Slashdot Mirror


Alphabet Wraps Up Reorganization With a New Company Called XXVI (bloomberg.com)

Alphabet is approaching its final form. After evolving from Google into a corporate parent with distinct arms in far-flung fields like health care and self-driving cars, it is now forming a new holding company called XXVI Holdings Inc. Bloomberg reports: The new structure legally separates Google from other units such as Waymo, its self-driving car business, and Verily, a medical device and health data firm. Google co-founder Larry Page announced Alphabet two years ago to foster new businesses that operate independently from Google. Technically, however, those units, called the "Other Bets," were still subsidiaries of Google. The new structure, unveiled Friday, enables the Other Bets to become subsidiaries of Alphabet on the same legal footing as Google. "We're updating our corporate structure to implement the changes we announced with the creation of Alphabet in 2015," Gina Weakley Johnson, an Alphabet spokeswoman, said. She called the process a legal formality that won't affect ultimate shareholder control, operations, management or personnel at the 75,606 person company. Google is also changing from a corporation to a limited liability company, or LLC. This won't alter the way the business pays taxes, Johnson said. The switch is partly related to Google's transformation from a listed public company into a business owned by a holding company. Now, it's owned by Alphabet, so it effectively has only one investor and no public disclosure obligations. An LLC structure is better suited to this situation. XXVI, the name of the new holding entity, is the number of letters in the alphabet expressed in Roman numerals.

103 comments

  1. Thanks for clarifying by El+Cubano · · Score: 2

    XXVI, the name of the new holding entity, is the number of letters in the alphabet expressed in Roman numerals.

    Thanks for clarifying that. At first I thought they named themselves for Taylor Switft's age. The number of letters in the alphabet is much better. Of course, it is a good thing that Google wasn't started in China, or the new company would have ended up with a name like MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

    1. Re:Thanks for clarifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Taylor Swift turns 28 this year - so, if they named the company after her age, they were shockingly incompetent.

    2. Re:Thanks for clarifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      No it's some kind hipster/chromosome disorder you are required to have for their diversity quota.

    3. Re:Thanks for clarifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for clarifying that.

      Actually, I figured that out right away. My thought was "well, now they're going after the whole alphabet."

      It made me wonder when they will actually fill in all the letters. We have
        Android
        Chrome
        Google
        Verily
        Waymo
        YouTube

      I'd guess there will be more I didn't think of.

      I also thought of how they're zooming through the alphabet for Android versions. What happens when they want to go past Z? Will Android be end-of-life then?

    4. Re:Thanks for clarifying by somenickname · · Score: 2

      XXVI, the name of the new holding entity, is the number of letters in the alphabet expressed in Roman numerals.

      Thanks for clarifying that. At first I thought they named themselves for Taylor Switft's age. The number of letters in the alphabet is much better. Of course, it is a good thing that Google wasn't started in China, or the new company would have ended up with a name like MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

      I wonder if this is an assumption on the part of the article writer. XXVI is clearly a stock-symbol-shortened version of ".xX VI Xx.". The new company name is just a strong suggestion to employees as to what editor they should use. Hopefully this means we will have VI bindings in Android soon.

    5. Re:Thanks for clarifying by ClickOnThis · · Score: 2

      Taylor Swift turns 28 this year - so, if they named the company after her age, they were shockingly incompetent.

      If they had waited two years, they could have called the company XXX. Oh well.

      [Just a joke. All due deference to Taylor Swift and other victims of assault.]

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    6. Re: Thanks for clarifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get back to coding you geek! :P

    7. Re:Thanks for clarifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same thing that ubuntu did and start from A again I guess.

    8. Re:Thanks for clarifying by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      If they had waited two years, they could have called the company XXX.

      But then people might think it was named after Barbara Bach.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    9. Re:Thanks for clarifying by NoZart · · Score: 1

      They are already in the works of a new mobile operating system to dodge the problem of finding some snack that starts with an X

    10. Re:Thanks for clarifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

      Man, the missed opportunities Google.
      You'll never see those Google + food tie-ins now.

    11. Re:Thanks for clarifying by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Or possibly Vin Diesel.

    12. Re:Thanks for clarifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XXVI holdings is to own cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Why else would they need to be secret about it?

  2. Romans used just 23 letters in Latin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Or so Google tells me.

    1. Re: Romans used just 23 letters in Latin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They mean "26" written in Roman numerals, which is not linked to Latin in any way. The joke here is that the company is called Alphabet, and there's 26 letters in the English alphabet. I don't know why someone has to explain it.

