Slashdot Mirror


Chris Lattner, Poached From Apple To Become Tesla's Top Software Executive, Quits After 6 Months (bizjournals.com)

Tesla said last night Chris Lattner, the vice president of Autopilot software, has left the company about six months after the electric car-maker hired him away from Apple. From a report: Lattner had led the software development team in charge of Autopilot. Tesla executive Jim Keller is now in charge of Autopilot hardware and software. The company announced it had also hired OpenAI research scientist Andrej Karpathy, who will serve as Tesla's new director of artificial intelligence and Tesla Vision. "Chris just wasn't the right fit for Tesla, and we've decided to make a change," the company told reporters in a statement. "We wish him the best." Lattner tweeted last night, "Turns out that Tesla isn't a good fit for me after all. I'm interested to hear about interesting roles for a seasoned engineering leader!" Lattner is a widely respected figure in the industry. He is the main author of LLVM as well as Apple's Swift programming language. We interviewed him earlier this year.

140 comments

  1. Explains Autopilot 2.0? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

    AP2.0 isn't even as good as 1.0 yet. The new hardware is all camera based instead of using a mixture of cameras and other sensors (radar/ultrasonic), and they expected it to be just as good with the right software and then move on to being fully antonymous.

    At the moment it can't even stay in lane properly...

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Explains Autopilot 2.0? by vtcodger · · Score: 3, Funny

      "At the moment it can't even stay in lane properly..." OK in Boston, but might be a drawback elsewhere.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    2. Re: Explains Autopilot 2.0? by WindBourne · · Score: 0

      I tested ap1 about 1.5 years on a frontage road and a highway. the car ping-pong ed esp on the frontage road. otoh, just drove an MX with ap2 and new software, on same areas. it was vastly superior. very little ping pong on frontage and dealt with merge lane perfectly. handled everything decently. some work is needed for edge case, but nothing like you claim.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Explains Autopilot 2.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      I'm hearing rumors that Mr Lattner and didn't want his name all over it when people start dying. He (and most of the engineering team) wanted proper hardware but Elon Mush overruled them. (Most sensor companies have blacklisted Tesla for misusing their hardware, claiming full antonymous capabilities, and them blaming the hardware for failures)

      I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla writes a big check to settle some DOT investigations and Chris Lattner gets a 10% whistle blower bonus.

    4. Re: Explains Autopilot 2.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not the software's fault. Tesla only makes cars for really fat assed Americans and because of that is 15-20cm wider to fit people who usually have fat rolls hanging off the side of the seat.

      Car lanes just aren't fat enough to fit such a massive fat person car.

    5. Re:Explains Autopilot 2.0? by EnsilZah · · Score: 1

      Are you intentionally lying or just bad at putting across that you're pulling information out of your ass?

      From Tesla's site:
      "Eight surround cameras provide 360 degrees of visibility around the car at up to 250 meters of range. Twelve updated ultrasonic sensors complement this vision, allowing for detection of both hard and soft objects at nearly twice the distance of the prior system. A forward-facing radar with enhanced processing provides additional data about the world on a redundant wavelength that is able to see through heavy rain, fog, dust and even the car ahead."

    6. Re:Explains Autopilot 2.0? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the AP2 system doesn't even use all the cameras yet. The radar is just for distance keeping cruise control, the AP doesn't use data from it for steering.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re: Explains Autopilot 2.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Low effort Europoor keks.

    8. Re: Explains Autopilot 2.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tested your test and found it to be testless

    9. Re:Explains Autopilot 2.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you fail to mention anything about the ultrasonic sensors that you said weren't there. Remember "all camera" is what you said.

      You're wrong, just sit there in your wrongness and be wrong.

    10. Re: Explains Autopilot 2.0? by rdelsambuco · · Score: 0

      Personally, I tested ap1.2 about 1.3 years on a similar frontage road and a freeway. The ping pong and slerpaderp were equally as annoying and vastly inferior to the lane merging edge cases and simultaneous ferg jamming. Nothing like the grandparent poster claims - anecdotally, of course.

      --
      I comment occasionally so that I can mod others -1 overrated or -1 offtopic.
  2. Engineer or Engineering Leader? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He is the main author of LLVM

    Way too many co-workers were forced or voluntarily tried the Engineer -> Engineering Leader route and turned out to hate it.

    Code, unlike subordinates, does exactly what I tell it to do. If a mechanical design of mine fails it's because I screwed up not because my subordinate did.

    1. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Way too many co-workers were forced or voluntarily tried the Engineer -> Engineering Leader route and turned out to hate it.

      Not all techs can lead, but some of them need to. Non-techs can't effectively lead technical teams. Some may claim that "leadership is leadership" but that is not true. You can't lead if you don't understand the issues.

