arebop
arebop on Hacker News
I've been given such an offer. The company gave eligible employees X days to opt in and then it gave itself Y days to decide which volunteers would get buyouts. This matter of loyalty perception was certainly a live question for the employees. But also the company did iterative buyouts so in later rounds there was some evidence available to the current prospects about how employees were treated earlier. Not so much in what opportunities were withheld from the "disloyal" but in the take rate of volunteers and in the probability of being "laid off" given the receipt of an earlier buyout offer.
They did it again in 2024 and then switched to continuous drip of small "layoffs" and encouraging attrition. They have tried various layoff flavors: random, strategic, political, voluntary, and now in their continuous microlayoff era good luck distilling a consistent simple explanation for the day to day decisions of many thousands of managers.
Google has cost-cut their old hiring and performance management processes, and eliminated many perks and benefits that were peculiar to Google. As the unique characteristics of Google as an institution are pared away, it makes sense that they would also adopt the standard approach to layoffs and that is what we have seen since 2023.
Who remembers Dr. Sbaitso, the tts eliza derivative and forerunner of chatgpt?
YouTube Kids is also full of garbage. The bar to get content into YouTube Kids is substantially higher than YouTube but still the average video's educational quality is abysmal.
There are people at YouTube/Google/Alphabet who care but at the end of the day we get what the invisible hand gives us. Market forces have not yielded a well-curated educational video experience on YouTube.
The Assistant can't reliably set timers either, though I guess 80% is considerably better than 0. Still, I think it used to be better back before Google caught a glimpse of a different squirrel to chase.
Yes, but it requires landlord cooperation.
A lot of people lately are complaining about a lack of price stability, it seems like a good angle.
Also as an SF resident with no realistic alternative to Comcast cable, I'd appreciate a provider who didn't try to sneak price increases onto my bill a couple of times a year.
In a healthy market I wouldn't expect big margins for sellers, but honestly if someone's making insane profits by selling me a product or service that's excellent and better than my non-empty set of alternatives I'm not going to complain.
IDK this is my experience over the past few years with 10+ appointments with two specialists and three PCPs in the SFBA; my understanding is that it is typical in this area and becoming typical in other regions of the U.S. as well.
The waiting is similar in the U.S., only the cost is wildly different. Actually, it sounds like you can see a family doctor the same day in Germany? That would make it better in Germany.
In the U.S. I can see a midlevel the same day by paying $200 for an annual membership in a mass-affluent pseudoconcierge practice plus $800ish for the appointment+labs, the $800 may be partly or entirely covered by insurance depending on how the conversation goes with the "provider". I have to wait several months if I want to see a real doctor outside of an emergency room. 6 months is about right for seeing a specialist with a preexisting relationship, might need a little more lead time for an initial consultation.
If you think careless/bold Harvard students are road hazards, wait until you meet the psychotic addicts of the Tenderloin.
I was on dev teams inside industrial-age companies before I went to FANG, and I saw it go both ways.
In one company, the hourly customer service folks who sat adjacent to our patch of the cube farm (that's right, no noise isolation between the call center and the software development team) complained about engineers arriving half an hour after customer service shift start, so we salaried engineers were instructed to be at work by 8am or whatever. In another company, the hourly people were not allowed in the executive barbershop, the executive dining room, or the executive washroom and had to park in the surface lot instead of the garage. Actually, garage access was denied even to most software engineers but whatever.
I'm sure it's generally true that "MVPs" get exempted to varying degrees. My point is that the policies themselves are fairly capricious in the first place and the identification of MVPs is unreliable too. Performance management for managers is probably more difficult even than performance management for software engineers and my experience makes me highly skeptical about the whole prospect of professional management.
Now that AI means LLM specifically I guess you are right, but if you'd told me 20 years ago that we'd have cars driving themselves around major cities by now, I'd have been pretty impressed.
I heard about the self-flying helicopter at CMU and robots playing soccer, but really finishing the science and engineering to have computers mundanely outperforming humans at safe city driving is remarkable. Except of course to current industry observers & wall street analysts, who are asking "will this ML mumbo jumbo ever amount to anything practical? Or is lane keeping with human vigilance and alarm-setting the pinnacle?"
Interesting that investors don't care at all about the Waymo progress, judging by the q&a. Though, Tesla is definitely an AI market leader!
The complaint is not that Google is too efficient. It is that Google is achieving apparent improvements in efficiency by taking steps that improve the short-term metrics and have net negative long-term impact. So, OP is disputing the senior management claim that this cost base reengineering is legitimately "durable."
We have abundant fog and seasonal rain in SF, but not much hail or snow.
That's why they've done winter testing in Tahoe (since 2017) and Buffalo NY (last winter).
It is a reduction in per-kwh rates coupled to the introduction of a universal flat fee. You can see in the graph in the article, for PGE and SoCal Edison it shifts the burden from users of more than 515kwh to users of less electricity and for SDGE customers the burden shifts from users of more than 313kwh to users of less. Of course there is also an income-based distortion to soften this for poor people.
This seems kinda nuts, why would we incentivize electricity consumption? I guess there is some infra cost to connect customers to the grid but how can that be worth 8--18% of the cost of the kwh?
Advertisers don't always insist on seeing evidence of genuine ROI but online advertising is more measurable than most other forms of ads and when the ROI slips a lot of ads customers notice and act accordingly.
It's the same in San Francisco, where we support returns to investors in residential real estate by banning new development since the 1960s and therefore doctor salaries don't afford a luxury lifestyle [
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/business/economy/high-end...] and therefore we have a shortage of physicians.
It is common in economics
This doesn't sound like a Big Tech problem. This is a problem of mismatch between your current role and your interests.
If your big tech company has an easy transfers policy + culture, you may be able to narrowly address the mismatch without affecting other aspects of your job such as comp. Perhaps your manager would even support you in making this move by helping you to spot your next opportunity and steering your work in that direction.
In any case, with the weak labor market in tech right now and what sounds like a rather short tenure with your current and first real job, I'd recommend you stick it out for another year+. There may be some things you can do to incorporate the design & coding work you love into your current role to keep up your motivation and skills, without having to overcome biases related to a resume gap or short stint when you interview for your next posting.
I sometimes query this to help me recall details from years ago, so I'm sad that the encroachment of very broad government surveillance and the rise to power of extremist politicians makes it unacceptably dangerous to continue to provide the service.
Cloud also can't generate Googly margins but they're willing to invest in that.
The problem is that ~all companies let themselves be controlled by such forces. Given there are so few counter examples it looks like it is a systemic issue and not a choice each board makes independently.
Google's unusual share class structure was supposed to give them a degree of independence from these forces, but it didn't last. They still tie employee comp to share prices, so they still have to care about share prices. Facebook has even stronger centralization of shareholder power, but its pay structure is very similar. Can you think of any example of a public company that is resisting these forces?
I suspect this is why the road trucking divisions have been deprioritized at companies such as Waymo. The truck-drivers are better organized than the cabbies+ridesharing drivers, so even if highway driving is technically easier it is politically less feasible. I suppose it could just be that intrastate trucking is too small of an opportunity and interstate trucking obviously requires lobbying in multiple contiguous states.