  3. This is what happens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When you have too much money and too many employees.

    Meaningless wankery.

    1. Re:This is what happens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try owning a large business. You'll see this isn't meaningless.

    2. Re:This is what happens by Iamthecheese · · Score: 2

      I disagree. It's very meaningful. What it means is Google doesn't have to be as transparent since it has only one stockholder.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    3. Re: This is what happens by cornjones · · Score: 1

      This was my first thought as well...

    4. Re: This is what happens by tattood · · Score: 1

      This was my first thought as well...

      As long as anybody can buy Google stock on the open market, they are a public company. They still have many, many individual stock holders, but XXVI is the majority stock holder. If XXVI bought up all of the stock, only then can they be as non-transparent as they want.

      --
      WTB [sig], PST!!!
  4. disclosure obligations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Now, it's owned by Alphabet, so it effectively has only one investor and no public disclosure obligations"

    Alphabet however is publicly listed and does have public disclosure obligations.

    1. Re:disclosure obligations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "no public disclosure obligations"
      This was their number 1 goal. And changing into a LLC will effect their tax liabilities while concentrating all the wealth to the current owners. And with no public disclosures requirements you remove the stock price volatility which can wipe out millions if not billions of the owners wealth. Now the owners have removed that risk.

    2. Re:disclosure obligations by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      And changing into a LLC will effect their tax liabilities [...]

      Probably not. The Google LLC probably elected to be taxed as a corporation. That would require opening new bank accounts and changing letterheads to the new name. Everything else can stay the same.

    3. Re:disclosure obligations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      affect, not effect.

    4. Re:disclosure obligations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean "impact", right? ;)

  5. Ironic. That it Looks like a super bowl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because they are looking at the super bowl of anti trust cases of the US DOJ has any integrity left

    1. Re: Ironic. That it Looks like a super bowl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. If ever there was time to regulate, it's now. It might be so convoluted as to be impossible later on.

    2. Re:Ironic. That it Looks like a super bowl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US DOJ has any integrity left

      Now, now - you know as well as the rest of us that it doesn't.

    3. Re:Ironic. That it Looks like a super bowl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they are looking at the super bowl of anti trust cases of the US DOJ has any integrity left

      They'll get on it right after they finish prosecuting that woman for laughing at Sessions.

  6. Now they just need extraterritoriality by He+Who+Has+No+Name · · Score: 1

    And we can finally get the Sixth World started properly with megacorps and a dystopian cyberpunk economy-stratified society.

    1. Re:Now they just need extraterritoriality by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      And we can finally get the Sixth World started properly with megacorps and a dystopian cyberpunk economy-stratified society.

      Since they're putting all these different entities under one name, I'm shocked they didn't simply drop all the pretense and name it:

      Umbrella(TM) Corp.

      An umbrella by any other name...?

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  7. Re: Trump Will Fix This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like the smell of my own farts. Strange, no?

  8. XLII by dottrap · · Score: 1

    Google used to be more ambitious.

    From googol (100 zeros) and indexing all the worlds information, reduced to ABCs and counting like Sesame Street.

    If they were still cool, it would be XLII, the answer to life, the universe, and everything.

    1. Re:XLII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "We liked the name Alphabet because it means a collection of letters that represent language, one of humanity's most important innovations"

      Google = information
      Alphabet = Language

    2. Re: XLII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey buddy, take it up with Larry Page. It's his words not mine.

    3. Re:XLII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fireball XL5 - I'll say no more.

  9. So XXVI is the employee age limit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nobody over 26 yrs old will be hired, just like the parent company?

  10. Google and the "Other Bets" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So, if these other units were the "Other Bets" (in the sense of wagers/gambles, I presume), and Google itself was the first of the bets, that means that it was the "Alpha Bet". :-)

  11. What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tyrell Corporation? Replicants? Alphabet/Google/whatever_they_are_this_week has become way too big for their own good. Anyone with a modicum of honesty will admit they control far too much and they are putting their tentacles into everything.

    1. Re:What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lolwut... they sell you a websearcher (no it's free), they sell you a smartphone OS (nope it's free), they sell you an office program (nope it's free), they sell you email service (nope it's free), they sell you audio and video content (nope it's free), ......... srlsy wtf do they sell you lol...

