Google's Marissa Mayer Becomes Yahoo! CEO

D H NG writes "Marissa Mayer, Google's employee #20 and Vice President of Local, has been appointed CEO of Yahoo. She was Google's public face for years, famously being responsible for the look and feel of Google's most popular products: the famously unadorned white search homepage, Gmail, Google News and Google Images. Mayer resigned from Google Monday afternoon and will begin her new job on Tuesday."

Comments

Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, seems like Google is really starting to drive away its loyal employees like rats from a ship. I guess that's what happens when you start doing evil and putting your advertisers above what should be your actual customers not the product you sell.

Re:Ship is sinking

[TWX]

I guess that's what happens when you start doing evil and putting your advertisers above what should be your actual customers not the product you sell.

Huh?

I'm confused. I guess that I didn't understand right, I thought that we users were the product, and the customers were the advertising agencies and companies that pay Google to deliver our views/time to them...

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you understood it right. We should be viewed as the customers not a product. Until Google realizes that, they can go suck eggs and hopefully they'll get slapped with more fines due to abusing people's privacy.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, the definition of your 'customer' is someone who gives you money. Did you remember to pay the Google bill this month? Didn't think so.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

No. You see, just like us people eat beef for a living, corporations eat our attention. It's just the way the food chain works.

Re:Ship is sinking

[LurkerXXX]

Are you paying google? If not, it's not surprising, and perfectly natural, that you should be the product.

Never assume they are doing anything for your benifit. They aren't. 'Do no evil' stopped forever when they started having shareholders to answer to.

Re:Ship is sinking

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

We should be viewed as the customers not a product.

Not if they wish to make money.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Sarten-X]

No, no, no... it's gotta be all about me! Every company exists to serve me, and me alone! If those big companies aren't pleasing me, they're wrong and evil!

</sarcasm>

Re:Ship is sinking

[Billly Gates]

If there is no product left you are screwed. Yahoo is not Google either and is less aggressive in marketing and advertising.

What I really see is from the security scandal and many many other problems including spammers taking over, and feature rott, are all a sign of a lack of vision and people just giving a damn about their products. Their products reak, porn spammers even go into the children's chat rooms for crying out loud and spam every 1 minute! I am not talking about a one time thing, but they have been doing that for over 10 years! I quit using Yahoo right around then with chat.

Their IM program is malware ladden and slows down older computers and has people randomly friending and spamming you, again no one gives a shit at Yahoo and I use Digsby for my Yahoo client now.

They could have taken on Google in 2002 with an improved search engine. They could have taken on Skype with improved video as they did have some of it workign and calling in YahooIM 5 years ago at least. They could have got rid of all the porn spammers and made Yahoo chat a must have thing rather than letting AOL and then MSN steal this market.

In comparison Google and even Microsoft quickly fix things and are always at least trying to compete and outdo companies like Skype. No one cares and it is just a boring day job with no passion left. This new CEO needs to excite her employees and fire QA and security people and provide a vision for improvments.

Do this and we the product shall return.

Re:Ship is sinking

[s73v3r]

How much do you pay for Gmail? For Google Search?

I'm guessing the advertisers give Google a lot more money than you do.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

I pay the stupid Google bill every time I use their products and I'm getting tired of it. Now I want to stop. So, how do I do that? How can I make sure no information about me ends up on a Google server?

Re:Ship is sinking

[garett_spencley]

Without users Google has no "product" to sell.

There is a distinction that can be drawn between "customer" and "consumer." The average Joe might not be Google's primary "customer" but he is their primary "consumer" ... and without consumers Google is out of business.

It's a total logical fallacy to assume that Google doesn't need to treat their consumers right, and only needs to pander to the people who buy their advertising services. Their advertising services are worth nothing without the consumers, and that makes "us" important (no, essential) to Google's bottom line.

Re:Ship is sinking

[miltonw]

If. You. Don't. Like. Google. Then. Don't. Use. It.

Oh, and stop whining all the time, 'K pumpkin?

Re:Ship is sinking

[ackthpt]

Yep, seems like Google is really starting to drive away its loyal employees like rats from a ship. I guess that's what happens when you start doing evil and putting your advertisers above what should be your actual customers not the product you sell.

I thought that was Yahoo's specialty. I stopped using Yahoo years ago due to the glut of advertising in everything to the point I felt Yahoo was becoming unusable.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Dahamma]

Their IM program is malware ladden and slows down older computers and has people randomly friending and spamming you, again no one gives a shit at Yahoo and I use Digsby for my Yahoo client now.

It's sad, Yahoo Messenger used to be their best product (and their mail was pretty solid, too). I understand they are free, and would be fine with a few ads. But as you said both of them are now completely stuffed with (totally irrelevant at best, borderline sleazy/offensive/phishing/scam at worst) ads. And UI-wise their mail client is now approaching unusable.

I *wanted* to stick with Yahoo, but it was like they were actively trying to drive me away. I'm almost surprised they have not yet figured out which genres of music I hate most and automatically play them in the background when I log in...

Re:Ship is sinking

[Billly Gates]

The ads are not the worst more than randomly people Iming you with hey look at my titties at www.horneyforflies.com. They try to friend you once an hour from compromised accounts.

Seriously this is negligent as kids use IM programs. No one cares and you can now forget about me using it at work. I would be fired fast. They have no one doing any checking other than yep we have an IM client, lets go work on Yahoo360 instead and let it rot. Very similar to SCO, Bordland, and a whole bunch of other companies.

Google would stop you so damn fast if you tried a scam with Google's voice and found a weakness. The Andriod Yahoo mail vulnerability is another one. Yahoo just shrugs their shoulders.

Is this a company I want to do business with? Hell no. I do banking on my computer

Re:Ship is sinking

[Man On Pink Corner]

And without farmers the local grocery store has no "product" to sell. That makes us what, lettuce?

Re:Ship is sinking

[bzipitidoo]

Companies exist to serve the public. The profit motive is only a guide.

Just because the social contract isn't written down does not mean it doesn't exist. Many people appear to have forgotten this. Not only are many big companies not serving the public well, they are marginalizing and robbing their own shareholders through huge executive compensation packages, and poor planning that spends their good reputations, their accumulated resources, and their very futures to boost immediate profits and executive bonuses. What kind of idiotic thinking leads to decisions to waste money on huge disinformation campaigns, as Big Oil did when trying to deny Climate Change, and Big Tobacco did when trying to claim nicotine was not addictive? There isn't a single big bank or telecoms company that has a good reputation. The biggest of the entertainment industry have thoroughly dirtied themselves by waging a highhanded, mean spirited, sanctimonious, bullying terror campaign against the entire world, calling us all evil thieving pirates. Many of these executives are parasites, psychopaths, and megalomaniacs, not leaders.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Capt. Skinny]

Yahoo is the real sinking ship. She'll be out of a job when they go belly up in 5 years.

Re:Ship is sinking

[icebraining]

I frankly don't get why do people claim that Google is now turning evil.

Googe was founded in '98. In 2003, just five years after, and almost a decade from now, they created AdSense and started tracking people using cookies. And now they're suddenly evil? It makes no sense.

On the other hand, they're still doing good stuff - paying Mozilla, offering FOSS tools (and keeping private forks closed, but again, they always did), campaigning against SOPA, etc.

I'm not claiming they are or not evil - I frankly find that irrelevant. But they haven't really changed, so I don't see how can people claim they turned evil. Either they aren't or they've been for many years now.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

How about not using their product you dolt.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we are cabbage

Re:Ship is sinking

[symbolset]

Oh yeah. That's why Google completely pulled out of China over censorship and spying on their users, sending political activists and just normal people talking about forbidden subjects to work camps. Bing and Yahoo were quick to fill evil gap for them.

Re:Ship is sinking

[symbolset]

This woman is brilliant. Maybe she'll find a way. Certainly she won't have any trouble getting the press to show up for her events. Pretty CEO = Lots of clicks, therefore ad views, therefore lots of coverage. So whatever they do she won't have a hard time letting people know about it. She should exploit that as much as possible. Slashdot may as well add an icon of her mug right now.

She should also go over the top with the Community partnership, green energy, great Place to work, human interest type articles. Maybe fly a few columnists out at a time, all the time to bring Yahoo home to the local communities they serve all over the world - have an office dedicated to that. Build the community love.

Sales and process types wind up at the top of corporations after a while, and Yahoo's got more than a few of those. It probably won't take her long to find out which ones are stuffed shirts with empty hats. That part is easy. Finding the right people to sit in those chairs is hard.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget about SMTP (old fashioned email) spam delivered in copious quantities from Yahoo's free email servers and paid hosting services using any combination of apparently compromised and purpose-registered accounts -- not just from Android. It's so bad that something very close to 100% of SMTP traffic I see from Yahoo is spam, in contrast to a very small percentage from Google, or even AOL and Hotmail. Hell, if AOL is doing better than you are at anything, you've really passed out with your face in the gutter.

Meanwhile Yahoo, rather than actually fixing the problem, has stopped accepting SMTP abuse reports. Cute solution: "What spam problem!? We haven't seen any reports of any spam! Also, LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!! LALALALALA!!"