    2. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      From the interview I heard (he was on the Accidental Tech Podcast a while back), he actually really liked his position as Lead, it's just that autopilot is actually a really interesting problem space and Tesla probably made him a pretty decent offer. (And, frankly, he's probably well off enough that the offer was more just an acknowledgement of his skill rather than any money he actually needed.)

    3. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2

      Absolutely. The best managers I've had were engineers. The better ones were hands on engineers.

      It still doesn't mean it's for everyone. Did Chris hate Tesla or did he hate being a Manager or being a manager at Tesla? Sometimes it just comes down to a clash of A-list personalities. He clearly knows his stuff and knows the direction he wants to go with a project. Jobs may have been hands off with the direction of LLVM while Musk would be more hands on with the direction he wanted Chris to do things.

    4. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      He is the main author of LLVM

      Way too many co-workers were forced or voluntarily tried the Engineer -> Engineering Leader route and turned out to hate it.

      Code, unlike subordinates, does exactly what I tell it to do. If a mechanical design of mine fails it's because I screwed up not because my subordinate did.

      You just haven't programmed your subordinates correctly. Go to a North Korean "teambuilding" camp for your next group outing and you will have them reprogrammed to follow your orders completely.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    5. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by thebullshitpatrol · · Score: 2

      If you can't hop on the line and flip burgers, you don't know what flipping burgers correctly looks like, you can't gauge how much time and energy is needed to flip one, and your employees don't respect your ideas about how they should be flipping them.

    6. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Altus · · Score: 2

      He was a manager and a director at Apple, so its not like he was new to the challenge of engineering management.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    7. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would venture a guess that the shear quantity of regulatory bullshit and dealing with governments would cause any good techie to decide it's just not worth it.

    8. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I'm going to be a little pedantic, but I think it might be somewhat true that "leadership is leadership". However, if you don't know where you're going or how to get there, then it's likely you're going to lead people in the wrong direction.

    9. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Big_Breaker · · Score: 2

      I have a different take. His previous development work existed purely in the digital domain. Even if he was successful running huge projects previously I think autonomous driving is a different beast that he was poorly prepared for.

      For autonomous driving you need to integrate noisy sensor data from a chaotic real world environment and somehow use that data in a logic process that makes repeatably good decisions and fails gracefully. You need to understand the abilities and limits of the sensors, the range of operating environments and you need to iterate in consultation with the sensor engineers to improve the data delivered into the software in a cost effective way. This is all "get your hands dirty" real world engineering - not his background.

      They hired a coder when they should have hired an engineer.

    10. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by houghi · · Score: 2

      That is true, but you also do not need to understand all the issues in order to lead.

      I have seen great leaders who had no idea what I was doing and I have seen lousy ones that did and everything in between.

      The risk of a leader that knows it all is micro-management and the risk of a leader without the detailed knowledge is listening to the wrong people.

      I believe in general micromanagement is worse than listening to the wrong people. The second can be easily changed when found out.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    11. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      Why are people acting like Chris Lattner has never managed people before?

    12. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they are trying to shift the blame away from Tesla and the incompetent people running the company.

    13. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would venture a guess that the shear quantity of regulatory bullshit

      So then he wasn't cut out for it.

    14. Re: Engineer or Engineering Leader? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      nope. at this point a coder, esp in AI, is demanded. an engineer does not think abstractly enough to deal with this.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    15. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yea, too bad Steve Jobs as a non-tech person couldn't lead Apple....err...wait a minute...

    16. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by sinij · · Score: 1

      He probably wasn't asked to autonomously land a reusable tunnel on a self-driving barge.

    17. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      From people I know that have worked for him, he's a great leader but an okay manager. He's been doing the tech lead thing since he was a masters student at UIUC.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    18. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Yea, too bad Steve Jobs as a non-tech person couldn't lead Apple....err...wait a minute...

      Technical details were not Steve's strong point, but he knew how to code, and knew circuit board design. Before starting at Apple, he worked as a technician at Atari, where his boss said: "Steve was difficult but valuable. He was very often the smartest guy in the room, and he would let people know that."

      Steve knew enough about engineering to know what was possible, and know when engineers were BSing him.

    19. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Micromanagement can be easily identified and discouraged. Bringing a salesman-turned-manager up to speed on current engineering practices is a bit harder task.

    20. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 2

      Yeah, because techies hate challenging projects that advance the state of the art.

      The regulation is part of the challenge. Prove it works on a private closed course. Convince the lawyers. The lawyers convince the politicians. The politicians change the laws and regulations.

      But it all starts with making it work.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    21. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      He was already "Senior Director, Developer Tools Department" at Apple. So it's not like he wasn't experienced in management. The "He's a coder not a manager" argument is false since he's spent most of the last half decade as a manager.