    2. Re:What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They sell you.

    3. Re: What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They sell YOU to advertisers.

    4. Re: What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey - it's the troll who operates the "Juan" persona on the Cypherpunks list. The stylometrics give it all away. =)

  12. why by fermion · · Score: 2

    So what is the purpose of this expenditure of presumably vast amounts of money to set up shell companies that legally separate individuals from activities while still allowing the individuals to exert full control? Is it just a tax shelter? Is it to limit legal liability when one of these firms does something hugely illegal? Corporate does not spend money without a reason.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:why by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      It sure does sound like they are preparing to be evil.

    2. Re: why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Preparing?

    3. Re:why by ncc74656 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It sure does sound like they are preparing to be evil.

      You say that as if they aren't already.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    4. Re:why by hord · · Score: 2

      “By separating them, it allows the parent company to limit the exposure of the various obligations of the LLCs,” Hobart said. “For example, if one of the LLCs has its own debt, only that LLC will end up being responsible for payment of that debt.”

      This. Google's ad business doesn't want to have to pay for the failures in all their experiments. The ad business is the only one that consistently makes large amounts of money and they are going to do everything they can to isolate it legally from everyone.

    5. Re:why by swillden · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most of the purpose of having a corporation is to ensure that if it goes bankrupt it doesn't take the owners down with it. While it's unlikely that any of the "other bets" could generate such a large financial liability that it could actually sink Google, they might be able to put a dent in it. By separating the companies entirely, Alphabet enables any one of the subsidiaries to go belly up without harming the rest. Of course, they'll still have the option of using cash generated by Google to bail out failing subsidiaries if they want. Or to grow succeeding subsidiaries. Larry and Sergey being who they are, I doubt they'd use bankruptcy to avoid legitimate liability, but the change should serve to make shareholders a lot more comfortable with the other bets, knowing that any of them can be shut down cleanly at any time.

      Is it to limit legal liability when one of these firms does something hugely illegal?

      I don't think that actually works. When courts are pursuing criminal wrongdoing, they look for actual decisionmakers, regardless of corporate boundaries. Otherwise it would be trivial for corporations to deliberately set out to do illegal things, isolating the illegal acts in a subsidiary set up for that purpose, then just cutting it loose if it gets caught. For example, VW could have set up a subsidiary responsible for writing the emissions control software for their diesel vehicles.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    6. Re:why by swillden · · Score: 1

      The ad business is the only one that consistently makes large amounts of money

      Actually, there are several businesses that consistently make large amounts of money. Ad revenue still comprises almost 90% of revenue, but it's ticking downward year by year. Enterprise licensing (GSuite, mostly) is doing very well and growing. Android also consistently generates billions through the Play store. I think Google's cloud services are generating pretty good revenues, too, though they may not generate any net profits.

      However, it is true that all of the things that make money are part of Google, not the "other bets".

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:why by swillden · · Score: 1

      Ad revenue still comprises almost 90% of revenue, but it's ticking downward year by year.

      In case it's not obvious, I mean ad revenues are declining as a percentage of total revenues, not in absolute terms. Said another way, ad revenues are growing at a healthy rate, but non-ad revenues are growing faster.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    8. Re:why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're propping up the free market of course!

    9. Re:why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitcoin. I've said too much.

    10. Re: why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does all that fedgov black budget money get recorded as "ad revenue"?

    11. Re:why by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      I think the difference you might be thinking of is Criminal VS Civil. If through your own negligence you're found CRIMINALLY responsible for something, then LLC isn't going to probably do much for you. If someone feels like suing you CIVILLY for say money they feel you own them, well I think that might be where the whole LLC comes into play.

      I remember a lawyer trying to explain that simply putting a waiver doesn't exempt you from laws, you are still subject to them. It might help a bit, should there be at least some wiggle room, but for the most part if you're negligent, you're negligent.

    12. Re:why by swillden · · Score: 1

      I understand the difference between criminal prosecution and torts. I don't think the corporate structure is an effective shield against either, otherwise we'd see a lot more corporations setting up subsidiaries to shield them from risky actions. e.g. (again) the VW case, which actually includes both criminal and civil liability.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  13. Wait wait wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    The switch is partly related to Google's transformation from a listed public company into a business owned by a holding company. Now, it's owned by Alphabet, so it effectively has only one investor and no public disclosure obligations.