Re:Ship is sinking

[symbolset]

Google is competing against Apple and Microsoft. These three all have a lot of fans - as in "fanatics". A fanatic is having a reality break. They will go willfully blind to overlook any flaw in the object of their fantasy, and amplify the slightest perceived flaw to high crimes and misdemeanors for no other reason than they want to promote the thing they like and prevent the other thing. Some of these fans work for these companies and are just putting their honest opinions. And then there's the profit motive, and Waggener-Edstrom. All thee have fiends as well who would come in here and bash them for subsidizing elder care or building a solar power plant or some other inescapably wonderful thing.

In life there are no perfect choices. You can't swing around a $100B company and not crush some daisies. People don't post comments to just say "meh" so comment sections naturally pit the fans against the fiends and generate ad clicks off the conflict in a diabolical scheme to get us, the commenters to generate the content that draws the viewers that see the ads that pay the rent for the employees. All three of these companies have fanatics and fiends, good points and bad.

Except Microsoft of course. We know about them. ;-)

Re:Ship is sinking

[garett_spencley]

Let me give your analogy everything and say unequivocally "YES we're 'lettuce'" ... it does not invalidate my point.

Can the grocery store benefit by selling rotten lettuce ? Can it benefit by stocking less of it despite their "customers" demanding more ? And can it benefit from an attitude of "fuck the farmers who make the lettuce, we're going to spit on them and kick them to the ground because we 'only care about our customers!'" ?

Honestly who cares if we're the product ? Why is that a bad thing ? When we sell our services to an employer we're "the product" (to the same extent that we're "the product" to advertisers. Obviously we're not talking about trading or selling us as human beings in a literal sense). The point is, we choose to use Google for a reason. If they remove that reason or start slacking then we'll be itching for an alternative and a new market opportunity opens up to compete with them. For what it's worth I've already heard of some people who have stopped using Google search, going directly to Wikipedia instead. It might not be a great example but it is an example of choosing "not Google." In fine dining the Filet Mingon might be the product but you better bet your sweet ass the Chef holds that cut of beef on an insanely high pedestal and treats it with ridiculous amounts of respect because doing so is crucial to the restaurant's bottom line.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Sarten-X]

Companies exist to serve the public. The profit motive is only a guide.

By what law or logic is this? Last I knew, a "company" was simply a group of people who have pooled their resources to accomplish a common goal. That goal could be "cure cancer", "promote world peace", or simply (and commonly) "make money", but there's no mandate I've ever encountered that they must serve the public.

In fact, I can think of many companies that explicitly do not serve the public, or do so only indirectly. Holding companies, for example, exist to just own other companies. Defense companies will often only serve governments, which may or may not serve the public interest. Foreign financial companies are often merely vehicles for relocating money for tax purposes.

Re:Ship is sinking

[couchslug]

"Companies exist to serve the public. The profit motive is only a guide. "

Companies exist to make profit. Public service is a cost center.

Re:Ship is sinking

[dopeghost]

No one cares and it is just a boring day job with no passion left. This new CEO needs to excite her employees and fire QA and security people and provide a vision for improvments.

I remember a similar company, popular for a while a few years back, that given their name, you would of thought were born to execute on such a strategy.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

If. You. Don't. Like. People's. Posts. Then. Don't. Read. Them.

Oh, and stop whining all the time, 'K?

Re:Ship is sinking

[Man On Pink Corner]

Just because the social contract isn't written down does not mean it doesn't exist.

I have a contract that says you will mail me US $325.00 on the first and third Fridays of each month, except during leap years, and years following each football season when the Dallas Cowboys make it to the playoffs. During said years the amount due is $675.50, which must be delivered via FedEx Priority Overnight in bills of $50 or lower denomination.

Like your "social contract," this one isn't written down, either, but...

Re:Ship is sinking

[phantomfive]

You may very well be the person the GP was attempting to parody. "Companies exist to serve me. And you too, of course. But if they don't do what I think is good, they are bad."

Re:Ship is sinking

[TWX]

There are browser extensions that disable communication with Google's servers. That's what I use. I also have similar extensions to block Facebook.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Tough Love]

Companies exist to serve the public. The profit motive is only a guide.

A nice utopia you live in indeed. In the real world I live in, companies exist to serve the interests of shareholders. If they happen to have a moral spine then great, but it is no requirement.

Re:Ship is sinking

[TWX]

I don't understand- if they're smart then they will treat us like product- high quality, specialized product that is well chosen for its particular customer.

I don't find *most* of Google's ads on their own services to be that annoying. They come in the form of text, mostly, and are significantly more relevant to me than ads from other services. I don't like ads, but if I'm going to "pay" for the free services by putting up with ads, I'd rather they be appropriate than for crap that really annoys me.

Re:Ship is sinking

[bcrowell]

What I really see is from the security scandal and many many other problems including spammers taking over, and feature rott, are all a sign of a lack of vision and people just giving a damn about their products. Their products reak, porn spammers even go into the children's chat rooms for crying out loud and spam every 1 minute!

Here's another pathetic example. Yahoo was the inventor of the DKIM system for cryptographically signing email in 2004. It's a valuable tool for fighting spam. When you get spam from a yahoo or gmail address, you can tell whether or not the return address is forged. If it's not forged, you can complain using a web interface. But within the last year or so, yahoo eliminated that interface, so they're no longer getting the full benefit of the DKIM system that they themselves invented. Here is the URL where the form used to be; it now redirects to a useless help page.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

I started hating them when I didn't log into my email after 6 months. I lost a lot, my old poetry, writing, pictures. I have a deep resentment for them right now, but I hope she can change that.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Tough Love]

I believe the terminology everybody is looking for is "audience". Less formally, eyeballs. And a web portal is only worth as much as its eyeballs.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Tough Love]

Yahoo is the real sinking ship. She'll be out of a job when they go belly up in 5 years.

That will be in another three CEOs from now.

Re:Ship is sinking

[qu33ksilver]

Its a long time Yahoo brought about some great product. Its high time they move on from a purely website to creating some products. Probably this might bring about this change.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that Cole's Law?

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

...it's not surprising, and perfectly natural, that you should be the product.

Yes. No luck with a car analogy, but a pimp analogy might work?
But only the motel (site) operators get given a cut of the loot.

Re:Ship is sinking

[mysidia]

Without users Google has no "product" to sell.

The users are vendors, who deliver the eyes Google is selling, there are PLENTY of them, and they demand very little overall.

Re:Ship is sinking

[bzipitidoo]

Same logic by which governments exist. There have been many governments that have failed horribly at this, and seriously deluded themselves, thinking their purpose is to treat their inner circle to the good life on the backs of the 99%. Today, it is Syria. In the Middle Ages, it was the monarchies that became increasingly out of touch. Thought they were too good for the common people. Wise monarchs understood that majesty was just propaganda, their power was not absolute, they weren't really godlike beings and that peasants existed for more than serving the royal will, were more than cannon (or arrow) fodder, more than a nuisance that required frequent warring to check their numbers. When a monarch ascended who actually believed the propaganda, the result was usually disaster. Between the American Revolution, which showed the world we didn't have to live with bad monarchs, and WWI in which the last of the major ruling European monarchies self destructed and took their states with them, the entire system collapsed.

Today, we're much too apologetic over the antisocial behavior of our governments/corporations. "With great power comes great responsibility." Do you recall Tony Hayward's stunningly selfish, arrogant, and clumsy statement after the BP blowout in the Gulf of Mexico? "I'd like my life back." BP's acts affected the lives of millions. When the stakes are that high, they cannot behave as if their actions have no consequences. Through reckless disregard of safety and sanity, they ruined the fishing and tourism industries of the Gulf for years. It doesn't get much more irresponsible than that. Sadly, Hayward was not an exception. Lot of people have bought into the idea that corporations' first duties are to profits and shareholders, and the public interest be damned. They really believe that corporations are only doing what they are supposed to do. That attitude is fine when corporations are numerous, small, and not too powerful, and healthy competition and law enforcement keeps their worst impulses in check. But there are too many cozy oligopolies these days. Too much concentration of power. Lately, even shareholders don't count for much. We excuse rent seeking, tax evasion, externalizing of costs, media manipulation and coercion, regulatory capture, bribery, and even lawbreaking. We despair of enforcing laws, most recently against the wave of fraud that has engulfed Wall Street. It's amazing how many people still gas up at BP stations, still bank at the likes of Bank of America even after the mess they made with subprime mortgages, and if that doesn't make an impression, jerking them around personally with poor service, ridiculous fees, and gotchas in the fine print.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

They come in the form of text, mostly

No, really. Come on Slashdot, this is 2012. Google is the NUMBER ONE provider of graphical ads. You can even order your flashy video ad right now. OIr perhaps just a boring 336x280 full-colour banner?

This geek fantasy that Google is some sort of benevolent entity that doesn't want to disturb your browsing experience is naive.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you recall Tony Hayward's stunningly selfish, arrogant, and clumsy statement after the BP blowout in the Gulf of Mexico?

No, I don't recall a BP blow-out. I do recall a blow-out on a Transocean-owned rig resulting from the negligence of Transocean and Haliburton. Perhaps you were thinking of that incident?

Re:Ship is sinking

[Lazy Jones]

On the other hand, they're still doing good stuff - paying Mozilla[...]

