopters who tried Labs products. However, as time goes on and nobody's doing any development work on a particular thing in Labs anymore, there is still an operational cost to other engineers at the company who have to keep the thing up and running. Since it's a 'Google' product, the brand image is at stake, so we can't just let them wither. So I think it's reasonable to decide to have each labs product either shut down or integrated into a core (supported) product. Perhaps it would have been better to chuck all the old labs and start again, with a published policy that things in labs will either be fully supported or completely gone 1 year after launch (or something). The removal of labs is a signal that there's more red tape around launching new products than there used to be, but I think that's inevitable as a company grows, and more than some engineer's weekend is on the line if a lunch goes badly. 20% Time: Still as strong as ever, from what I can tell. About half the engineers I know have a 20% project, and there's nobody who doesn't have one who wishes they could have one. Most of the time if people don't have a 20% project it's only because they find their core job interesting and diverting enough that they don't have a desire to split their time with a side-project. Despite what some people have claimed on HN, your manager can't deny you from having a 20% project if you want one. (I work for Google, but not on any of the products mentioned above, and I (willfully) don't have a 20% project. These are my opinions and not necessarily those of my employer.)
    - michaelochurch 14y ago
      Despite what some people have claimed on HN, your manager can't deny you from having a 20% project if you want one. Theoretically, managers can't block you from having 20% time, and there's no official permission process you need to go through to take it, but if your manager says, "I'll fuck you over in Perf if you do a 20% project", then you don't have 20%-time. What I'm told is that, before 2007 or so, Google actively worked to avoid manager-as-SPOF, and that this is what made Google great. But then they hired a bunch of executives from mainstream large companies and didn't tell them to wipe their fucking feet off before coming inside.
      - daave 14y ago
        > if your manager says, "I'll fuck you over in Perf if you do a 20% project", then you don't have 20%-time. I find it hard to imagine a manager could get away with saying that, but even if they did, I think it would be an empty threat. Perf is designed so that the manager is not a SPOF, your peers' reviews are considered at least as important as your manager's review. It would be pretty obvious if there was a big discrepancy between what your manager says and what your peers say, which would call your manager's review into question. The only way this would be a problem would be if your peers give you bad reviews too (and if that's the case, then maybe, just maybe, you need to take a look at yourself).
michaelochurch 14y ago
See, I have absolutely no objection when people speak positively of their Google experiences. A lot of people have good Google experiences, and they should. I didn't. I had a shitty one. What I find ridiculous is that any time I say something about Google, people leap into ad hominem attacks without even reading what I have to say. You know what I did to piss these people off? Absolutely nothing. I've never met most of them. I'm surprised they even give a shit about me or what I have to say. It's never the powerful people getting indicted who crush whistleblowers most with the most fervor. It's other peons who want to stick their fingers in their ears and say, "nanananan-I-can't-hear-youuuuu!" in the face of depressing news.
- vagrant 14y ago
  Maybe it has something to do with the way you say it. Maybe you meant to say, "I had a shitty experience at Google", but you accidentally typed, "most of the work is shitty legacy maintenance". Maybe you meant to say that you were not satisfied to start out with the other Nooglers in intro jobs and prove yourself by working your way up, but instead you said that most people start out in shitty jobs and never escape.
  - michaelochurch 14y ago
    What I've observed is that most people at Google are working on shitty legacy maintenance. I was in New York, which is generally considered to be slightly above other satellites on the project-allocation heap but far below Mountain View, because that's where all the players are. Most people I knew were on uninspiring work, although there were exceptions, but you generally had to be Senior SWE or higher before you were even considered eligible for the good projects (and even some people at Sr. got shafted). Google has a palpable "Real Googler Line". Above it, you're free to transfer and work as you wish. If you want to change teams, just decide to do it. Hell, Steve Yegge quit his project in public. Below it, you have manager-as-SPOF and one-assigned-project... banking without the upside. When I was there, the RGL was moving upward to somewhere between Senior and Staff. I don't know why you have a chip on your shoulder against me. I never did anything to you.

by sequoia 14y ago

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

waterlesscloud 14y ago

I don't think he should sit out Google discussions. He had the experience he had. Others have the experiences they have. We're all capable of assessing his reports for ourselves. I might add we're also all capable of assessing the responses of Googlers to his reports for ourselves, and those responses don't always speak well of Google.