      My money is on him being interested in AI and machine learning from a technical perspective and then once he got into it realized that working with machine learning is nothing like the clean, deterministic and pure code of a compiler.

      I work with some software that is largely non-deterministic (at a human comprehensible level at least) that works with computer vision and I hate it. I love working on rendering photo realistic imagery but interpreting photos into data is very very very black box work. There is a lot of just trial and error and experimentation until (for reasons you probably will never fully understand) it just snaps in the software and runs perfectly.

      I would believe he was fired and I would believe he quit due to the conspiracies revolving around AP2's maturity but I wouldn't rule out that he actually didn't enjoy the work.

    22. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leadership includes knowing how to budget for subordinates screwing up. It's called 'contingency'.

      If you screw up your contingency planning, then that's your screwup, not your subordinates'.

    23. Re:Engineer or Engineering Leader? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      One of the better directors I've had knew nothing about the business, knew that he knew nothing about the business, and trusted the people who reported to him. It worked pretty well.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    24. Re: Engineer or Engineering Leader? by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      No, you're wrong. The coder is only as good as the instruments and data provided. The coding is not the secret sauce, the hardware and operation is. Read up on which sensor companies are furthest ahead, they have the most advanced hardware. Coding is pretty easy once you have your design/algorithms.

  3. Quits? by monkeyxpress · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Chris just wasn't the right fit for Tesla, and we've decided to make a change,"

    He may have technically quit, but it kinda sounds like he didn't have a lot of choice in the matter. I also find it quite interesting that they talk about 'fit'. I doubt he is a high level asshole, given that post Jobs' Apple is not known for HR scandals, and in my experience personal issues have to be devastatingly bad before a company will let go of someone who knows their stuff. So maybe he didn't know his stuff (which bodes poorly for the Apple car), or he got off side with Musk (which bodes poorly for Tesla).

    Anyway, I hope he negotiated one hell of a golden handshake. I don't imagine the Apple car project will be excited about having him back.

    1. Re:Quits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, the guy is known for compilers and languages. He was asked to make autonomous car software. I honestly don't see why anyone would assume because he could do one means he could do the other. Especially when compiler and language work is refining things which have existed for a very long time and autonomous car software is making something that's never been done before. They're two very different mindsets. I'm personally good at the first, but garbage at the second. But my ego is small enough that I understand this about myself. I'm a good engineer and a terrible research scientist.

    2. Re:Quits? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Anyway, I hope he negotiated one hell of a golden handshake.

      Why? Is giving some rich guy a luxurious reward for failure really more important that leaving the money in a company that will spend it advancing technology?

    3. Re:Quits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Elon RUNS Tesla. He makes decisions and his teams have to make his vision happen (or they will find another job). Sometimes his decisions are based on his ego, like some of the shape and aesthetic demands he's imposed on his SpaceX engineers, and are not good engineering designs. But this doesn't matter. Elon's way or the highway. I would guess this is largely the source. Lattner had some vision of autonomy in his head and Elon shot that down. He probably felt he could not do his job the way he felt it needed to be done and left accordingly.

    4. Re:Quits? by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      Well, he would've been hired on as a tech lead, not just some random programmer. Understanding the problem space is probably hard, but not intractable for someone like him. He DOES have a PhD, after all. He might not be an expert in AI specifically, but he would've understood exactly how little he knew about the topic before he went in.

    5. Re:Quits? by Junta · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or folks just disagreed strongly with each other and it doesn't really reflect poorly on anyone (at least until one or the other side is proven right or wrong).

      In this level of doing things, compromise and moving forward may not be as feasible as it is in the lower levels. If you have leadership that really don't want to be on the same page, it will impact the quality of that leadership.

      I have been in places where it has been very obvious that executives don't agree, and one is ostensibly yielding to the other, but it's clear that whether he meant it or not, his leadership was undermining the other because he didn't genuinely believe in the other's direction. Even as he tried to tow the party line and said mostly the right things, you couldn't help but to see his true thoughts bleed through and inspire decisions that did not work well in the context of the stated strategy.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    6. Re:Quits? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Well, he would've been hired on as a tech lead, not just some random programmer. Understanding the problem space is probably hard, but not intractable for someone like him. He DOES have a PhD, after all. He might not be an expert in AI specifically, but he would've understood exactly how little he knew about the topic before he went in.

      AI is intractable. Doesn't matter how good an engineer someone is if the problem is unsolvable.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    7. Re:Quits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "tow the party line" -> "toe the party line"

    8. Re: Quits? by magarity · · Score: 2

      Why would anyone think he would be good at it? It's called the Peter Principle and it's truly evil. Fear it.

    9. Re:Quits? by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Dad (a PhD) tells me that a doctorate is proof that someone can come at a problem and learn everything there is to know about it and then extend the world's knowledge, if only a little bit.