... to make Firefox and Thunderbird slow, bloated, unusable? It certainly looks that way since around FF 3.6.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Kokuyo]

"And can it benefit from an attitude of "fuck the farmers who make the lettuce, we're going to spit on them and kick them to the ground because we 'only care about our customers!'" ?"

Erm, I don't know how it is where you live, but around here, that's pretty much how it works.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Mr. Underbridge]

I pay them in eyeballs.

Re:Ship is sinking

[hackula]

Sir, let me google that for you... http://lmgtfy.com/?q=dogpile.com

Re:Ship is sinking

[Hatta]

Companies exist to serve the public. The profit motive is only a guide.

By what law or logic is this?

Because the people are sovereign. Companies can only exist because the public wills it. If companies are to justly exist, they can only exist to serve the public. If a company exists that does not serve the public interest, either the people will remove it, or the people have been oppressed to the point where they can't.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Sarten-X]

So freedom to associate is subject to the whims of someone calling themselves the public? Or are we to hold daily votes to close down any company that a majority of people don't like? If we can effectively execute a company, should the same justice be applied to people that the majority of the public just doesn't like?

Re:Ship is sinking

[Hatta]

So freedom to associate is subject to the whims of someone calling themselves the public?

You can associate however you want. That doesn't mean the government has to let you incorporate.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Sarten-X]

Prohibiting incorporation doesn't have any bearing on how ethically a company behaves. Incorporation is mostly legally useful for limiting liability, so that if one person in a company screws up the whole venture, the others aren't personally liable for the company's failure.

As long as the company is still able to pay its bills, an unincorporated company is just an association of people, free to be as evil as they want.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Hatta]

an unincorporated company is just an association of people

Right, not really a company at all.

free to be as evil as they want.

Within the law, which again (ostensibly)exists to serve the public.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Sarten-X]

Not really a company except in the ways that it is:

In the United States, a company may be a "corporation, partnership, association, joint-stock company, trust, fund, or organized group of persons, whether incorporated or not, and (in an official capacity) any receiver, trustee in bankruptcy, or similar official, or liquidating agent, for any of the foregoing." In the US, a company is not necessarily a corporation.

Of course, companies (and corporations) can be as evil as they want within the law, which is no different that today's model, where the law defines standards of behavior that regularly lag behind modern opinions, and are more influenced by media and panic than actual concern for the public good.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Hatta]

Fair enough. In so far as companies exist in isolation, without any official recognition or facilitation by the public, they simply exist. Any official recognition or facilitiation however is rightly done only by the public to serve the public good.

If you want to be evil in private, go ahead. Don't ask me to limit your liability. Don't ask me to offer you tax breaks. Don't ask me for any special treatment at all. That is reserved for the groups that are operating in the public interest.

Or rather, it would be in a just society where the people had a say.

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

Social contracts don't exist. Stop perpetuating this nonsense.

Re:Ship is sinking

[icebraining]

Bloated? Hardly. Its memory usage has been dropping consistently on stable versions: https://areweslimyet.com/

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm more interested in the Rule 34 on Ms. Mayer!

Let the fapping commence!

Re:Ship is sinking

[Sarten-X]

...And what committee or group will hold this vast power of deciding whether a company is serving the public or not? The easily-corrupted government? The easily-swayed uneducated public?The elite educated few?

Re:Ship is sinking

[Anonymous Coward]

There are websites out there that search Google for you and report the results back to you, all while never telling Google who is asking for the search. These websites also don't keep logs or even IP addresses.

So all Google sees is that those websites are doing searches. Google never knows it's really you behind these websites. And these websites quickly forget about you completely.

Best alternative to Google so far. It's using Google without the privacy issues.

Now personally I'd prefer to work with Google and find a mutually-satisfying deal. Unfortunately, as long as I'm not sure what info they gather about me, where they get it from, how long they keep it and who they give it too, I refuse to play nice.

We're seeing artists today who 'fight' piracy by connecting with fans and being open. They explain how much they earn, how much their work really costs to produce, what they do with the money they're being given... And it works: once people are satisfied that they money they give to the artist is put to good use and they're not being asked to purchase an outrageously-priced album so the artist can buy a porsche, people are willing to pay. The exact details of this business model vary from artist to artist and will still change with time, but the essence of this will be part of the media and art industry's future business model: artists will have to communicate a lot more with their fans in order to make money.

I think the future of "you're not the customer, you're the product" services is similar: companies like Google, in a few years will have to let their users control what private and personal information they are willing to let them have. It will take at least a few years, but people are getting increasingly aware of the importance of protecting their privacy and these companies will have no choice: give control to your users and trust their choices or simply see them all go to competitors who promise 100% privacy. Google is already missing out on a lot of information from people who refuse to use their services out of privacy concerns. We, the privacy-concerned paranoids, are a giant question mark to advertisers who don't know what products and services we might like. Advertisers would be learn more about us, but the only way this will happen is when Google and others earn our trust. To do this, they must be honest and give us control when it comes to our personal information that they collect about us.

The day I know what info is collected, where it's collected from, where it's stored, who has access to it, who it's shared with - and I can also control these parameters (e.g. I can block collecting my info at any time or from any website, I can have my collected info deleted or I can veto the sharing of my info with specific third parties), well that day is the day I'll use Google again instead of using a third-party website as an intermediary to hide my identity.
They will just have to adapt in this manner.

Her profile picture...

[TWX]

Ya HOOO....

Re:Her profile picture...

[Nadaka]

Yes.

She is a hottie.

Who is very financially successful.

And an engineer who writes code.

Tell me she plays video games and likes to cook too.

Re:Her profile picture...

[dubbreak]

Yes.

She is a hottie.

Who is very financially successful.

And an engineer who writes code.

Tell me she plays video games and likes to cook too.

Yep she loves video games and is definitely a foodie who can cook.

Only downside is that she has a sarlacc where here vulva should be.

Re:Her profile picture...

[TWX]

Only downside is that she has a sarlacc where here vulva should be.

An Original Sarlacc, or a Special Edition Sarlacc?

Re:Her profile picture...

[Anonymous Coward]

With her millions of dollars?

She looks damn hot now.

Re:Her profile picture...

[Nadaka]

In that case, I'll get my Boba Fett costume and make it a party.

Re:Her profile picture...

[Anonymous Coward]

She isn't hot, she's homely and bland.

Re:Her profile picture...

[dubbreak]

Oh man. Lost geek cred on my part as I had to look that up (or maybe plus geek cred since I've never seen the Special Edition?).

Without looking it up I would have said original and I still do. Beak and tentacles?! Seriously, that's overdoing it.

Re:Her profile picture...

[ColdWetDog]

Ya HOOO....

Yeah, looks like she was pretty hot like 10, 15 years ago.

Just like Yahoo.

Re:Her profile picture...

[TWX]

(or maybe plus geek cred since I've never seen the Special Edition?)

Eh, I was young, they came out when I was in high school. It was the first time my generation got to see Star Wars on the silver screen, and they touted it as fixing things to the way they would have done them had they had those resources in the beginning, as well as cleaning up some of the obvious bad edits.

All of the crap though, like the animals that prey on each other, the added singer thing, the miniature Jabba being walked on by Solo, that sort of thing, I didn't see a reason for.

Re:Her profile picture...

[Anonymous Coward]

She's no barbarella!

Re:Her profile picture...

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like she's pretty hot right now (at least as seen from my 43 years of age).

Re:Her profile picture...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, it's not that Tech isn't welcoming to women, they just _choose_ not to pursue careers in tech! Heck I'd be welcoming them personally, at home, all night long (the hot ones, that can cook, don't really care about the others...).

hur hur hur.

Jesus H. Christ. Grow the fuck up, or you'll never get any pussy. Yahoo hires top talent from google and this is the first comment? Really?

Re:Her profile picture...

[mattack2]

Can't believe I'm defending the special edition, but the "miniature Jabba being walked on by Solo" was originally intended.. of course the used some of the original footage + new special effects.

(Now, the Trek like 'ring' when the planet explodes, plus a ton of other changes, are annoying..)

So, she used up all her creativy

[Anonymous Coward]

Now yahoo hires her?
Whats the odds on another failure, and a $40 million parachute in 1 year?

Re:So, she used up all her creativy

[symbolset]

She was employee #20 at Google. Her estimated wealth is $300 million. I don't think she needs a parachute. She wants a shot at top dog, and that was the one thing Google couldn't give her.

Re:So, she used up all her creativy

[geekoid]

And quite frankly, I doubt she will fix yahoo!

yahoo might actually have a chance now

[Anonymous Coward]

a slim one, but better than what theyve had. classic case study in how not to run a business

Re:yahoo might actually have a chance now

[masternerdguy]

Yahoo! simply has nowhere to go. They've been out innovated in everything and their original purpose, human indexed websites, is no longer relevant to the world. Anything Yahoo! does, Google or Microsoft can do better.

Re:yahoo might actually have a chance now

[ackthpt]

Yahoo! simply has nowhere to go. They've been out innovated in everything and their original purpose, human indexed websites, is no longer relevant to the world. Anything Yahoo! does, Google or Microsoft can do better.

The question is .. do they still have enough money and desire to innovate? They could yet dig themselves out of the hole, but it requires getting the company to be a great place to work, attracting brilliant, energetic minds to create. If all Yahoo are is a company of cowering cubicle moles, trying not to be noticed and whacked, there's not much she or anyone can do.