MaysonL 14y ago
And we've almost all seen what's happened to Gmail, Google Reader, Google Labs and 20% time.
- daave 14y ago
  Mayson, can you be more specific? What has happened to them? Gmail: I can't think of anything negative that's happened to Gmail in recent times (unless you didn't like the UI redesign - there are certainly mixed opinions on that), and certainly the performance and uptake of Gmail has only improved. Google Reader: Not much new happening, but it's still running. Are you referring to the changes in the sharing model? Whichever sharing model was better, surely you can agree that having one unified sharing experience across Google produces results in a more streamlined product, and at least this was a step in the right direction. Google Labs: Was closed down, yes. I still don't understand how this relates to the parent post. My thoughts on closing down labs: Labs was supposed to be a way to get ideas out there in the wild before turning them into a fully-supported core product. This was great for the engineers who had built these things (they got to see them used), and the early-adopters who tried Labs products. However, as time goes on and nobody's doing any development work on a particular thing in Labs anymore, there is still an operational cost to other engineers at the company who have to keep the thing up and running. Since it's a 'Google' product, the brand image is at stake, so we can't just let them wither. So I think it's reasonable to decide to have each labs product either shut down or integrated into a core (supported) product. Perhaps it would have been better to chuck all the old labs and start again, with a published policy that things in labs will either be fully supported or completely gone 1 year after launch (or something). The removal of labs is a signal that there's more red tape around launching new products than there used to be, but I think that's inevitable as a company grows, and more than some engineer's weekend is on the line if a lunch goes badly. 20% Time: Still as strong as ever, from what I can tell. About half the engineers I know have a 20% project, and there's nobody who doesn't have one who wishes they could have one. Most of the time if people don't have a 20% project it's only because they find their core job interesting and diverting enough that they don't have a desire to split their time with a side-project. Despite what some people have claimed on HN, your manager can't deny you from having a 20% project if you want one. (I work for Google, but not on any of the products mentioned above, and I (willfully) don't have a 20% project. These are my opinions and not necessarily those of my employer.)
  - michaelochurch 14y ago
    Despite what some people have claimed on HN, your manager can't deny you from having a 20% project if you want one. Theoretically, managers can't block you from having 20% time, and there's no official permission process you need to go through to take it, but if your manager says, "I'll fuck you over in Perf if you do a 20% project", then you don't have 20%-time. What I'm told is that, before 2007 or so, Google actively worked to avoid manager-as-SPOF, and that this is what made Google great. But then they hired a bunch of executives from mainstream large companies and didn't tell them to wipe their fucking feet off before coming inside.
    - daave 14y ago
      > if your manager says, "I'll fuck you over in Perf if you do a 20% project", then you don't have 20%-time. I find it hard to imagine a manager could get away with saying that, but even if they did, I think it would be an empty threat. Perf is designed so that the manager is not a SPOF, your peers' reviews are considered at least as important as your manager's review. It would be pretty obvious if there was a big discrepancy between what your manager says and what your peers say, which would call your manager's review into question. The only way this would be a problem would be if your peers give you bad reviews too (and if that's the case, then maybe, just maybe, you need to take a look at yourself).

michaelochurch 14y ago

See, I have absolutely no objection when people speak positively of their Google experiences. A lot of people have good Google experiences, and they should. I didn't. I had a shitty one. What I find ridiculous is that any time I say something about Google, people leap into ad hominem attacks without even reading what I have to say. You know what I did to piss these people off? Absolutely nothing. I've never met most of them. I'm surprised they even give a shit about me or what I have to say. It's never the powerful people getting indicted who crush whistleblowers most with the most fervor. It's other peons who want to stick their fingers in their ears and say, "nanananan-I-can't-hear-youuuuu!" in the face of depressing news.

vagrant 14y ago
Maybe it has something to do with the way you say it. Maybe you meant to say, "I had a shitty experience at Google", but you accidentally typed, "most of the work is shitty legacy maintenance". Maybe you meant to say that you were not satisfied to start out with the other Nooglers in intro jobs and prove yourself by working your way up, but instead you said that most people start out in shitty jobs and never escape.
- michaelochurch 14y ago
  What I've observed is that most people at Google are working on shitty legacy maintenance. I was in New York, which is generally considered to be slightly above other satellites on the project-allocation heap but far below Mountain View, because that's where all the players are. Most people I knew were on uninspiring work, although there were exceptions, but you generally had to be Senior SWE or higher before you were even considered eligible for the good projects (and even some people at Sr. got shafted). Google has a palpable "Real Googler Line". Above it, you're free to transfer and work as you wish. If you want to change teams, just decide to do it. Hell, Steve Yegge quit his project in public. Below it, you have manager-as-SPOF and one-assigned-project... banking without the upside. When I was there, the RGL was moving upward to somewhere between Senior and Staff. I don't know why you have a chip on your shoulder against me. I never did anything to you.