Slashdot Mirror
Is Google Too Smart For Its Own Good?
An anonymous reader writes in with a piece in Fortune speculating on what's next for Google. The writer believes that a supersaturated solution of very smart people, plus stock that may have run out of upside, will yield what he calls Son of Google — a large wave of innovative companies created by Google graduates. And a Google less intent on hiring, and less able to hire, the very smartest people around. Could happen.
I'm not worried, at least not until we get to the Revenge of the Son of Google, or maybe the Bride of the Son of Google. That's when the entertainment value really drops off.
Perhaps part of the google ethos and internal structure is aimed at reducing competition from former employees - the sorts of pressures that drive people to break away are diminished, with the 20% project time and a good chance of whatever you're working on becoming a proper google beta. Of course, people that just have a drive to be the boss of the boss's boss will still form companies, perhaps they are eliminated at interview?
I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
People are forgetting the secret to Google's success.
Luck.
They developed the right product at the right time. Microsoft did the same. They happened to be home when IBM called and got the DOS contract.
heir graduates can come up with quality product but will they be able to provide somethign the market really needs?
I'm not sure that online service providers are going to be naturally monolithic in the way that, say, hardware manufacturers or pre-web software companies are. I find it easy to imagine that Google's core business could be wiped out in a year by a new upstart with a better technology. Microsoft are lucky in that they have established lock-in - it will be superceded by something else over the long term rather than replaced by superior products of the same ilk. Google doesn't have any lock-in, and I think the nature of online serices is such that companies that try to establish it aren't going to be successful.
Better luck next time,
-DSA
Kind of how Failchild Semiconductor was the wellspring for many of todays semiconductor companies? This graphic (PDF warning) was the best thing I could find.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Right, lets role play here for a minute. I'm a phd coder employed at google. I have a good chunk of cash in google shares that will vest soonish. So I'm going to take that money and go and start a startup because?
Which wally thought that the primary motivation for programmers was making money?
Pretty much every study of programmers motivations i have ever read has shown them to be intrinsically motivated by the opportunity to solve puzzles, and to be able to hang out with birds of similar feather. The fact is that money isn't that much of a motivator for coders, provided there is sufficient to buy toys. The latest laptop. A 30" lcd into which to plug said laptop. A plasma telly and an xbox 360 on which to play halo.
Starting up a company is risky, there is a bucket load of work to do that isn't coding, and you have to stop talking to all the other coders who you like chatting with at work. Wtf?
Someone has NO CLUE how coders think. And this made it to the front page of slashdot how, exactly?
I agree completely. As I understand it you are even required to spend 20% of your time on your own project. One of the smartest people I know will probably go to Google soon, so I don't think they have a problem with hiring. As to spinoffs, sure maybe there will be some, which is a good thing too. However, if you get to work on your cool idea on company time, and get bonuses in relation to the succes of your project, why start up your own company. Do you want to become a manager who has to run a business, or do you want to play with your toys. Google works by making it profitable not to start your own company. Sure, you might not make 1 billion dollars with a brilliant idea, but who needs that much money? If google makes it that your brilliant idea earns you millions and does the boring admin and pays you to work on your next crackpot idea that may or may not work then why would you leave.
But really smart people can also be mediocre people as well. It is a common misconception especially among geeks who place their status on intelligence. You could be the smartest person on Earth and still a Mediocre person/employee. Things like...
1. Hubris, The ancient Geeks knew this, Jesus knew this. Almost all other major religion know this. But a lot of "Smart" People tend to ignore this. Excessive Pride is Bad MmKaaa. This closes your mind, it prevents you from listening to what the "Less Smart" People who are saying. Because you assume just because you are smarter then them that you ideas are always more correct. Which is wrong.
2. Wisdom. The concept of wisdom is a rather nebulous concept. Wisdom comes from experience, and your own personal insight. It is a case where a 5 year old could solve the problem and not you. Just because the 5 year old just recently experience a similar concept during play. a lot of "Smart" people tend to limit themselves from experiences, Book Worms, Video games... So they do not gain as much wisdom as say someone who never went past high school but has explored the word.
3. Work ethic. A lot of "Smart" People will just flat out refuse to do a job that is beneath them, past their confront zone, or just not in their area of specialty. Like a parson with a BS In Computer Science with a 4.0 GPA and a highly skilled programmer being ask to help out lay network cable from Data Center A to the the New Data Center which is 100M away. Or an Artificial Intelligence expert refusing to program a Database Query. Or Refusing to learn a new language that the company is moving to. Also there are the smart people who just stop working when it is not fun any more.
4. Hunan Skills, Human skills are important because what ever your job is at some level it will used for the benefit of humans. And you cannot advance in your career without human skills.
I am sure anyone who worked for Technical Support has realized People with PHD are the worse group of people to to Technical Support for. Because when they call you they are already embarrassed that they needed to call technical support because they think of themselves smart enough to fix the problem themselves with out the help of some 2 Year vocational school grad. Then when you do talk to them on the phone they are less then honest on following your instructions. Finally when you give them instructions they will not follow it. compared with Blue Collar Factory workers (Which I have learned are actually very smart people too) they are not afraid to call when the problem is minor and can get it fixed before it becomes major, they tell you exactly what they did, they follow your instruction on how to fix it. They also write them self a note on how to prevent it in the future.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Going anon obviously.
Two things -
1. Academic != Smart. The amount of small minds here (particularly the worst kind; small minds with large egos) is unreal. Just because you have a PhD does not make you smart.
2. Most Google employees are total sheep. They are the type of people who want to join a cult. This goes against everything business owners stand for.
3. Setting up a business has nothing to do with being smart or academic. Only certain kinds of people (generally, the kind of people who like selling, i.e. not nerds) enjoy and succeed at setting up businesses.
People totally overrate Google employees. It's funny/sad.