      In my experience in industry, a doctorate is proof that a person could do the above, once, when they were young, not necessarily anymore. I've seen an awful lot of awful PhDs working, cluelessly, in fields outside their expertise that they treat as 'easy', while doing completely wrong. Some that can only be compared to 'know it all' teens.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    10. Re:Quits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, at AMD, rumor was it was either Raja or Jim that had to go... all else being equal, i think Keller is a crazy smart guy with an enormous ego and a demand to be "in charge". probably a good fit for Tesla, unless/until he clashes with Musk. other folks, may find it hard to sit in a parallel role if he's there.

    11. Re:Quits? by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      The military does lots of stuff in similar problem domains with little or no need for AI. There are lots of problems where Artificial Intelligence might produce great results, but commanding large, powerful, vehicles in a complex space with huge liability concerns isn't one that I personally would be all that comfortable with.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    12. Re: Quits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both are grammatically accurate, and applicable.

      One describes stepping as closely as possible to ideals represented by a metaphorical line, while the other describes pulling on a metaphorical rope to advance the party's objective.

    13. Re: Quits? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      bingo. there is some level of abstraction in compilers/languages, and it is more science, than art. otoh, AI remains an art, not science. so many new avenues and approaches.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    14. Re:Quits? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      This just in: Tesla is actually run by your mom's friend. "I hear you work for Apple making something called "compilers"? Anyway, could you come over and help me with my PC some time as its running slow. Also I might have a job for you building autonomous vehicle control systems!"

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    15. Re:Quits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dad (a PhD) tells me that a doctorate is proof that someone can come at a problem and learn everything there is to know about it and then extend the world's knowledge, if only a little bit.

      In my experience in industry, a doctorate is proof that a person could do the above, once, when they were young, not necessarily anymore. I've seen an awful lot of awful PhDs working, cluelessly, in fields outside their expertise that they treat as 'easy', while doing completely wrong. Some that can only be compared to 'know it all' teens.

      No kidding. I know that experience first hand.

      It isn't necessarily PhD holders' fault. They are given years to study a very specific problem they choose and present an open-ended response be it an actual solution or just more knowledge generation. When they are done they are told that a PhD means, largely what your father said, a one-size-fits-all solution to intellectual problems. They think having expertise in one sub-domain of one field is just as good as having expertise in all fields.

      Then they go into the workforce everyone says they will make 35k in and some of them actually end up making six figures out the gate. This inflates their ego. They think they are special. Then their employer gives them a specific problem and wants a viable solution in the next few quarters. Now that PhD has to do what they did out of passion in their youth over years for a salary in mere months.

      No small wonder why so many PhD holders are know-it-alls and simultaneously fail. Both managers and PhD holders don't know what PhD holders are for.

    16. Re:Quits? by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      It's possible to solve it at least as well as a human, obviously.

    17. Re: Quits? by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      What are you smoking? He started the illegal no-poaching that took millions from employees over years.

    18. Re:Quits? by michael_wojcik · · Score: 1

      Sure. Like pretty much any other achievement, some will repeat it many times over the course of a successful career, while others never will. Those in the latter group may not be suited for work outside the academic environment (particularly if they're easily distracted); they may rest on their laurels; they may grossly overestimate their capabilities; they may decide not to do the work.

      And, of course, some are simply frauds. I personally know one or two PhDs who plagiarized a significant portion of their dissertation work. Generally the victims don't want to launch a long, unpleasant battle, with backlash from some quarters almost certain, just to get someone's degree revoked (if that), so they get away with it.

      Also, standards for a PhD or other doctoral degree vary quite a lot among countries. And there are fake doctoral degrees from unaccredited diploma mills.

      Of course, many PhD holders do have both the intellectual focus and work ethic that the degree is meant to demonstrate. Of the dozens of PhDs I've known well, and the hundreds I've met more briefly, only a handful were bad apples.

  4. Confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Still trying to piecemeal the timestamps of who said what about who did not fit first.
    Assholery makes a difference after all. Or is that before?

    1. Re:Confused by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      If douchebaggery was involved, all bets are off.

  5. "Turns out..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turns out he got caught fucking the boss's wife!

    1. Re:"Turns out..." by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Turns out he got caught fucking the boss's wife!

      Nope. The boss doesn't currently have a wife. Maybe it was one of his ex-wives.

    2. Re:"Turns out..." by haruchai · · Score: 1

      Turns out he got caught fucking the boss's wife!

      Nope. The boss doesn't currently have a wife. Maybe it was one of his ex-wives.