Re:yahoo might actually have a chance now

[TrippTDF]

Beyond money and desire- do they have the talent? Startups actually put ads on public transportation and billboards out here trying to recruit developers. In a market where the chances of making it rich at a startup are actually fairly high, it's hard for Yahoo to capture or retain talent in the face of Google, Facebook, or one of the thousands of startups.

Re:yahoo might actually have a chance now

[Amiga Trombone]

If all Yahoo are is a company of cowering cubicle moles, trying not to be noticed and whacked, there's not much she or anyone can do.

I don't know about that. It seems to be working pretty well for IBM.

Re:yahoo might actually have a chance now

[Anonymous Coward]

how is human indexed websites any different than the current trend in social networking? I'd argue Yahoo has more appropriate properties than anybody else, they just need to bring them to the front. They could get in a good spot replacing Google as a "neutral" party web service. Google's push into Android has alienated Apple and Microsoft where Yahoo can easily make deals as no threat.

They could get back to basics maybe pick up things like Dropbox and OpenFeign that are kind of orphaned and build a nice third party site that connects iDevices, Android, and Windows equally. They have all the pieces right now, they just need somebody with motivation to put them together.

This is the girl who's main focus at Google was tying the branding together... she is the one (I think?) who shepherded Google's famous "plain" pages for a long time.

Re:yahoo might actually have a chance now

[stewbacca]

Nah. Yahoo Fantasy Football is one of the best out there, and it's free. Oh wait, this is slashdot? I mean, Yahoo has a good WoW AH tracker...

Re:yahoo might actually have a chance now

[foamrat]

I know this was a joke, but personally I can't stand Yahoo FF. ESPN's is far superior IMHO.

Re:yahoo might actually have a chance now

[stewbacca]

Nope, not joking. I vaguely remember using ESPN one season but it didn't have something crucial to us (like a flex player, or roster size limit, or waiver wire rules, or something) that we all universally hated (probably fixed by now, and I don't even remember what it was).

I'll probably give both a try this year and see.

Seems like a funny choice

[joeflies]

She spent her time working at a company that has a good product and a pretty solid streak of good years.

Yahoo is stuck with lots of products that nobody wants anymore and flailing to find what to cut and what to keep. Those kinds of decisions are much more difficult that riding a rocket like Google's last decade. CEOs who turn around failing companies are not pragmatic technologists or engineers, but either cutthroats or visionaries with a killer instinct.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

I've. Heard from people who have served under her that she is a talentless bitch, and was kept as the "token woman".

If all that is true, she's the perfect Yahoo! CEO.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[mrmeval]

She's a rat jumping a ship caught in a maelstrom of it's own inebriation for one that's just caught in a whirlpool. If she makes careful yet bloody use of the ax of benevolent love and righteousness she will do ok.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, that's some awful writing. Truly cringeworthy metaphors and you can't tell its from it's. Your post was like getting an icepick in my eye.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Ryanrule]

Like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought rats jumped off the sinking ships, not on them...

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[moderatorrater]

As trustworthy as ACs usually are, I doubt that a "token woman" would make it to VP level.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

There are legions of them. Many are reaching the C-level offices now

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

I heard that both Larry and Sergey tapped her.

Keep in mind, at the moment of climax, people occasionally scream "yahoo!". Nobody ever screams "google!" (Although one girl did ask me if I needed to "google [her] clit").

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know. Sarah Palin comes to mind.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[symbolset]

Ballmer, don't you have a meeting with Elop or something to attend to?

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

May I direct you towards the Bulwer Lytton Contest. http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/ Such talent should be encouraged.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[MightyMartian]

And how would you know that all the way down in the mail room?

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Flere Imsaho]

I heard this in Zapp Brannigan's voice, without knowing it was one of his quotes. Goes to show what a classic character Brannigan is :-)

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

You must mean "card's"

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Grishnakh]

I don't know if she was a "token woman" or just a good bullshitter (as most people high in organizations seem to be), but when I worked at Freescale we had a female VP who did not impress me at all as being competent. Then again, the entire executive team at the time was pretty incompetent, so she fit in well there.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[DerekLyons]

Yahoo is stuck with lots of products that nobody wants anymore

That would explain why so many people continue to use their services.

Seriously, this idea that Yahoo has no customers is based on nothing. They have one of the biggest photo sharing sites in the world, one of the biggest hosts for discussion groups and mailing lists, one of the largest bases of email users, etc... etc...

Just because they aren't a darling of the tech set doesn't mean they're a tumbleweed filled wasteland.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

As trustworthy as ACs usually are, I doubt that a "token woman" would make it to VP level.

Right, the only way she could possibly manage to pull that one off would be to fuck Larry. Oh wait...

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

May I direct you towards the Bulwer Lytton Contest. http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/ Such talent should be encouraged.

Wow !

Thanks for the link !!

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[wienerschnizzel]

either cutthroats or visionaries with a killer instinct.

Yahoo already went trough an asshole cutthroat Bartz and a cutthroat technocrat Thompson and they still did not get very far. Mayer better be a visionary I guess.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you're wrong. As US company Y! is concerned with usability and simplicity of their services. They compete with any other service available Internet wide. The problems I see and foresee are mostly related to the content: poor language base and "too targeted" content. Loosing content's content will make Y! more attractive. In fact Google is single simple page. Though this simplicity is religion for some people, to other people (including me) any content could rise interest. E.g. I'm not interested in two very popular US sports like rugby and cricket (sorry FOOTball and baseball)... E.g. I do not want to see weather in degrees Fahrenheit, what in fact I see even with proper setup. This two examples are provided to demonstrate that EVEN I've properly set-up content to Europe oriented I still got news from US which are irrelevant and irritating.

Y! is too US concerned. I do not say this is bad. But Google is not too US concerned. It does provide search page and results in native languages. This should be simple. Y! language base is still limited to the world languages. Does this mean they do not respect diversity? As this is US company I bet both might be true. Most US people I know respect diversity (too much in my opinion), but big people are too money-centric to care about non-money things.

Y! has a very good code base.Their services are well implemented and I took many of their code as example and reference... So the technically they are okay. They got what they need - someone that has worked in company with to-the-world-open mind.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[fatphil]

And when I worked for Freescale, whilst our executives were clearly without direction, the more infamous executive fucking things up in the news was Hewlett Packard's Carly Fiorina. (I knew many people who worked for HP in those days, and there were reports of dancing in the street when she was given her golden dropkick.) In contrast, I don't even remember the names of any of those responsible for messing things up at FSL.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[assertation]

Is she a pragmatic engineering type?

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

Her boss must be an ass.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[Anonymous Coward]

Hope she can get hackers off the system. email is hacked, Groups are hacked...
too much html options?

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[AbominousSalad]

AFAIK it's based on this:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=SCOR+Interactive#symbol=scor;range=my;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;

That torrent of PR nightmares a few years ago, combined with Google's success, led to financial nose dive after nose dive. I was one of the people predicting Yahoo!'s utter destruction, and I was far from the only one. It's honestly kind of natural for people in the know, to have trouble believing that anyone DOES use Yahoo for anything, anymore.

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[AbominousSalad]

...or maybe actually this. http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=YHOO+Interactive#symbol=yhoo;range=my;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined; /facepalm

Re:Seems like a funny choice

[DerekLyons]

AFAIK it's based on this:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=SCOR+Interactive#symbol=scor;range=my;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;

Why would you base it on that? Yahoo!'s stock symbol is YHOO.
 

That torrent of PR nightmares a few years ago, combined with Google's success, led to financial nose dive after nose dive.

Yet, looking at their annual financials (which you don't seem that have done) shows a healthy profit and margin.
 

I was one of the people predicting Yahoo!'s utter destruction, and I was far from the only one. It's honestly kind of natural for people in the know, to have trouble believing that anyone DOES use Yahoo for anything, anymore.

Or, in short, you don't actually know anything and can't actually be bothered to look up anything - you just parrot what you've heard elsewhere.

significant technical background: will it help?

[Anonymous Coward]

From wikipedia:

Mayer received her B.S. in symbolic systems, graduating with honors, and M.S. in Computer Science from Stanford University. For both degrees, she specialized in artificial intelligence. In 2009, the Illinois Institute of Technology granted Mayer an honoris causa doctorate degree honoring her pathfinding work in the field of search.

I wonder if having someone with a technical clue (as opposed to a mindless MBA) will actually help yahoo, if they're beyond help at this point.

Re:significant technical background: will it help?

[Anonymous Coward]

yahoo, if they're beyond help at this point.

I meant to write, "OR if they're beyond help..."

Re:significant technical background: will it help?

[stewbacca]

Ahh, the tired "mindless MBA" meme on slashdot. My day is complete.

Re:significant technical background: will it help?

[gestalt_n_pepper]

Having encountered the species MBAes hedupasses on numerous occasions, I think that she has a far better shot than some goofball like Carly Fiona.

Non-compete?

[Trapick]

I'm curious if she had a non-compete clause in her contract, and how it will all work out if she does. Any Google employees who know the details on their typical contracts?

Re:Non-compete?

