hunter23
The engineering headcount was ridiculous for Google+. It was also ridiculous to have OKRs for every team at Google to integrate with Google+. Facebook (or really any company) didn't start with Mark Zuckerberg hiring a 1000 engineers and start cranking. If a VC cut him a check for $500 million after his MVP Facebook would probably be a failure. Instead he built the MVP with a few engineers and increased headcount as he increased the user base and shifted vision. Google had this mistaken notion that they could just throw more engineers at the problem and skip the whole product discovery process.
While I didn't work on the Google plus team (I was on a different team), the biggest reason in my mind why Google+ failed was motivation. Not a single Google executive on the team had a strong reason for why they should build Google+ besides "we can make a better version of Facebook". There was no real use case.
Facebook, at the time, however had engineers and product managers who were intensely driven and hungry; they were in a fight for their existence against some of the biggest companies in the world. If they failed their company would fail, and they were hugely passionate about what they were doing. For Googlers, it was largely a theoretical intellectual experiment. Tons of Googlers on Emerald Sea didn't even use any of the social media tools and they didn't get "social". To them it was some thing you plug on top of an existing product to increase ad revenue.
If you don't have the drive and you don't understand your users, you aren't going to build something people want.
You want to document these discussions. In my experience, Confluence, Google Docs, and email are much easier to find things. Specifically because they have a UI which has a unit per discussion (an email thread, confluence doc, google doc) while Slack is a stream of multiple discussions happening at the same time. As such is it very hard to search and also to separate discussions. Discussions can spread across threads while they tend to stay in the same email thread or Google document.
To give an example, let's say I want to have a discussion on a technical design I created. I would probably either create a Google doc and ask for comments or send out an email. If I ever wanted to refer back to the discussion I just needed to find the unit of discussion. It's relatively easy to find an email or google doc.
In slack there really isn't an equivalent. it's possible you could create a dedicated channel per discussion (although no one does) but even trying to find that channel when you have thousands of channels is much harder. Part of the problem is that search isn't very good in slack, but the larger problem is they don't have any equivalent of a "unit" of discussion.
Oh yea and there's also the whole problem that slack only works well internally but there are lots of thoughtful discussions you need with your team and outside organizations.
Literally every Bay area government has regulations (zoning, community review, etc.) that prevent housing to be put in place. On the transit side, we have multiple transit organizations (Muni, BART, Caltrain, etc.) that do not coordinate and operate as one entity; contrast this with NYC where the transit orgs have a common leadership.
What is happening in the Bay is that we are having an infrastructure crisis because a Nimby philosophy is preventing investment in critical areas like housing, transport, etc.
I agree that private industry won't solve this problem correctly because of its self interest, but frankly the problem is that the policy makers have no interest in solving the issue. Their loyalty is to their wealthy vocal residents who have no interest in creating housing or transit. They definitely do not care if underserved and disadvantaged people are suffering.
So while I agree that private industry will not tailor their solution to the disadvantaged (due to self interest), I don't think policy makers will either (due to self interest). Proposition 13 is a perfect example of how the voting population does not care about infrastructure for the poor. Prop 13 was marketed as a relief provision for the elderly, but the bulk of the measure is essentially a tax break for largely white wealthy landowners.
This makes sense, as essentially they wanted a 10 billion+ valuation and the consumer market wasn't big enough to get to that valuation. The problem is their enterprise products don't look look much better than their competitors while their consumer product (sync a folder) was best in class...
If dropbox hadn't raised so much money they could have stuck to their core vision. Instead they will have to compete into the crowded world of mediocre SAAS products that duct tape different solutions together badly.
All because they wanted that sweet VC money so they could have a $100K chrome bear in their office and dropbox branded water in their fridges...
The employees are part of the 72 billion. All employees (current or ex) have a lock up period after the IPO where they are not allowed to sell.
You are making a mistaken assumption that only unprofitable companies need to fundraise, there are lots of profitable companies that want to raise capital to fund future growth (and their current cash flows aren’t enough).
Also I am very surprised that you named Github as a well run private company. As far I know, they were definitely not profitable (their spend was crazy) which is part of the reason the board took the acquisition offer from Microsoft. I really don’t think they are a good example of a well run private company.
You are correct that only companies that want capital IPO but that is by definition as an IPO is a capital raise. I believe that direct listing is an exception to this.
You can get a 3 bedroom with that budget.
Actually there were bills in congress that would have made it so a program wasn't needed because the government would file on your behalf (https://slate.com/business/2019/04/turbotax-bipartisan-tax-f...). In most cases the government knows enough about you to calculate your taxes for you. Turbotax lobbied the government to kill these bills because it would have destroyed their business model.
So the reason you have to use a complicated form or program to file, is entirely Turbotax's fault because they have lobbied the government from making it simpler for users.
Of course a bigger root cause is that lobbying is undermining our democracy.
One way to achieve this need to socialize is to work out of a co-working space or coffee shop.
"Google employees protesting the makeup of the AI Ethics council appeared like the closest thing to bullying in the USA that I have ever witnessed"
I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but I genuinely don't understand what the OP is trying to stay in that statement. Is he saying Google employee's protesting of the AI board is the worst example of bullying they have seen?
* dictatorial power
* totalitarian one party state
* embrace of political violence as a means to silence opposition
* strong opposition to Marxism, liberalism, conservatism
* radical nationalism
* nationalist economic policy through protectionist schemes
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#DefinitionsWhat about a group of employees collectively organizing and protesting non-violently against an internal board at a privatized company is exactly fascist?
One thing I can think of is have some production test accounts that are regularly used and have a unique password. Then have an automated task that periodically greps the production logs for the password to see if you have a log leak.
Any other approaches?
In ruby, the world isn't so great. When I was in the ruby world, I would always hit roadblocks on my side projects. There were so many times where I wanted to do something not web dev related and I couldn't find a popular and well supported ruby package. For example, I wanted to do text analysis of some sites I scraped and python's nltk was perfect (but there wasn't a perfect ruby library).
The ruby world needs to expand beyond web dev if it wants to grow.
What a non-apology.
Yet 70% of the companies didn't even give the candidate a chance to interview. It's incredibly sad that a candidate that is able to get offers at Google, Facebook, and Apple can't even get 70% of the companies to let them in the door to interview. Interviewing is clearly broken.