      I can barely tell them apart. Even his current (or is that recent?) gal Amber Heard fits comfortably into the mold.
      Haven't seen someone with such a strong type preference since John Derek (Ursula Andress / Linda Evans / Bo Derek)

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  6. Re:You can be Uber's CEO!! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 0

    Tentacle Grape.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  7. seasoned roles by Osgeld · · Score: 0

    for a job hopper that will leave at the next glimpse of shiny

    1. Re:seasoned roles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on what? He was at Apple for 10+ years

    2. Re:seasoned roles by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      And it was his first job out of university. He's now looking for his third job.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  8. Nope, dude just can't cut it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "They have hired people we've fired," Musk said. "We always jokingly call Apple the 'Tesla Graveyard.' If you don't make it at Tesla, you go work at Apple. I'm not kidding."

    1. Re:Nope, dude just can't cut it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You what to know what the common thing in all your failed relationships is? You

    2. Re:Nope, dude just can't cut it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says the guy with a tiny peen.

  9. It's a farce! by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    Don't you see what's going on here people? Elon is making check knockoffs of people and enslaving the originals and eventually eating their brains! We need to save Chris from the evil clutches of the alien menace that is Elon Musk. WHO'S WITH ME?! ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  10. I wonder why he thought it would work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    after all, how much experience does he have with AI and autopilating software?

    1. Re:I wonder why he thought it would work by haruchai · · Score: 1

      after all, how much experience does he have with AI and autopilating software?

      Autopilating software? That'll get the kinks out of your AI

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  11. WTF, no weather report yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Normally we would have at least 3 or 4 Slashdot weather reports by this time of day telling us how warm it is. How will I know how warm it's getting today? Or how warm it will be in 10 years? Or 2 centuries? Please Slashdot, we need multiple updates EVERY day telling us how warm it is, even when it's cold. For the love of God, please get your act together PDQ!

  12. Management wasting another good engineer? by ErichTheRed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've heard Tesla has a ruthless startup culture even though they're a huge company -- kind of the worst stereotypical SV startup taken to a new level because Elon Musk is so driven. If that's the reason he's out I'm not surprised. Coming from Apple where employees are pretty much pampered and living off the constant money flow from the App Store might be a pretty big shock.

    But -- this guy is the "main author of LLVM". I've seen this one play out over and over, and have experienced it personally. Almost every company that isn't producing actual software treats their IT and development resources the same way the rest of the company regarding career path. Every individual worker in non-IT/non-engineering departments dreams of becoming the supervisor, then the manager, then the director and maybe a VP someday...mainly because most people aren't passionate about typical corporate jobs. The problem is that people management skills and engineering/work skills are completely orthogonal. No problem in the other departments -- who would want to be some random report analyst when they could be the boss of a bunch of report analysts and never have to see a report again? This is a bad fit for many engineers, scientists and IT people though, because most of us got into the job because we enjoy it.

    Some companies are just starting to come around to the fact that not everyone is hard-wired for management and would rather just be doing more interesting and impactful technical work. That's how I've been able to structure my career (luckily.) When my current company figured out I was good at what I do, liked it and wanted to keep doing work like it, they gave me more responsibility on the technical side instead of a Kindergarten class of employees to manage. I'm hoping I can keep going in this way because I've done the whole department manager thing. I really tried liking it, but it's just not where my skills are best used. Being a senior engineer/architect type, teaching the newbies the ropes and figuring out our long term technical path is what I'm good at, and companies who figure this out with their smarter employees will benefit in the long run IMO.

    1. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple: Highly Profitable

      Tesla: Loses money like a gambling addict.

    2. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by Altus · · Score: 1

      He was a director at apple, he is not new to engineering management.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    3. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess...the question is whether he was a Director (as in people management) or a "director" (as in SAP/PeopleSoft won't let us pay anyone below Director in the system the salary he requires".) Again, back to the career progression thing with everyone other than engineers being funneled up the management hierarchy regardless of ability or skill.

      Big deep-pocket tech companies are full of "distinguished engineers" and similar people who may have some management responsibility but are ultimately in charge of a process, thing, product or service...or just being a "smart guy" or "well-connected smart guy" that the companies can say they have on staff.

    4. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with this (at least from my job experience) is that the engineering ladders tends to be short and sweet with non existent room for growth as a technical leader. Hell most places don't want to keep expensive Sr. engineers and technical experts on staff, much easier to hire them out in their view. So unless you are content with zero growth in your responsibilities or pay, management is the only realistic career path and it's boring as hell.

    5. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed - the company I work for now used to have a couple levels of engineer, then you had to move to management to make more money. We're one of those rare long-service companies since the specialist knowledge of our industry takes a long time to develop, so people stick around. Now, you can (theoretically) get to the second-highest grade in the company and stay in the Engineer/Architect realm.

    6. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by chuckugly · · Score: 1

      Bigger places generally have a technical track, for instance where I currently work we have several "VP Fellows" who are not in a management track, they're top level technical resources. If the company you're at hasn't figured it out maybe you will have to switch if you ever become that accomplished.