    Why is this not the main story? Google just pulled a fast one on all of its investors.

    1. Re:Wait wait wait by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

      Probably because it doesn't mean what you think it means. If you owned shares in Google you still own shares in Google - except its now called Alphabet. That is all.

  14. In the future it will just be called... by anvilmark · · Score: 3, Funny

    "The Umbrella Corporation"

    1. Re:In the future it will just be called... by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      "The Organization"

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    2. Re:In the future it will just be called... by NettiWelho · · Score: 1

      "Weyland-Yutani - Building Better Worlds"

    3. Re:In the future it will just be called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The Sponge" has no disclosure requirements.
      "The Octopus" is everywhere.

    4. Re:In the future it will just be called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      26 fins on an umbrella?
      Man, what are you trying to shelter, the average American?

  15. Google Does Not Want to Be Googled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I feel like they are naming all of these new googlecorps with such generic names as to intentionally make it really hard to google them and thus keep track of whatever evil schemes they are up to.

  16. A Company with a Roman Numeral Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's brilliant! I wish I'd have thought of LLC first.

    1. Re: A Company with a Roman Numeral Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LLC is -50-50+100=0

    2. Re: A Company with a Roman Numeral Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't work like that.

  17. Transparent ploy to insulate lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Like if the self driving car part gets a 100bn wrongful death lawsuit it won't take Google down with it.

    1. Re:Transparent ploy to insulate lawsuits by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Should it?

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    2. Re: Transparent ploy to insulate lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes. Google is the company parent, they should have to pay that 1bn.

  18. Resident Evil by jimbo · · Score: 1

    I still think of Alphabet as the Umbrella Corporation.

  19. Alphabet is approaching its final form by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really hope we don't end up fighting it's cybernetic offspring in some sort of dystopian future.

  20. what XXVI really means by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    After you complete the contest, with substitution of X like Wheel of (Mis)Fortune, the anagram XXVI is EVIL

    e.g. like Google is EVIL

  21. Coincidentally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    XXVI is the number of Final Fantasy games the Japanese will make before someone over there learns enough English to, *ahem*, finally notice the flaw in their franchise name. Final Fantasy XXVI will be followed by Penultimate Fantasy and then by Final, "No, for Real this time!", Fantasy. Ironically the latter will be a prequel.

    You're welcome,
    Time-Traveling Slashdotter

  22. Numerologist behind the Google names? by seoras · · Score: 1

    If you pop the name "google" into a numerology calculator you get a very interesting set of results.
    In western name numerology the vowels and consonants are summed to give 2 "hidden" traits of "Inner Dreams" & "Souls Urge"
    Google is unique, as far as I know, in being the only word to give 8 for both of these hidden traits.
    The 3rd trait is the "expression", or how someone/thing appears to the world and is the sum of all letters. Google = 7.
    The number 7 is the number of research (search), study, introspection, etc. A religious number, each major religion resting on the 7th day.
    The number 8, which is their hidden desires & dreams, is the number of wealth and power.
    (Ever noticed the Chinese obsession with 8s? Beijing Olympics opened on the 8/8/08).
    Interesting curiosity I thought and then came along "Alphabet". Analysed the same way it's hidden's are 7 & 22, the outer appearance is 11.
    Again a rare name in numerology as it has not one but two "master numbers". The 22 is the "master builder" and considered the most powerful of numbers.
    11 is the number of a preacher, counsellor etc. (again religious ovetones just like the 7).
    Once again a hidden desire for power and an outward appearance that's benign.
    Now they come up with 26 in roman numerals (which would be an 8 again) it's getting beyond coincidence.
    I'm now certain that whoever comes up with names at that company has a side interest in numerology.

    1. Re:Numerologist behind the Google names? by stephanruby · · Score: 2

      I'm now certain that whoever comes up with names at that company has a side interest in numerology.

      Technically, you're right of course. But this has more to do with how marketing is taught in US business schools.

      The idea is that a company should hire a consulting company and pay them millions of dollars to check all the possible meanings of a name and its symbols in all the countries the company will want to operate in.

      And please don't get me wrong, this isn't really bad advice in itself. Foreigners can be super arrogant in thinking that a name that sounds good to them will also sound equally good to everyone else in the world. It's just the example that is typically brought up with it that is slightly problematic.

