News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google Blew a Ten-Year Lead by hinkley on Wednesday June 24, 2020 @12:31PM (#23630069)
One of my employers was spun out twice, after having been acquired years ago. It was sort of a joke to tell people who the owners were. It made no goddamned sense. Sure, we had customers in common, but so do Xerox and people who lease out coffee machines. The toner-flavored coffee jokes practically write themselves.

They just got onto a growth tear and bought a bunch of things they shouldn’t, and eventually rounded up all of the vaguely similar ones and divested.

I wonder sometimes if Google would be better off having a system set up for spinning off ideas that are complementary to their business model but distracting, or not high volume enough. Not every idea has to be a billion dollar idea, and a one time cash infusion to five $200M ideas would be a pretty small opportunity cost for them.

The fact that such ideas are not a direct competitor also achieves another goal of overly large employee pools, which is to choke off the supply of talent to upstarts.

Re:Google Blew a Ten-Year Lead by munificent on Wednesday June 24, 2020 @01:48PM (#23631335)
> I wonder sometimes if Google would be better off having a system set up for spinning off ideas that are complementary to their business model but distracting, or not high volume enough.

Is that not what Alphabet is?

Re:Google Blew a Ten-Year Lead by hinkley on Wednesday June 24, 2020 @02:16PM (#23631747)
That's what I was hoping Alphabet would be, but it seems like this bit is still a sticking point:

> or not high volume enough

Kind of a let-down

Re:Google Blew a Ten-Year Lead by throwawaygler on Wednesday June 24, 2020 @12:40PM (#23630284)
Re:Google Blew a Ten-Year Lead by hinkley on Wednesday June 24, 2020 @12:44PM (#23630370)
Does “sign up for early access” just mean get sneak previews, or that this is a new thing?

If the latter, then good for them but another thing they should have done ten years ago.