    7. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by dwightk · · Score: 2

      Coming from Apple where employees are pretty much pampered and living off the constant money flow from the App Store might be a pretty big shock.

      um... you mean, hardware sales?

      --
      Like anyone can even know that
    8. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      Once you're working on something of sufficient size *you have to be managing other workers*. It's impossible for one person to do that much on their own.

      If you are not managing anyone, that means what you are working on isn't that big.

    9. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by jeremyp · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Doesn't mean he was actually any good at it.

      I've never worked for him or even met him, but I followed the Swift Evolution list after Swift was open sourced. When they first open sourced it, they announced a set of about seven priority goals for the next release (Swift 3). As the date for the beta arrived six months later, he sent out an email with a completely new replacement set of goals and then announced a great release that met the new goals. There was much congratulations and back slapping, but in reality the release was a failure because it failed to meet all but two of its original goals. My email pointing that out was not well received.

      If you are not willing to honestly assess the work of your team and yourself, you are not a good manager. If Chris was unable to keep his team focused on their objectives, I'm not surprised he was let go. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out that was why he left Apple. One of the goals missed on the Swift 3 release was ABI stability. That basically means that every Swift application has to have a copy of the run time statically linked and you can't distribute Swift frameworks in binary form (the frameworks and the application have to be compiled and linked with the same version of the Swift compiler.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    10. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Coming from Apple where employees are pretty much pampered and living off the constant money flow from the App Store might be a pretty big shock.

      App Store money is pittance - most of that goes to servers, credit card processors and other expenses. And online revenue at Apple (covering ALL of iTunes and iCloud) is tiny compared to even Mac sales. Apple's not getting rich off the App Store - 30% is not a big cut when most of the apps are free.

      No, Apple is a driven workplace - maybe not ruthless, but one where people are driven to excel. Jobs may be an asshole, but he was an inspirational asshole - if he knew you were phoning it in, he'd call you out. But if you were doing something to your very best, you'd be the saint.

      Perhaps that was missing at Tesla - the desire to excel and be rewarded for it (even if it results in failure).

      I don't believe things have changed much under Tim Cook, other than not being publicly berated, tarred and feathered in front of all the Apple employees.

    11. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a fucking dumbass moron.

    12. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Apple: Highly Profitable

      I'm pretty sure that profitability is not exclusive with presence of mediocre employees, especially in very large companies.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    13. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by Megol · · Score: 1

      Now that's a novel use of the phrase "ABI stability". I guess you think Windows programs are statically linked with all required libraries? No? Well, Windows do have a stable ABI for both user programs and kernel drivers.

      IOW I think the Anonymous gentleman that replied earlier wasn't completely wrong.

    14. Re:Management wasting another good engineer? by windwalkr · · Score: 1

      You're reading GP's comment backwards. His point is that Swift does not have a stable ABI, ergo programs must be statically linked.

  13. Dunning-Kruger effect by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Well, the guy is known for compilers and languages. He was asked to make autonomous car software. I honestly don't see why anyone would assume because he could do one means he could do the other.

    I don't mean to paint with too broad a brush but I've run into a fair number of software developers that are rather arrogant and presume that because they are talented at writing code that they are somehow domain experts in other fields as well. There are more than a few of them who have posted here on slashdot over the years. This doesn't describe the majority I think but it's hardly rare to see the Dunning-Kruger effect among engineers.

    1. Re:Dunning-Kruger effect by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      This doesn't describe the majority

      You're kidding. They post naive slashdot comments on every story that's outside their field, all the while being certain that they have seen in five seconds what the "idiotic" researchers couldn't see in five years.

  14. Perhaps he didn't code swiftly enough by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    Ahem

  15. Good news for Blackberry by ControlsGeek · · Score: 1

    He should give John Chen a call. Blackberry just got a 900 Million dollar windfall. I'm sure they are looking for good people for software development.

  16. Main point by fubarrr · · Score: 0

    >the main author of LLVM as well as Apple's Swift programming language

    The only point of Apple hiring him was to prevent LLVM going GPL.

    Without LLVM, Apple would've been locked to GPLed realm of GNU C++ ecosystem, which meant no DRM and other goodies

    1. Re:Main point by Desler · · Score: 2

      That would be false. It was after hiring him that Apple was willing to re license LLVM as GPL to get it integrated into GCC.

      The patch I'm working on is GPL licensed and copyright will be assigned to the FSF under the standard Apple copyright assignment.

      https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/200...

    2. Re:Main point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >the main author of LLVM as well as Apple's Swift programming language

      The only point of Apple hiring him was to prevent LLVM going GPL.

      Without LLVM, Apple would've been locked to GPLed realm of GNU C++ ecosystem, which meant no DRM and other goodies

      Except for the fact that he worked for Apple at the time when LLVM was offered up to GCC.