      The claim is that GM failed miserably in South America because it launched a car called "Nova", which means "No Go" in Spanish. However, that's not exactly what happened. Nova was initially very successful in the South American countries it launched in. It's just that the Nova car wasn't reliable and the name eventually became a joke because of its associated quality control issues. And yes, the name itself didn't really help, but the name itself wasn't the key lesson to take away from that example either.

      In any case, coming back to your original comment. Yes, I'm sure someone versed in numerology checked out all the possible meanings and made sure most of those meanings were positive. And the same goes for local meaning, cultural meaning, historical meaning, color meaning, font meanings, etc. After all, correcting the mistake of an ill-chosen brand name and relaunching the brand can be super expensive. And this is not a risk marketing people want to take.

  23. So ... what happened to XXV? by Zumbs · · Score: 1

    If they take their name after a roman numeral, XXVI, one cannot help wondering what happened to XXV? And XXIV etc?

    Attempted reorganizations gone wrong?

    Secret entities?

    --
    The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
  24. Excessive VI, emacs is finally by tats · · Score: 1

    dead.

  25. A better title would be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Alphabet Wraps Up Tax Avoidance Scheme with a New Company Called XXVI

  26. Re: Trump Will Fix This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those aren't your own farts that you smell. The "smell" has been implanted directly into your nose direct from our factory through special nasal hairs that we implant each time you sleep..

  27. If corporations are 'persons' .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... then one corporation owning another boils down to practiced slavery.

    Jokes aside: A corporation should only be able to be ownable by humans, which in turn should be fully responsible for any action the corporation takes. This would end externalisation of risk while funneling away the profits, be it form of tax evasion (through fake license payments) or the strategy to (should things go south) kill off a single shell corporation to leave others with the bill.

    A company spilled crude into the ocean, poisoned the population or sold exploding things while you owned a part of it (be it directly or as shares)? Then pay up for any damages... Would be a fair compensation for getting a share of any profits, wouldn't it?

  28. Which alphabet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bloody structural racism....

  29. New World Order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whether they change their name from Alphabet or a reference of their parent company, they are still just trying to circumvent current anti-trust laws. They will not stop until all have been assimilated on this planet into their image of the world which includes stifling free speech under the guise of "hate speech". They have shown time and again, they will go to no lengths to squelch any opposition to their final solution of group think.

    And it seems to be working in CA and NYC as their experiment has shown. Both these areas blindly follow their PC overlords to the actual physical violence to any who oppose. I want to know when the government will take action on this as this is a clear violation of anti-trust laws. Heck, even the EU figured that one out. While I am all for free market, there are limitations that Silicon(e) Valley can perform to perpetuate their plans for world domination.

  30. Don't be evil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh yeah they changed their motto from that... which was an evil thing to do.

    And now Google doesn't have to disclose anything!

  31. Just checking by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    How does "the new structure eliminates Google's disclosure requirements"

    ultimately square with

    "Don't be evil" ...again, precisely?

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Just checking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You don't get to pick and chose the rules you operate under. While I doubt anyone at Google cries themselves to sleep because of the elimination of the disclosure requirements getting eliminated, the purpose is probably mainly to shield people and property from potential liabilities stemming from other parts of the corporation.

      For instance, as someone else pointed out, this means that if you get bumped by one of Waymo's cars, a jury can't get bamboozled into giving you all of Google's money as compensation. Etc. That's probably a much more powerful motivator than "Yes, no we can start being really evil. Occam and so on.

    2. Re:Just checking by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      If you have your face bashed in with a brick, you'll feel a lot better, and so will we. Also, you won't care about stupid shit anymore. And your inability to talk will make you seem infinitely smarter. All-in-all, it's a big win.

  32. mistreating the abbos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's now "Don't be evil, if there's anybody watching".

  33. Now each company has fewer employees. Not meaningl by raymorris · · Score: 2

    > When you have too much money and too many employees.

    Yes, they had too many employees in too many completely different lines of business, all under one awkwardly large company.

    > Meaningless wankery.

    Now they are splitting different subsidiaries that do different things, like Waymo, into distinctly separate companies. Each company will have fewer employees, and be more focused. That's not meaningless.

  34. Separate self-driving cars from thermostats by raymorris · · Score: 2

    Previously, Alphabet had a division that builds self-driving cars, called Waymo, another division that makes smart thermostats, another that makes Android, etc. Dozens of unrelated product lines. It's awkward and difficult to manage so many different projects as one company. What reason is there to keep them all together as divisions of the company? It just makes sense for these separate products, in different industries, so be separate companies. The new holding company allows them to be separate companies, managed separately. They can easily be sold off whenever it makes sense to do so. The holding company will own stock in each of the new seperate companies.

