Slashdot Mirror


Google's First Employee Departs

redletterdave writes "Craig Silverstein, the first employee hired by Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, will leave the search giant for Khan Academy, an online education portal based in Mountain View, Calif. Silverstein had been with Google shortly after it first launched in the garage of Susan Wojcicki, a friend of both Page and Brin, in September 1998. He had helped Brin and Page develop infrastructure when Google was just a Stanford grad school project, but when he officially joined the company, Silverstein became its technology director. The Khan Academy, where Silverstein is heading next, is a not-for-profit organization that aspires to change the education industry by providing free 'world-class education to anyone anywhere.' Microsoft chairman Bill Gates is an enormous fan of the service, telling CNN that he uses it with his kids."

13 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. KHAN!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obligatory.

  2. Great run, Craig by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Craig is good egg who walks the walk. Not hungry for power, glory or money, he already has enough of all that. The original Google do-gooder. I sincerely hope that his shoes do not prove too big to fill.

    --
    Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
  3. If he is the Tech behind Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm guessing he has enough money to last him several lifetimes by now. Good to see people that will work for non-profit at that point.

  4. Re:Slow to Grow? by jholyhead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where do you jump to when you already work for one of the biggest companies on the planet and are richer than Midas?

    It took him 14 years to find a job he wanted more than the one he had. If only we were all so lucky.

  5. Re:Education industry by sourcerror · · Score: 5, Informative

    Khan Academy doesn't stop at K-12. There's plenty of college level material there.

  6. Re:Bill Gates has kids? by alphatel · · Score: 5, Funny

    All the cool kids used Alta Vista.

    You weren't one of them. We used Asta la Vista

    --
    When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
  7. Re:Free??? by Bucc5062 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And your alternative is what?

    Don't just complain and whine about unfair taxes, tell me what you would propose that would be better for education. Keep in mind that you have a diverse population of children ranging from very well off to homeless. I would hope you want every child to have some education, because you would believe that an educated nation is a strong nation.

    Please, provide a workable plan to educate our youth that does not include some social sharing of cost. Here at /. you'd get some great feed back and perhaps it can be presented to the President for consideration.

    --
    Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
  8. Re:Bill Gates has kids? by mcavic · · Score: 5, Funny

    I remember when Alta Vista came out with natural language searches. You could ask it What's the name of President Clinton's cat? And it would give you links for where to buy socks.

  9. Re:first by FhnuZoag · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can't wait for you to leave slashdot.

  10. Re:Bill Gates has kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People have such ridiculously selective memories about Alta Vista. Yes, it was once awesome, but it sucked because it had no search algorithm, it just matched keywords. This worked fine at first, but people (and by people I mean porn sites) pretty quickly learned that all it took to game the system was to put huge blocks of tiny text at the bottom of every page containing every keyword they could think of. Pretty soon, it didn't matter what you searched for, you got back the same 10 porn sites. So yes, Google became better than Alta Vista, because they figured out a system that was at least marginally difficult to game.

  11. Re:Free??? by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can either help pay for the lower classes to be educated, or you can deal with the consequences of having large numbers of uneducated unemployable people, and all the social problems that come with that. Which do you really think is better for you?

    I choose not to have kids either. But I understand that I'm going to be a lot better off if the youth I have to deal with in the future are in school and not on the streets. If I send them to school now, I can live off of their tax dollars later. If I don't send them to school now, I'll be paying for their incarceration into the foreseeable future.

    Investing in the society in which you live is a rational self-interested decision.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  12. Re:Free??? by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But continuing to allow people to irresponsibly breed is also not working.

    The birth rate in most developed countries is decreasing. Not because of any policy mandate, but because the people choose it. We need to figure out what they're doing and copy it.

    What they're doing is educating their people, and providing opportunities for them. Educated people have fewer children. Moderately well off people have fewer children.

    What we're doing in the US is the exact opposite. We're cutting education, we're expanding economic opportunities for the rich and not the lower classes. And when 30 years of ever increasing inequality bear fruit in social problems, conservatives will blame the very people they refused to help.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!