[mpoulton]

I'm curious if she had a non-compete clause in her contract, and how it will all work out if she does. Any Google employees who know the details on their typical contracts?

No matter what's in a typical Google contract, hers is certainly different. She was a top-level executive for some time, then one rung down the ladder. She has hundreds of millions of dollars. There's no way she agreed to disadvantageous terms.

Re:Non-compete?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since both companies are based in California, and California forbids non-compete clauses, no such clause is applicable.

Now she could be sued for use of trade secrets, that is, if she ever does, but just going to work for Yahoo is not illegal for her.

Re:Non-compete?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does Yahoo compete?

Re:Non-compete?

[Anonymous Coward]

Non-compete contracts are basically un-enforcable in California. They're really only of help to deep-pocket organizations who want to harrass under-funded startups and small businesses who couldn't afford a fight. I doubt Google will fight Yahoo on this one.

Re:Non-compete?

[s73v3r]

Such clauses are not worth the paper they're written on in California. Which is a good thing, as no company should be able to have any say whatsoever on what you do after you've left their employ.

Re:Non-compete?

[micheas]

IANAL but my understanding is that non-compete clauses are binding in California if you are compensated for your lost opportunities (not just your lost income, but lost business opportunities as well.).

The compensation requirement makes enforceable non-compete clauses very rare in California

Re:Non-compete?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll bet she talked this over with Larry, Sergei and Eric before she accepted the position. I'd even be suprised if she doesn't get a going away party and offers for assistance from most if not all of the Google execs.

And probably lots of comments like, "You'll need all the help you can get."

Re:Non-compete?

[foniksonik]

Doesn't matter. California is at will employment. No contract can stop you from leaving or joining another company. If she breaks other contracts such as NDA they could sue for that.

Re:Non-compete?

[symbolset]

This is what seems likely to me also. No chair throwing involved.

Re:Non-compete?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or she's just there to convince the board to sell to Google for a pack of snackerdoodles??

Re:Non-compete?

[Anonymous Coward]

She was a top-level executive for some time, then one rung down the ladder.

Not only that, she was a top-level executive in charge of the flagship product, then got moved to the top spot in a much less important product area, then Jeff Huber was put in place over her when her product area was grouped with another... that's a path of gradual demotion. It looks to me like the leadership at Google hasn't been tremendously impressed with her, so they may not be unhappy to see her go.

Re:Non-compete?

[Anonymous Coward]

California law doesn't honor non-compete agreements (with very, very few exceptions), but that has nothing to do with at-will employment. Plenty of states have at-will employment but honor non-compete agreements.

Re:Non-compete?

[Tough Love]

I'll bet she talked this over with Larry, Sergei and Eric before she accepted the position.

Right, and they all said "great, what a great idea, you should so totally do it!". And then afterwards, the cackling...

Re:Non-compete?

[tokul]

I'm curious if she had a non-compete clause in her contract, and how it will all work out if she does

Google is in California. Clause goes to /dev/null, if contract has one.

Re:Non-compete?

[dutchwhizzman]

I wonder if employee #20 would already have such a clause in their contract and if they do, if it would be as "solid" as the current ones. Also, it could very well be the non compete tells she isn't allowed to work in a similar function to that of employee #20 at the time. I doubt the job description for employee #20 was anything resembling CEO of a large multimillion dollar company, so chances are, even if she has a non compete, it'd be worthless here.

Re:Non-compete?

[Taco Cowboy]

I'll bet she talked this over with Larry, Sergei and Eric before she accepted the position. I'd even be suprised if she doesn't get a going away party and offers for assistance from most if not all of the Google execs.

Look at it this way ---

If Microsoft can do what it did to Nokia, why can't Google do the same thing to Yahoo?

At least, in Yahoo's case, it's in a worse shape than Nokia before the invasion of Microsoft's mole
 

Re:Non-compete?

[Anonymous Coward]

also, there is sheryl sandberg, which if i recall correctly was chief economic officer or something like that and then went to work at facebook's

Re:Non-compete?

[geekoid]

No, but that will get most people not to sue.

best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Anonymous Coward]

That is the best thing to happen to Yahoo in a long time. She's significantly more competent than the previous CEO, and has more knowledge of tech companies than the one before that. She has some serious challenges, but she could change the worst parts of culture at Yahoo (which is currently driving away top talent).

She did a couple interviews lately, if you want to know more about her.

Bio and more links here.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Billly Gates]

She has 0 CEO experience.

In a case like this you need a rockstar CEO who is top rated and has a proven track record as Yahoo is not stable right now.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[ThatsMyNick]

Wallstreet expects a rockstar CEO with solid track record. Employees on the other hand, need someone like Mayer to lead them. She has solid technical experience and has has proved to a good leader. I would definitely love to work in a company led by her.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[icebraining]

psychology major

What

Mayer graduated from Stanford University with a B.S. with honors in symbolic systems and an M.S. in Computer Science. For both degrees, she specialized in artificial intelligence.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Altanar]

Maybe 0 CEO experience, but she's spent the last 2 years at Google's "operating committee", previously named the executive management group. - http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/12/google-search-executive-marissa-mayer-takes-a-new-job/

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Tough Love]

Wasn't Marissa Mayer the one responsible for attempting to force a gigantic background image onto the search portal so Google could look cool like Bing? As I recall that lasted about 4 hours. The upcoming show ought be good for some entertainment if nothing else.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Tough Love]

Cupcakes will be delivered to every desk every morning.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who would LOVE TO WORK in a company led by any female is an idiot, for sure.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Anonymous Coward]

GP never said human psychology. Sounds like she spent a great deal of time studying the psyches of computers.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[dkf]

Wasn't Marissa Mayer the one responsible for attempting to force a gigantic background image onto the search portal so Google could look cool like Bing? As I recall that lasted about 4 hours. The upcoming show ought be good for some entertainment if nothing else.

If she's able to back down when something just doesn't work as well as it should, despite the personal embarrassment, then she's better than the vast majority of people in managerial positions.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[stewbacca]

Every CEO ever had zero CEO experience when they got their first CEO gig.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[travdaddy]

Has that been verified or is that just what it says on her resume?

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[assertation]

What is "the culture" at Yahoo?

Laid back and government like?

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Anonymous Coward]

For both degrees, she specialized in artificial intelligence.

Then she's toast. Everyone knows that artificial intelligence is no match for genuine stupidity. And there's plenty of the latter at Yahoo.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Tough Love]

Wasn't Marissa Mayer the one responsible for attempting to force a gigantic background image onto the search portal so Google could look cool like Bing? As I recall that lasted about 4 hours. The upcoming show ought be good for some entertainment if nothing else.

If she's able to back down when something just doesn't work as well as it should, despite the personal embarrassment, then she's better than the vast majority of people in managerial positions.

I seriously doubt she was given the option. And obviously, the feedback from limited tests was completely ignored as usual. Her style.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[geekoid]

Since that hasn't worked every year for the last 5 years, maybe they just need to try someone who knows what kinds of changes need to make instead of just axing a bunch a people and telling every one to 'just fix it'?

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[geekoid]

That's a great example of how smart she is, and how great Google is.
They tried something, it didn't work, they pulled it. Much better then the 'it doesn't work, so lets keep beating on it".

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[geekoid]

You know what? there has been nation wide internet service for 20 years, so it's really time for people like you to grow the fuck up and stop making shit up like some 13 year old girl desperate for attention.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Tough Love]

Well, what you're missing is the fact that they were already aware that everybody hated the new page from the preliminary limited testing and she tried to force it through anyway. As I understand it, she was moved away from that responsibility not too long after and later demoted.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[Tough Love]

What makes you think I'm making it up? And by the way, you have a foul mouth.

Re:best thing to happen to Yahoo

[hondo77]

In a case like this you need a rockstar CEO who is top rated and has a proven track record as Yahoo is not stable right now.

Says who?

Good luck, Yahoo!

[mholve]

It Mayer Mayer not work out... :D

Re:It's worth a shot...

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

You're really hoping she goes for balding overweight IT professionals with posters of Slave Leia in their room, huh.

Cupcakes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Her life outside of Google, including her posh penthouse in the Four Seasons in San Francisco and her affinity for cupcakes, has also been popular Internet fodder.

Cupcakes? I knew there'd be some cuts coming :)

Re:Cupcakes?

[Anonymous Coward]

/)

No 2 week notice?

[cpu6502]

Wow. "Okay boss I'm done here. Bye!"

Re:No 2 week notice?

[micheas]

Welcome to California.

She has been raising her public profile a lot in the last 12 months so her quitting after a couple lateral "promotions" is not really unexpected.

The surprise is that the Yahoo board did not snag Elop for his ability to build Yahoo's partnership with Microsoft. That would have been typical Yahoo board behavior.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[ClickOnThis]

California is an "employment-at-will" state. If there is no contract of employment, then either the employer or the employee can terminate without notice or reason.

Of course, there are laws that protect employees from unlawful dismissal, but generally the burden of proof of violation is with the employee.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but there is still such a thing as courtesy. Not that she'll have trouble looking for work in the future, but this can sometimes bite you in the ass if someone from your old company is at a company you want to work for, and they share your abrupt exit.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[sexconker]

What are you, 5 years old?