    3. Re: Main point by fubarrr · · Score: 1

      No, they did not.

      >copyright will be assigned to the FSF under the standard Apple copyright assignment

      No talk of GPL here, they talked on a limited copyright, not a geniune change of license

    4. Re: Main point by Desler · · Score: 1

      My quote explicitly mentioned the GPL. Are you illiterate?

    5. Re: Main point by fubarrr · · Score: 1

      Yes, under a limited copyright assignment, _without_ license change

    6. Re: Main point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, under a limited copyright assignment, _without_ license change

      [Citation Needed]

    7. Re: Main point by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      If they had assigned the copyright to the FSF, then the FSF could have distributed it under any licence they wanted.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    8. Re:Main point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The very next sentence after the one you quote says:
      [quote]Initially, I intend to link the LLVM libraries in from the existing LLVM distribution, mainly to simplify my work. This code is licensed under a BSD-like license, and LLVM itself will not initially be assigned to the FSF.[/quote]
      The patch that was being released under the GPL was the compatibility layer between LLVM and GCC, not LLVM itself.

      I don't think LLVM would have gone GPL with or without Apple. The community developing it is happy with it being BSD and the fact that it can easily be incorporated into development tools without technical or licensing hurdles.

    9. Re: Main point by Desler · · Score: 1

      Keep shifting the goalposts.

    10. Re:Main point by Desler · · Score: 1

      Sure, it might not have but Chris kept talking about doing a full copyright assignment if the community agreed.

      If people are seriously in favor of LLVM being a long-term part of GCC, I personally believe that the LLVM community would agree to assign the copyright of LLVM itself to the FSF and we can work through these details.

      Either way, the point of my post was that Apple's motives for hiring Chris had nothing to do with the ridiculous claims fubarr made. If Apple was all for preventing LLVM from going GPL why would their own employee in an official capacity be talking about a possible assignment of LLVM's copyright to the FSF. The copyright assignment would have allowed the FSF to freely relicense it as they pleased.

    11. Re: Main point by Desler · · Score: 2

      To add to my other post.

      Maybe that was true initially but Chris kept going on:

      If people are seriously in favor of LLVM being a long-term part of GCC, I personally believe that the LLVM community would agree to assign the copyright of LLVM itself to the FSF and we can work through these details.

    12. Re: Main point by fubarrr · · Score: 1

      Too young, too simple, sometimes naive.

      The thing he was willing to GPL was not the LLVM, but a mere compatibility layer. A thing to keep exploiting GCC, while they make their own backend suck less. The whole text of the proposal sounds like a deal.

      The legalese of that limited assignment basically meant that Apple can continue using GCC (because they discovered what a rotten tomato LLVM actually was), while being secure from all aspects of linking to GPL code. Same trick Nvidia did for 15 years with kernel module driver wrapper.

      They promised a complete asaignment, but people usually do not hold their promises, especially in business setting.

      I'm right, and you are not right.

    13. Re: Main point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There isn't a single factual statement you've written.

    14. Re: Main point by _merlin · · Score: 2

      That doesn't even make sense. FSF doesn't need copyright assignment to distribute LLVM under the terms of GPL. The BSD-like license allows for that already. They never promised to assign copyright of all of LLVM to the FSF. That wouldn't make sense because it would prevent anyone from distributing it under the less restrictive BSD-like license.

      The patch to allow GCC to easily use LLVM as a backend needs to be GPL-licensed because it's a derivative of GCC which is itself GPL-licensed. Assigning copyright on that patch to FSF would have allowed integration into GCC. However, the FSF are opposed to making GCC modular in any way. They think this will be a gateway to integrating GCC with non-free (as in beards) development environments (yes this also makes it hard to integrate into FSF-approved development environments, but that's their choice).

      But clang/LLVM has been the best thing for GCC in years. It's provided real competition in the compiler space, and without that GCC was just stagnating and getting buggier. C++ support, error messages, compile speed and plenty of other stuff has improved enormously since clang/LLVM has been on the scene.

    15. Re: Main point by fubarrr · · Score: 1

      >FSF doesn't need copyright assignment to
      >distribute LLVM under the terms of GPL

      The whole thread was about the opposite case. LLVM wanted a deeper linking to GCC without having to relicense as GPL. Why you all guys want to derail this thread so much? Working for Apple, or their satellites?

    16. Re: Main point by Desler · · Score: 1

      The thing he was willing to GPL was not the LLVM

      Initially, yes. But as I quoted he was talking about a full copyright assignment which would have allowed the FSF to relicense it as they please.

      They promised a complete asaignment, but people usually do not hold their promises, especially in business setting.

      No, he said the LLVM would likely be willing to do a full assignment if the GCC people agreed to a merge.

      I'm right, and you are not right.

      Are you 2 years old?

