3 ms·

Technological experiments often call for risk-seeking and adventure, but when it comes to things that affect other people, a more conservative and level-headed

Technological experiments often call for risk-seeking and adventure, but when it comes to things that affect other people, a more conservative and level-headed approach is necessary. For example, the utter recklessness involved in deploying calibration scores and shuttering 20% time is deplorable. That's an extreme lapse of professional responsibility. (Sorry if this irritating, but as a matter of principle, I must keep doing this until Google does the right thing and one of the two founders issues a formal apology, and not only to me but to thousands of other affected people.)

raldi 13y ago
I would usually hesitate to make a cartoon reference on Hacker News, but I really feel it's called for at this time: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73GOfY0Ab9g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73GOfY0Ab9g
phreeza 13y ago
Do you have some kind of script set up to alert you any time a story mentioning Google makes the front page?
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  No, but that's a good idea. Thanks for that. I have an important job to do, which is to try to save Google (although I will probably fail) from the people who are trying to destroy it. Even though I left that place and will almost certainly never go back, it's too important a company to let it fall to ashes.
  - cromwellian 13y ago
    You can't iterate on products without launching them. Startup culture in Silicon Valley is all about failing fast. The heart of science is running experiments, and if Google can't run experiments or pilots, it will fail to the innovators dilemma. Our democracy is similarly unable to run experiments to test out policy, which was another thing Larry talked about, as a result, we argue over the effects of policy without doing anything. States were supposed to be the laboratories of democracy, but even on the state level, hardly any experiments are conducted. The idea that you should only launch services you plan to run forever is a plan for stagnation and death.
    - yuhong 13y ago
      Yes, but michaelochurch was talking about something else.
      - cromwellian 13y ago
        Many of the Google products you see today were 20% projects. Google had no idea GMail would be a hit. You can't simultaneously criticize management for 20% time being more difficult, and then criticize them for launching lots and lots of experimental products and then killing off the ones that don't work.
        michaelochurch 13y ago
        We agree. I am all for "lots and lots of experimental products". Calibration scores (secret performance reviews that happen in the Perf Room-- yes, Google has a physical place for "calibration" that is actually called "The Perf Room") are not experimental technology or product. They're an experiment (and a failed one) on people. Different rules together.
        dewitt 13y ago
        Odd. I've been doing eng management at Google for the better part of a decade and I've never heard the term "Perf Room" before, nor did an internal search turn anything up. Maybe it is used, but at the very least I'm unaware of it. I realize you worked there for a few months a few years ago, but I think someone might have been pulling your leg if they told you that phrase. (But you're right, like most meetings at Google, calibration meetings do happen in rooms. They're just normal conference rooms, though. Nothing special.) For everyone else: calibration is a process where other managers at Google cross-check the performance scores given to employees across different teams and parts of the company. We do this so that an individual manager can't introduce undue bias or play favorites, and so an engineer at a given level in one part of the company is more or less the equal of an engineer at the same level in another part. Calibration is one part of the system I think works really well, much better than any other place I've worked. In fact, I think more companies might want to emulate it.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > I have an important job to do, which is to try to save Google (although I will probably fail) from the people who are trying to destroy it. Its probably not healthy to delude yourself into thinking you have an "important job" that centers around your -- clearly quite bad -- relationship with Google. If you want to show the error of Google's ways, the approach you've been taking on HN simply isn't it; if you could manage the emotional distance to try rational analysis and argumentation I'd suggest that, but it doesn't seem like that is likely. Perhaps try doing something unconnected with Google that demonstrates a better way, and point to that.
apalmer 13y ago
Are you for real? I am trying to figure if you are a troll or whether you are truly psychologically damaged by your time at google? Dude google is not going to change or issue an apology because a former employee rags on them on the internet... you do realize this right?
- verbin217 13y ago
  I think it's fascinating. If you read his other comments he's obviously brilliant. That said, he seems to be somewhat detached from reality over his episode at Google. Not that perf isn't shitty just that he seems to think he alone can do anything about it. It's like the endearing megalomania of a child who honestly believes he'll grow up to single handedly end world hunger or cure cancer. You just hope that after he realizes his limitations he isn't so distraught that it keeps him from accomplishing what he's clearly capable of.
  - agent00f 13y ago
    Is the alternative implied here to acquiesce instead?
    - verbin217 13y ago
      If you mean michaelochurch then no not at all. "I must keep doing this until Google does the right thing and one of the two founders issues a formal apology, and not only to me but to thousands of other affected people." I don't mind his Google bashing all that much. I just hope that he's accepted the futility of it. He can't really do any more damage to his reputation so he may as well keep going. This is a good place to broadcast to prospective/current Google employees. There could be people reading here who've already been slotted and don't even realize it. Whether Google accelerates your career or uses you as a disposable code monkey is determined entirely by their incentives. How would it benefit them to tell an under-performer that they're not going anywhere? Using the ambiguity of an eventual promotion as an implied carrot would generate better returns on their investment. It sounds like it'd work pretty well actually... Use Google's reputation to bring on a flurry of the most desirable new graduates and use them to do grunt work while they're motivated to prove themselves. Promote the top performers to "Real Googlers". Keep the middle around until they run out of steam or quit in frustration. Google gets cost effective grunt work and a larger share of the very best talent as a long-term strategic advantage against Apple/Microsoft/Facebook. If michaelochurch is as abnormally dauntless/foolhardy as he appears to be this could be a really big problem. Most people negatively affected probably go the "professional" route and quietly move on.