What are you, 15 years old?
Why you grow up and get a real job, and then want a better job, you'll do well to not burn any fucking bridges.

2 weeks notice is the absolute minimum considered acceptable for any job beyond flipping and frying things.
If you flake out on an employer it will follow you to your next employer.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[larry bagina]

All the companies I've worked for (in at-will states) would cut some benefits without the proper notice (like cashing out vacation/sick time).

Re:No 2 week notice?

[ClickOnThis]

All the companies I've worked for (in at-will states) would cut some benefits without the proper notice (like cashing out vacation/sick time).

IANAL. However...

Accrued vacation time belongs to you, not the company. If the company refuses to pay out your vacation time, they're breaking the law.

Accrued sick time, on the other hand, generally does not belong to the employee, AFAIK. Some employers might do something with it on termination (e.g., add it to your service time) but I don't think there are any laws that govern its disposition when you are separated.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Ryanrule]

Maybe for your generation. Mine knows better. Especially when your new employer is a competitor.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Anonymous Coward]

Many many highly successful people do not observe such social customs. Do you have any solid research or studies that suggest that people do better when they give 2 weeks notice vs those who do not?

Re:No 2 week notice?

[TooMuchToDo]

If you flake out on an employer it will follow you to your next employer.

Only if you need that employer as a reference. I'm 29, make a $100K+/yr income (and have for the last ~5 years, with 12 years total in IT), and have had at least 9 jobs. Times I've given two weeks notice? 0.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[TooMuchToDo]

Correct. Vacation time, in most states, is required to be paid out to you at your hourly compensation rate. Otherwise, you can file a complaint with the state labor board, as well as sue your employeer over unpaid wages.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[russotto]

2 weeks notice is the absolute minimum considered acceptable for any job beyond flipping and frying things.
If you flake out on an employer it will follow you to your next employer.

Only true for us trenchworkers. Once you're in the executive offices, things differ. Particularly if you're known in the industry by all the other executives. Nobody is going to refuse to hire Marissa Mayer for the CEO slot (and I doubt she'll ever consider anything less again) because she didn't give 2 weeks notice to Google.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[symbolset]

A couple things. First, it's likely Google has known about this prospect for some time, and it's just us finding out about it now. They all seem like the classy sort of people who could work that out. Second, she already has three hundred million dollars. It seems unlikely she's concerned about her next employer. Agreed though, courtesy is courtesy and two weeks is the expected notice.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Anonymous Coward]

depends on how a company accounts for the time. Most states don't have any actual laws about vacation, companies don't have to give you any, and they don't have to be paid. (go capitalism!) If a company uses the "accrual per paycheck" method, then they usually will pay it out as it's part of "wages". If a company uses the "give you a yearly lump" method, then it's just that a grant of time off work, not a promise to pay you any money. If you don't work there, you don't get the time off. That especially sucks when companies "walk you out the door" when you give notice. They don't pay you AND keep the vacation time.

My company is the later, so I've already looked that one up.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Grishnakh]

Elop is still very busy driving Nokia into the ground.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you're a liar or a fraud. No-one valuable enough to get paid $100k/year would be replaceable overnight.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[stewbacca]

Ok, I call BS. No one who makes 6-fiures in the tech industry refers to their highly paid gig as "IT" unless they are talking to grandma. That, and nobody in IT makes 6-figures.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[stewbacca]

Companies are required to pay your vacation time. They have to carry your accrued vacation time on the books for this reason. It's also why they generally cap how many unused vacation hours you can have, since carrying a bunch of vacation time really messes with the books.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[stewbacca]

oops, forgot to say *in some states*. It's not a federal law.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Anonymous Coward]

> nobody in IT makes 6-figures

LOL. Everyone I know makes at least that much. Contractors make almost double.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Anonymous Coward]

They make 12 figures?! Even if that's only $100,000,000,000 that's still $100 billion.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[geekoid]

contractors make 12 figures?

Re:No 2 week notice?

[geekoid]

Yes, but I'm sure they new she was leaving. Wait? why do we think she didn't give any notice?

Re:No 2 week notice?

[sexconker]

If you flake out on an employer it will follow you to your next employer.

Only if you need that employer as a reference. I'm 29, make a $100K+/yr income (and have for the last ~5 years, with 12 years total in IT), and have had at least 9 jobs. Times I've given two weeks notice? 0.

Show me the receipts, you bullshitting little asswipe.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[TooMuchToDo]

IT encompasses sysadmin/devops, development, developer advocate, and full-stack architecture and implementation.

I've started and sold a hosting company, managing a consulting firm, been on the team for one of the detectors at the LHC, and currently drive day to day technology operations at a tech consulting firm; I currently don't get out of bed for less than $130K/year (with insurance and 6 weeks vacation as well).

If you're in the IT industry and *not* making six figures, you're doing it wrong.

Re:No 2 week notice?

[stewbacca]

Well, IT "industry" and IT "department" are two wildly divergent things in regards to typical salaries. I was reading your post as "IT department". Your description, however, reads more like "computer science" than "information technology".

Re:No 2 week notice?

[Compaqt]

Wait, don't smart companies give you combined "personal days"? Use it if you're sick or just want to goof off or go to Disneyland.

That prevents having to lie about being sick.

Don't you wish your CEO was hot like theirs?

[Trashcan Romeo]

I'd query that.

Re:Don't you wish your CEO was hot like theirs?

[winkydink]

I'd query that.

Too bad it will return zero results. :)

Re:Don't you wish your CEO was hot like theirs?

[sexconker]

I'd query that.

INSERT INTO CEO (P_ID)
Values (1179573)
GO;

DELETE FROM CEO
WHERE P_ID = 1179573
GO;

INSERT INTO CEO (P_ID)
Values (1179573)
GO;

DELETE FROM CEO
WHERE P_ID = 1179573
GO;

INSERT INTO CEO (P_ID)
Values (1179573)
GO;

INSERT INTO Offspring (Parent_A_ID, Parent_B_ID)
OH SHIT OH SHIT

Re:Don't you wish your CEO was hot like theirs?

[game kid]

Talk about not properly sanitizing your database input!

Re:Don't you wish your CEO was hot like theirs?

[treerex]

Until she starts laughing...

Re:Don't you wish your CEO was hot like theirs?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would mod you up, if I could.

Re:Don't you wish your CEO was hot like theirs?

[Anonymous Coward]

For the ones who have not seen it, someone made a compilation - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcSujceZDmg

Ashamed of this site

[Anonymous Coward]

I would kindly refer everyone here to geekfeminism.org since all those sexist comments are awful, you should be better than that.

Re:Ashamed of this site

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't bother clicking that link, it's exactly what it says but with no pics of sexy geeky chicks.

Re:Ashamed of this site

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm. They should hire a new CEO, somebody with some hustle.

Re:Ashamed of this site

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, you do know Marissa Mayer used to date Larry page for a long time right (until ~2006)? She did use her assets to reach the top, and slashdot rightfully comments on her assests (and I dont think she will disapprove of the praise she gets).

Re:Ashamed of this site

[couchslug]

"you should be better than that."

As they say at the OTHER Slashdot (4chan), "you must be new here.")

Re:Ashamed of this site

[stewbacca]

I would kindly refer everyone here to geekfeminism.org since all those sexist comments are awful, you should be better than that.

This is slashdot. They get to talk about women in tech (not in the context of World of Warcraft) once every three years. Cut them some slack.

Re:Ashamed of this site

[Anonymous Coward]

Not ashamed enough to say it in non AC I guess...

Good luck Marissa

[circletimessquare]

Nobody expects Yahoo to return to its glory years, but if you can right the ship and steer it to stability, consider it a success. Aim high by shooting low.

Re:Good luck Marissa

[Tough Love]

Aim high by shooting low.

But why aim directly for your foot?

Re:Good luck Marissa

[Anonymous Coward]

at least aim for the other guy's foot!

Re:Good luck Marissa

[djp928]

Yahoo had glory years?

Back to products hopefully!

[njyx]

Lots of the press is focused on the fact she's a woman CEO - but more important is she's been one of Google's #1 product people since really early on. Hopefully it'll actually make Yahoo focus on product again and get away from the "audience" focus. Larry and Sergei probably not happy campers right now...!

Re:Back to products hopefully!

[Tough Love]

Googlers are going to be awfully happy she's out. Larry's ex squeeze in case anyone doesn't know.

Re:Back to products hopefully!

[njyx]

Yep - I guess she had a lot of power at Goog (for good and bad reasons!)

Re:Back to products hopefully!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I thought all was well, since she got dropped off the Operating Committee.

Re:Back to products hopefully!

[Tough Love]

Well, I thought all was well, since she got dropped off the Operating Committee.

I bet she didn't put that bullet point on her resume.

Re:Back to products hopefully!

[Anonymous Coward]

Google really needs a solid competitor -- preferably run by an ex-Google manager. Google needs to be able to tell the world they are not a monopolist. Monopolists are milked for cash by the various international organisations.

Re:Back to products hopefully!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hopefully it'll actually make Yahoo focus on product again

She'll need an inventor if Yahoo is going to be a product. They've never manufactured a product before so it will be a big change.

Re:Back to products hopefully!

[Xest]

I'm not sure why everyone thinks her departure means she's going to be competing with Google.