  35. Final Fantasy meant "we're betting the company" by tepples · · Score: 1

    Final Fantasy composer Nobuo Uematsu explained that it was intended to be Square's last game, the one on which lead designer Hironobu Sakaguchi bet his career and the producer bet the company as it faced bankruptcy. It was also sort of an homage to tabletop RPG Fighting Fantasy, which shared its initials. (See citations at source)

    Capcom's Final Fight is a beat-em-up reusing much of the Street Fighter engine. It too got sequels, but there aren't any widely known reliable sources for why its title was chosen.

    1. Re:Final Fantasy meant "we're betting the company" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pshaw! Hearsay and speculation! That's like asking John Williams why Lucas did X or Y with Star Wars. Who ya gonna believe? Some composer 20+ years after the fact, or me an' my Time Goggles?

  36. 26 letters in the alphabet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew utf-8 was a farce.

  37. Nefarious Mathemagics.. by cb88 · · Score: 1

    XXVI = 26
    Half of which is notably 13, which is just a little evil.
    26 then presumably represents double evil or nearly complete evil.
    So we arrive at 2*X + 6 = 26
    Dividing by two X + 6 = 13
    So Something + 6 is Evil
    And twice something + 6 is double evil...
    From there we can extrapolate that 3 of something is complete evil
    Going back to XXVI=26 , we see on the right are 2 XX and VI which is 6 and on the left 2 and 6, so we swap and reevaluate with X = 6 and 2 = X
    66VI=XX6
    666=666
    Thus google is complete EVIL.

    1. Re:Nefarious Mathemagics.. by adam.voss · · Score: 1

      So we arrive at 2*X + 6 = 26
      Dividing by two X + 6 = 13

      Nope :)

    2. Re:Nefarious Mathemagics.. by cb88 · · Score: 1

      Hey I made a valiant effort :D ... I should have just integrated it and factored out 666 as a constant :P

  38. convenient by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

    It was nice of them to have a distinct action and period in time where they decided to turn evil.

    1. Re:convenient by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      What is it with fuck-wits and "don't be evil"? You really need to let that go. Or drown yourself in ketchup. That would be both liberating and amusing.

    2. Re:convenient by HeckRuler · · Score: 2

      Naw, the "don't be evil" motto was a good thing.

      It was kind of a bad sign when they tried to distance themselves from it back in 2012ish. But I didn't think they were abusing their power much and it was really just a clash of corporate vs engineering cultures.

      But the switch from Google to Alphabet is the culmination of that corporate culture winning out. Google might still be run by engineers, but Alphabet is pulling the strings. Probably just for tax shenanigan schemes, but it's a pretty clear sign. I thought it wouldn't happen until Page and Brin kicked the bucket. "old guard" and all that, and Page is even back in the saddle as CEO. I dunno, I guess money changes people.

      And why are we keen to harp on this? Because engineers (Or specifically Paul Buchheit) aren't typically high-functioning sociopaths like most CEOs. As companies get bigger their culture and overall policy shifts from the founding geeks who made it to the corporate bosses who run it. Of course that started with Eric Schmidt, but culture is real slow the change. Arguably it's the natural slide to the lowest energy state, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't fight it

      Don't be evil, is a good motto. The sort of thing that an upcoming disruptive new competition that has the public's attention would make. Getting rid of it, distancing themselves from it, is the sort of thing that a big established soulless corporation would do. And that goes hand in hand with being dicks t

      Which is why I switched to duckduckgo and then ixquick for my searches around 2015. Google maps (and their traffic) is still handy, as is the gmail and calendar, but I'll switch away once I get off my butt or the google overlords start misbehaving. Same way I dropped facebook once that started going south.

      And besides, if a company's motto is ever something as direct like that, of course you can expect people to harp on it whenever they do something that appears to run afoul of it. It's kinda why mottos exist.

  39. Re: Trump Will Fix This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should also distance themselves from any ethics or accountability.

  40. Re:why? because they can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Corporate structures are explicitly used to create barriers to liability...it is the ONLY reason companies use them.. Here is a well known and very successful liability avoidance structure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hardie_Industries All fully legal of course, but a somewhat terrible choking death for the injured parties.