raldi 13y ago

I would usually hesitate to make a cartoon reference on Hacker News, but I really feel it's called for at this time: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73GOfY0Ab9g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73GOfY0Ab9g

phreeza 13y ago

Do you have some kind of script set up to alert you any time a story mentioning Google makes the front page?

michaelochurch 13y ago
No, but that's a good idea. Thanks for that. I have an important job to do, which is to try to save Google (although I will probably fail) from the people who are trying to destroy it. Even though I left that place and will almost certainly never go back, it's too important a company to let it fall to ashes.
- cromwellian 13y ago
  You can't iterate on products without launching them. Startup culture in Silicon Valley is all about failing fast. The heart of science is running experiments, and if Google can't run experiments or pilots, it will fail to the innovators dilemma. Our democracy is similarly unable to run experiments to test out policy, which was another thing Larry talked about, as a result, we argue over the effects of policy without doing anything. States were supposed to be the laboratories of democracy, but even on the state level, hardly any experiments are conducted. The idea that you should only launch services you plan to run forever is a plan for stagnation and death.
  - yuhong 13y ago
    Yes, but michaelochurch was talking about something else.
    - cromwellian 13y ago
      Many of the Google products you see today were 20% projects. Google had no idea GMail would be a hit. You can't simultaneously criticize management for 20% time being more difficult, and then criticize them for launching lots and lots of experimental products and then killing off the ones that don't work.
      - michaelochurch 13y ago
        We agree. I am all for "lots and lots of experimental products". Calibration scores (secret performance reviews that happen in the Perf Room-- yes, Google has a physical place for "calibration" that is actually called "The Perf Room") are not experimental technology or product. They're an experiment (and a failed one) on people. Different rules together.
        dewitt 13y ago
        Odd. I've been doing eng management at Google for the better part of a decade and I've never heard the term "Perf Room" before, nor did an internal search turn anything up. Maybe it is used, but at the very least I'm unaware of it. I realize you worked there for a few months a few years ago, but I think someone might have been pulling your leg if they told you that phrase. (But you're right, like most meetings at Google, calibration meetings do happen in rooms. They're just normal conference rooms, though. Nothing special.) For everyone else: calibration is a process where other managers at Google cross-check the performance scores given to employees across different teams and parts of the company. We do this so that an individual manager can't introduce undue bias or play favorites, and so an engineer at a given level in one part of the company is more or less the equal of an engineer at the same level in another part. Calibration is one part of the system I think works really well, much better than any other place I've worked. In fact, I think more companies might want to emulate it.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > I have an important job to do, which is to try to save Google (although I will probably fail) from the people who are trying to destroy it. Its probably not healthy to delude yourself into thinking you have an "important job" that centers around your -- clearly quite bad -- relationship with Google. If you want to show the error of Google's ways, the approach you've been taking on HN simply isn't it; if you could manage the emotional distance to try rational analysis and argumentation I'd suggest that, but it doesn't seem like that is likely. Perhaps try doing something unconnected with Google that demonstrates a better way, and point to that.

apalmer 13y ago

Are you for real? I am trying to figure if you are a troll or whether you are truly psychologically damaged by your time at google? Dude google is not going to change or issue an apology because a former employee rags on them on the internet... you do realize this right?

verbin217 13y ago
I think it's fascinating. If you read his other comments he's obviously brilliant. That said, he seems to be somewhat detached from reality over his episode at Google. Not that perf isn't shitty just that he seems to think he alone can do anything about it. It's like the endearing megalomania of a child who honestly believes he'll grow up to single handedly end world hunger or cure cancer. You just hope that after he realizes his limitations he isn't so distraught that it keeps him from accomplishing what he's clearly capable of.
- agent00f 13y ago
  Is the alternative implied here to acquiesce instead?
  - verbin217 13y ago
    If you mean michaelochurch then no not at all. "I must keep doing this until Google does the right thing and one of the two founders issues a formal apology, and not only to me but to thousands of other affected people." I don't mind his Google bashing all that much. I just hope that he's accepted the futility of it. He can't really do any more damage to his reputation so he may as well keep going. This is a good place to broadcast to prospective/current Google employees. There could be people reading here who've already been slotted and don't even realize it. Whether Google accelerates your career or uses you as a disposable code monkey is determined entirely by their incentives. How would it benefit them to tell an under-performer that they're not going anywhere? Using the ambiguity of an eventual promotion as an implied carrot would generate better returns on their investment. It sounds like it'd work pretty well actually... Use Google's reputation to bring on a flurry of the most desirable new graduates and use them to do grunt work while they're motivated to prove themselves. Promote the top performers to "Real Googlers". Keep the middle around until they run out of steam or quit in frustration. Google gets cost effective grunt work and a larger share of the very best talent as a long-term strategic advantage against Apple/Microsoft/Facebook. If michaelochurch is as abnormally dauntless/foolhardy as he appears to be this could be a really big problem. Most people negatively affected probably go the "professional" route and quietly move on.