She may well decide to actually go into partnership with Google on some things, this may even be why they chose her, because they recognise Yahoo couldn't compete with Google no matter how hard it tries, so instead should partner with it where it can, and diverge and offer other products where it thinks it can do better.

Larry and Sergei may in fact be quite pleased there's another friendly face now running a major silicon valley tech company. Up until now all the old school crowd like those at the top of Apple, Microsoft, Oracle etc. have been quite anti-Google.

She's actually attractive!

[Anonymous Coward]

I was expecting a beast like that harridan who runs Ebay now, or used to, the one with a face like a shovel, but this bird's quite attractive! I wouldn't mind her being my boss!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marissa_Mayer

She looks nice there!

Just goes to show how important physical attractiveness is - I bet 99% of the men here would work harder for a really attractive female boss, than the butt ugly female bosses you've had in the past. (And let's be honest - I bet ALL of the female bosses you've ever had, have had faces like a welder's bench, or a bagful of spanners. With a body to match.)

Eugenics for the win!

Re:She's actually attractive!

[Tough Love]

Oh yeah, that's totally what's needed to pull Yahoo back from the brink.

Re:She's actually attractive!

[Anonymous Coward]

don't worry.. I'm sure you're a disgusting piece of shit.. and obviously have a personality to match. So she, like all women, would never so much as look at you.

Re:She's actually attractive!

[Anonymous Coward]

Every female middle manager I've ever known has been fat and dumpy. And, no, it's not because they're older or had kids.

Re:She's actually attractive!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've worked for female bosses who were randomized across the ugly--beautiful and incompetent--competent scales. I want my boss to be competent. She's my boss, not a potential wife or fuck-mate.

Re:She's actually attractive!

[Anonymous Coward]

why can't she be both?

Re:She's actually attractive!

[couchslug]

"I bet ALL of the female bosses you've ever had, have had faces like a welder's bench"

Full of square holes and Acorn clamps? Yuck.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

She's Married, Boys

[SternisheFan]

Born Marissa Ann Mayer May 30, 1975 (age 37) Wausau, Wisconsin, USA Residence San Francisco, Palo Alto Nationality American Alma mater Stanford University Occupation President & CEO, Yahoo! [1] Computer programming instructor, Stanford University Employer Yahoo Stanford University Board member of San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, San Francisco Ballet, New York City Ballet, and Cooper–Hewitt, National Design Museum [2] Spousehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marissa_Mayer Zachary Bogue (2009–present) [3] (from Wikipedia)

Re:She's Married, Boys

[Anonymous Coward]

So what, I'm not looking for a girlfriend.

Re:She's Married, Boys

[Nexion]

Wow, so you are one of the other guys that actually reads a woman's profile before commenting. Good to meet you. :P

Re:She's Married, Boys

[Anonymous Coward]

So what? Unless you're the CEO of a huge company, your chances with her are about the same whether she's married or not.

I know why

[Anonymous Coward]

She's sees a sinking ship, so she is going to dump it for short term profits, before another CEO can take advantage of the opportunity. Good luck on the pilfering!

Whoa!

[Tough Love]

Whoa, the worst Google executive gets parachuted into Yahoo, is that some kind of strategy? A finishing move? Better cupcakes in the Yahoo cafeteria, if they even have one any more?

Re:Whoa!

[serviscope_minor]

worst

How so?

Re:It's worth a shot...

[tompaulco]

Her husband probably won't allow it.

simple solution

[CheshireDragon]

or maybe it isn't so simple. correct me if I am wrong, BUT
if you don't click the ads on their sites they don't get a chunk of change from the advertisers. In turn the advertisers don't get paid because we are not clicking on ads and buying the stuff which means they will pull their ads because they are not successful. SOOOO, IF we stop clicking on the ads and buying the stuff, these companies will start to lose money and realize that we are not the product....right? or something like that?

Re:simple solution

[symbolset]

You know what irony is? It's why I don't see a * up there by your UID.

Re:simple solution

[XxtraLarGe]

if you don't click the ads on their sites they don't get a chunk of change from the advertisers.

Some online advertisers, like Facebook charge per impression.

Re:simple solution

[mattack2]

OK, I tried looking in a bunch of the FAQs, what does the * mean?

Re:simple solution

[mattack2]

Argh. * == subscriber.

Time For Something New

[Linux_amateur]

Compared to the clowns that have run Yahoo to date, Marissa Mayer is a breath of fresh air. Yahoo needs a strategic person on top. Yahoo ran in front of the crowd with many features that were not monetized. Best financial section in the early days but they hid the link on the home page, moved it around and almost seemed embarrassed about it. In late 1990's every VC I knew went to Yahoo fist for news. They had an outstanding online merchant system again late 1990's that anyone could use to set up web sales. They even took care of setting the credit card merchant account details. I was blown away on how many early online sales were powered by their system. They even had phone support, all for less than $20/month. They were more that five years ahead of Amazon. If they could of put all those companies under their banner as Amazon now does that one feature alone could have made the company. If Ms. Mayer can focus on one to two areas, get good people to help her execute, Yahoo could come back. There are still many smart technical people at Yahoo. I wish her the best of luck. With Alta Vista (DEC) and Excite ancient history, it would be nice to have Yahoo along with Apple as two early pioneers still around.

You insensitive clods!

[PPH]

"Marissa" was my Yahoo! password. Now you've gone and leaked it!

ROFL!

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you should apply for the job then, "Billy" Gates.

ROFL!

slashdot shows its sexism

[Anonymous Coward]

a person becomes CEO of a large company and everyone here either:

-dumps on the company
-dumps on the new CEO
-talks about her attractiveness or lack thereof
-acts like it's a blessing that a woman can code

Hey the 50s called...

Re:slashdot shows its sexism

[Anonymous Coward]

a person becomes CEO of a large company and everyone here either:

-dumps on the company
-dumps on the new CEO

These aren't sexist, and slashdot does it to just about everyone no matter what gender.

-talks about her attractiveness or lack thereof

It's sexist to assume "her" here. I wonder how much has been said about Donald Trump's hair?

-acts like it's a blessing that a woman can code

Now that IS sexist, and about par for the course for slashdot (we were trolls before 4chan made it popular)

In related news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Paul Allen appointed CEO of Apple. And Eduardo Saverin to take over MySpace.

Trade Secrets?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't PageRank a Google trade secret and wasn't Marissa VP of Search for a while?

Yahoo better erect a firewall between CEO and Search if they don't want to get sued.

Re:Trade Secrets?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't PageRank a Google trade secret and wasn't Marissa VP of Search for a while?

Yahoo better erect a firewall between CEO and Search if they don't want to get sued.

Yahoo! get their web search results from Microsoft. That's a pretty good firewall.

No Non-compete with Google?

[n7ytd]

Two possible outcomes:
1. As soon as she turns the ship around and brings Yahoo! above water, Google sues or acquires them as settlement for using her knowledge of Google's trade secrets.

2. Yahoo! continues to circle the drain and she rides to the bottom, bravely staying with the ship and is barely able to console herself with the Yahoo trademarked Obscenely Huge Golden Parachute of Doom.

Re:No Non-compete with Google?

[the eric conspiracy]

Non-competes are unenforceable in California except in some very limited circumstances.

She was unappreciated at Google

[modmans2ndcoming]

After the reorganization once Larry took over and Marissa was left with Google Local I think the writing was on the wall and she was just looking for the right opportunity .

Re:She was unappreciated at Google

[accensi]

She was a VP that was not listed in the official site for several weeks and recently lost one of the most important clients of her Local and Maps unit - Apple. She was so low-profile in recent months that seemed to be in leave of absence for some health problem or pregnancy.

Re:She was unappreciated at Google

[ThatsMyNick]

She was also taken off the Operating Committee (Larry Page's inner circle) at the end of 2011. Yeah the writing was on the wall.

Yahoo employees rejoice

[markov_chain]

Office hours from now on shall be 9-5!

How lucky did Google get... win win.

[rtilghman]

Google's experience is awful, they've never been able to successfully launch a "finished" or integrated product offering, and their only source of revenue CONTINUES to be search driven advertising. In one move they guaranteed that Yahoo will never successfully resurface to challenge them and unloaded a decent looking (pretty is a strong word technopeople, you need to get out more) loadstone who (from what I've heard) consistently brow beat and bullied people smarter and better than herself in their own field of expertise.

For god's sake, if their search isn't depressing enough LOOK AT GOOGLE+! Awful, a travesty, and they've had to steal ideas from Microsoft as they seek to innovate! HA!

Poor Yahoo... Scott Thompson was actually a guy who knew how to make money and had successfully run something, this is not the "google in a bottle" you thought you were getting. Yahoo just got put on a 24 month deathwatch.

rt

Re:How lucky did Google get... win win.

[Anonymous Coward]

For god's sake, if their search isn't depressing enough LOOK AT GOOGLE+! Awful, a travesty, and they've had to steal ideas from Microsoft as they seek to innovate! HA!

For contrast, look at Yahoo! Finance message boards. 99% spam from the same series of spambots, and not one of Y!'s employees has the clue to write a simple Bayesian filter for things like well-known URL shorteners, DOMAINSINALLCAPS, and cascades of replies from "people" who say nothing more than "I am from $CITYNAME. I like your article".