    17. Re: Main point by Desler · · Score: 1

      Nowhere in Chris' post confirms that they weren't open to GPL licensing LLVM. In fact, it stated the opposite if the FSF had been willing to merge GCC and LLVM. The reason it never happened was the FSF refused not because Apple was against GPLing LLVM.

    18. Re: Main point by Megol · · Score: 1

      You're a joke. High on your own immature ego you can't even understand simple things when documented, can't even write properly and have a lot of attitude with nothing to back it up.

      Are you under 15?

  17. Spin from Elon by sjbe · · Score: 1

    "They have hired people we've fired," Musk said. "We always jokingly call Apple the 'Tesla Graveyard.' If you don't make it at Tesla, you go work at Apple. I'm not kidding."

    That's one way to spin it. It smacks a little of post hoc ergo propter hoc though with a little bit of puffery on top. Or it could be simply that they were a bad cultural fit at Tesla and Apple was a better fit. Just because someone doesn't fit at a given company doesn't mean they are inferior. I probably wouldn't be a great fit for Tesla either for a variety of reasons, none of which have anything to do with competence.

    1. Re: Spin from Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, that was some fancy shit Latin learnin' you just spat, dawg!

  18. Headline and summary don't match by diesalesmandie · · Score: 1

    Headline says he quit, summary says "they made a change" which is it?

    --
    This is my sig, there are many like it but this one is mine
    1. Re:Headline and summary don't match by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the actual article, if you had read it, both. He says that he left, and Tesla says that they made a change.

    2. Re:Headline and summary don't match by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Headline says he quit, summary says "they made a change" which is it?

      It's both.. Tesla made him quit :)

  19. Re:You can be Uber's CEO!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was a bunch of them...

  20. Just like his work on Swift, half-assed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps this is a trend. Swift sounds nice in design but when in actual use feels like it was designed by 10 different faction groups each with their own take on what is the next-gen language. Total half baked language with wtfs everywhere.

    Not to mention, the LLVM compiler for Swift is one of the slowest and error-prone garbage even after (pending) 4 major api breaking revision of the core language.

    What does this have to do with this Tesla post? It shows he can't manage anything large correctly.

  21. I don't see what this clown's background by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...has to do with control systems?

  22. Tesla Liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lattner is smart to publicly leave now before Tesla's blaming dead users for lethal product failures finally backfires. They are on borrowed time until they are barred from all sales and forced into mandatory recall due to public endangerment.

  23. Re:Yep, just an incompetent Macfag. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "They have hired people we've fired," Musk said. "We always jokingly call Apple the 'Tesla Graveyard.' If you don't make it at Tesla, you go work at Apple. I'm not kidding."

    Is this the only thing you are going to post today? I've seen you post this throughout this thread.

  24. Re:Yep, just an incompetent Macfag. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, I'll post about how your mom is being banged by the horsecocks of Tyrone and Jamal right now.

  25. It's all Amazon's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm looking around the office where I work, and it's just exasperating. Everyone is either a compulsive climber or a mindless drone. There is no in between. And this seems to be the case in almost every industry driven by software. With the rise of e-commerce and instant universal availability, no one is willing to accept second place anymore, so we have more false starts than we can count. Every competent new person we hire quits after six months to go build their own startup. I feel like I'm living in the Silicon Valley TV show. How is this going to play out in the long term?

  26. Re:You can be Uber's CEO!! by dasgoober · · Score: 1

    Giving or receiving ?

  27. Re:You can be Uber's CEO!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you feel lucky?

  28. Right, because everybody wants to hire a quitter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way to Go idiot...

  29. He was a people/technical director by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    From a long podcast interview he did around the time he left Apple, he has been mostly managing people for a while, along with some technical direction. But it was not like he simply had the title and was doing coding day to day.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  30. Re:Tell that to the president by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know Trump is not a Republican, right? Just because someone runs under a party's ticket doesn't mean they share the values of that party.

  31. Maybe he want to ship code that you KNOW works? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and why. Tesla is more of a trail and error developer than actual engineers.

    "IT IS WORKING NOW!"
    "Do you know why?"
    "No..."
    "Never mind, ship it!"

  32. Re:You can be Uber's CEO!! by B33rNinj4 · · Score: 1

    Don't forget the Clinton Foundation as well.

  33. Re:You can be Uber's CEO!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Don't forget the Clinton Foundation as well"

    You can stop now, Trump won.

  34. You can't expect all the software is the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You really just cannot expect a compiler designer to know shit about car software and to succeed in any project because he was successful in another thing.

    I for one congratulate Chris for taking the step aside to do something he may enjoy better.

  35. How this guy really gets around! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First he wins the NCAA title for Duke on a last ditch shot, then played for the Hawks, then went to Apple and then lastly Tesla. Dude is living the life.