I'm always amazed that Google Finance never really beat Yahoo Finance on its own terms; for reasons inexplicable to me, too many people stuck around at Y!, even though its own users acknowledge the Yahoo finance boards to be an utter cesspool of spam and trolls. The retail investing community represents a lot of folks with disposable income, and they'll click like monkeys on every. single. post. for fear of missing useful commentary.

It's really a shame...

[erp_consultant]

I remember when Yahoo first came out. Best search engine, best free email, best chat client, best portal. Then they stagnated. Google and Microsoft swoop in and all of a sudden Yahoo is an afterthought. I've still got a yahoo email account but hardly ever use it. When I did I got much more spam that real mail. Since I switched to gmail I get hardly any spam. With either Bing or Google the search results are better. What happened to Yahoo? Totally left in the dust. Meyer hasn't got a chance to save them and she knows it. It will be a stepping stone to a CEO job at another firm. Meanwhile the Yahoo shareholders take it in the shorts again. Sigh.....

Re:It's really a shame...

[Altanar]

Saying Yahoo was the best search engine in the pre-PageRank era is not saying much. As for email, I used Rocketmail... until it was bought out by Yahoo, who took Rocketmail and added a couple layers of Yahoo bloat onto it. But what I'll never forgive Yahoo for doing is ruining GeoCities. Before Yahoo, there was no annoying advertising overlay. None.

Re:It's really a shame...

[Dantoo]

Yahoo buying useful applications and then stuffing them royally has been a hallmark!! Remember the MusicMatch thing as well? Took a popular MP3 player/library and tried to replace it with a total piece of shit they developed in house in a half-arsed effort to transfer the customer base to their own failed adver-bloat offering.

What sort of a company buys up a superior product simply to remove competition to their failed product? Oh......... I'll just walk away now. :)

PS. Reckon she could get someone to look at reversing some of this damage? Pah! Dreams..sigh.

Re:It's really a shame...

[FunkSoulBrother]

Best search engine? Have you forgotten AltaVista?

Re:It's really a shame...

[Anonymous Coward]

no, hotbot was the best search engine.

Re:It's really a shame...

[erp_consultant]

Yeah, forgot about GeoCities. I lost an entire website when they took it down. Sure, it was free and I should have known better but boy was I pissed when that happened.

Re:It's really a shame...

[erp_consultant]

Dogpile anyone? :-)

Good choice

[Stuntmonkey]

I've worked with Marissa before and admire her product focus and attention to detail. She's very sharp. The challenge for her will be working in an environment without the depth of engineering talent that Google has; she has never experienced this in her working life.

Re:Good choice

[the eric conspiracy]

Well, since she was employee #20 she probably has some experience of that sort.

Re:Good choice

[musth]

Indeed. Let's all be concerned about "Marissa" getting along at Yahoo. This affects the citizenry, and especially the tech stakeholder, in a profound way.

And god, I hope they pay this dynamic, photogenic woman well enough. I'm concerned about that!

Re:Good choice

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, since she was employee #20 she probably has some experience of that sort.

Considering that #1 and #2 were Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and they quickly attracted a lot of other great talent, no, she doesn't. That's not to say she can't succeed brilliantly, but nearly her entire career has been in a company where she was surrounded by great engineers.

Re:Good choice

[Anonymous Coward]

It's easy to be good when you have the people of Google working for you. Let's see how she does with Yahoo! monkeys.

So..

[synapse7]

is she single?

Re:So..

[Anonymous Coward]

She got married in 2009 to some guy named Zach Bogue.

I'm sure Google will miss her

[HangingChad]

They'll definitely miss her distinctive laugh around the hallways I'm sure.

Re:I'm sure Google will miss her

[Anonymous Coward]

If I may be sexist here, it struck me during the GOP debates that Bachmann's laugh was really fucking annoying. It stuck out and was more disruptive than the laughter of others. Why is this? Am I a sexist pig or is there something to this? Could it be jealousy? Or is it that her laugh - as the only female voice - uniquely identifies her while other laughs bleed into the background (including audience, moderator noises)?

Is it because I'm anti-Bachmann (pro-Paul, fwiw)??? Who want to hear their enemy laugh?

Anyway, I didn't know if by "distinctive" you meant distance-piercing harpy scream.

Re:I'm sure Google will miss her

[bkk_diesel]

I had to search for that and came up with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcSujceZDmg
It is a pretty funny laugh.

MOD PARENT UP!

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally someone points it out. Mod Parent UP!

Interesting choice

[Anonymous Coward]

Marissa probably sees it as an opportunity to make a difference where it can matter a lot.

Google is successful and has its battles but is in no distress. Yahoo is a brand and a technology company with potential but seems lacking in focus.

With focus Yahoo could build itself a niche in a lot of areas, it doesn't have to be the at the top to be successful. Pruning a lot of its less profitable businesses and focusing on a few strengths would make sense. The pruning is just painful, externally and internally. Externally there is the pain of the user community, Internally the pain of the employee.

For example, I don't see them launching a Yphone or Ymeet conferencing service. But they could offer apps on popular mobile devices that broker connections to their existing services, offer single sign on to existing accounts. Gstore, Mstore and Astore - app stores all accept third party apps its not like its a closed ecosystem.

Amazon first market and Ebay second market seem equally willing to partner with anybody with an idea.

The only companies going out of business seem to be willfully ignoring the changing landscape and ignoring their own burn rate, some spectacularly so.

Re:Interesting choice

[musth]

First-name basis with "Marissa", you are?

We should all give a shit...

[musth]

...how the 1% are shuffled around between corporate CEO positions. A deep, all-embracing shit, accompanied by a look of seriousness. This is important, important news for us.

Re:We should all give a shit...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey dumbass, here's a newsflash for you: if you're posting on slashdot YOU are a member of the 1%.

predictions

[geoffaus]

maybe a good time to short yahoo stock?

Thank Santa Clara County

[tlambert]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad

That particular decision is also the reason it's so hard to revoke a corporate charter in California (the corporate equivalent of a death penalty on the "person").

Hadoop, Pig, etc

[Anonymous Coward]

At least she'll have a clue about what to do about these Big Data technologies that Yahoo had an important role in developing, unlike her predecessor(s). After all she comes from Google which started it all with MapReduce.

Re:Ship is sinking Hahaha

[Anonymous Coward]

Just saw it elsewhere: http://imgur.com/WGbGc

BING: Because It's Not Google.

BIG: Because It's Google.

Well, whaddya know? Works perfectly.

Cear cut example of doctored search

[Tough Love]

The most clear cut example of evil I've seen from Google so far? Compare Bing's search on Googirl: googirl

To Google's results: googirl

Doctored or what? Admittedly, not really really evil. But Google does swear up and down they don't do this. Perhaps... only when they feel like it?

Re:Cear cut example of doctored search

[l3v1]

"Doctored or what?"

Well, yeah, it seems someone at Bing has been putting some work hours into making the "googirl" response list more irrelevant :P Why, it's true :)

Re:Cear cut example of doctored search

[jbengt]

Doesn't really seem doctored to me. The Google reslts aren't all that different from the Bing results.

Re:Cear cut example of doctored search

[Tough Love]

Just to point out the obvious: do you see any cum in the Google results? You certainly do in the Bing results. Which on the face of it appear to be more accurate.

New attack against Yahoo?

[Anonymous Coward]

Code insertion?

Re:Ship is sinking Hahaha

[Anonymous Coward]

Fixed that link for you

Also, for completeness sake.

Re:It's worth a shot...

[maroberts]

You're really hoping she goes for balding overweight IT professionals with posters of Slave Leia in their room, huh.

OMG you know everything about me!....

An Interesting Choice For Several Reasons

[assertation]

This could be an interesting choice for many reasons.....if she succeeds with Yahoo.

Many women can't get some jobs because companies are concerned about them getting pregnant and not being there for them. She is due in October. If she pulls off turning Yahoo around she could make a contribution toward ending that kind of discrimination.

She could also help end the stereotype that a cute, blonde, conventionally attractive woman isn't likely to be an effective CEO.

If she succeeds, if not she will fuel to the fire of stereotypes.

I hope she succeeds. Yahoo used to be "the Google" back in the day. Now they seem to be stuck in mediocrity. It would be nice if she could bring some of that Google magic to Yahoo.

Re:An Interesting Choice For Several Reasons

[tehcyder]

She could also help end the stereotype that a cute, blonde, conventionally attractive woman isn't likely to be an effective CEO.

Yes, it would certainly be a triumph for feminism the day that a cute blonde was recognised as an effective CEO. She could probably celebrate by posing naked for Playboy

Far too little is made of the hardships of growing up attractive and intelligent.

Re:An Interesting Choice For Several Reasons

[assertation]

Tell me about it

Re:An Interesting Choice For Several Reasons

[PraiseBob]

Many women can't get some jobs because companies are concerned about them getting pregnant and not being there for them.

She is currently 6 months pregnant. I guess Yahoo doesn't mind if she phones it in for the next 6 months.

Not a marketing person

[Anonymous Coward]

Great hire, geeks with taste make the best CEO's. Pushing a marketing person into the CEO is the death knell of many a company.

2 years before death

[Anonymous Coward]

She has 2 years before Yahoo is Yagone.