Google Innovates in Smart Software: A Reorganization
April 28, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
Someone once told me that it takes six months for staff to adjust to a reorganization. Is this a bit of folklore. Nope, I just think the six month estimate is dead wrong. I think it takes longer, often a year or more to integrate two units of the same company. How do I know? I watched Halliburton take over Nuclear Utility Services. Then I watched Bell + Howell take over the Courier Journal’s database publishing unit. Finally, I have quite direct memories of not being able to find much of anything when we last moved.
Now the Alphabet Google thing is addressing its marketing problem with a reorganization. I learned this by reading “Announcing Google DeepMind.” The write up by a founder of DeepMind says:
Sundar is announcing that DeepMind and the Brain team from Google Research will be joining forces as a single, focused unit called Google DeepMind. Combining our talents and efforts will accelerate our progress towards a world in which AI helps solve the biggest challenges facing humanity…
Not a word about catching up with Microsoft’s Bing ChatGPT marketing, not a peep about the fast cycle integration of orchestration software across discrete ChatGPT-type functions, and not a whisper about why Google is writing about what is to happen.
What’s my take on this Code Red or Red Alert operational status which required the presence of Messrs. Brin and Page?
- Google is demonstrating that a reorganization will address the Microsoft ChatGPT marketing. A reorganization and a close partnership among Sundar [Pichai], Jeff Dean, James Manyika, and Demis [Hassabis]? Okay.
- Google announced quantum supremacy, its protein folding breakthrough, and the game playing ability of its smart software. Noble achievements, but Microsoft is pushing smart Bing into keyboards. That’s one way to get Android and iPhone users’ attention. Will it work for Microsoft? Probably not, but it is something visible.
- Google is simply not reacting. A baby ecosystem is growing up around Midjourney. I learned about unprompt.ai. The service provides a search and point-to-get the prompt service. When I saw this service, I realized that ChatGPT may be morphing in ways that any simple Web search engine could implement. For Google, deploying the service would be trivial. The problem is that reorgs don’t pay much attention outside of the fox hole in which senior management prefers to dwell.
Net net: Google is too big and has too much money to concede. However, the ChatGPT innovation off road vehicle is zipping along. Google is organizing the wizards who will on Google’s glitzy glamping rig. ChatGPT is hitting the rocks and crawling over obstacles. The Google machine is in a scenic observation point with a Pebble Beach-type of view. What’s the hurry? Google is moving… with a reorg.
Stephen E Arnold, April 28, 2023
The Google: A Digital Knife Twisted after Stabbing
April 27, 2023
This essay is the work of a real, still-living dinobaby. No smart software involved.
Brian Lee captures a personal opinion with the somewhat misleading title “Why Does Did Google Brain Exist?” To be fair, the typographic trope of striking out the “does” makes it clear that something changed in the GOOD’s smart software theme park. The lights on one thrill ride seem to have been turned off. Shadows flicker across other attractions, and it is not clear if maintenance is making repairs or if the shows are changing.
The article offers an analysis of the shotgun marriage of Google Brain with DeepMind. I heard the opening notes of “Duelling Banjos” from the 1972 film Deliverance. Instead of four city slickers floating on a raft, the theme accentuates the drama of similar but culturally different digital cruises on Alphabet’s river of cash.
I agree with most of the points presented in the article; for example, presenting “research” as a pretense for amping advertising revenue, the “hubris” of Google, and Google’s effort to be the big dog in smart software. Instead of offering snippets, I recommend that you read Mr. Lee’s essay.
I do want to quote what I think is the twisting of the knife after stabbing Googzilla in the heart. Mr. Lee shoves the knife deeper and pushed it side to side:
Despite Brain’s tremendous value creation from its early funding of open-ended ML research, it is becoming increasingly apparent to Google that it does not know how to capture that value. Google is of course not obligated to fund open-ended research, but it will nevertheless be a sad day for researchers and for the world if Google turns down its investments. Google is already a second-mover in many consumer and business product offerings and it seems like that’s the way it will be in ML research as well. I hope that Google at least does well at being second place.
The message is clear: The train carrying the company’s top acts has stalled on the way to big show. No longer getting top billing, the Sundar and Prabhakar Act is listed along with a trained pony act and a routine recycling Fibber McGee and Molly gags. Does the forced reorganization mean that Google has lost its star power?
Stephen E Arnold, April 27, 2023
A Googley Rah Rah for Synthetic Data
April 27, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I want to keep this short. I know from experience that most people don’t think too much about synthetic data. The idea is important, but other concepts are important and no one really cares too much. When was the last time Euler’s Number came up at lunch?
A gaggle of Googlers extoll the virtues of synthetic in a 19 page ArXiv document called “Synthetic Data from Diffusion Models Improves ImageNet Classification.” The main idea is that data derived from “real” data are an expedient way to improve some indexing tasks.
I am not sure that a quote from the paper will do much to elucidate this facet of the generative model world. The paper includes charts, graphs, references to math, footnotes, a few email addresses, some pictures, wonky jargon, and this conclusion:
And we have shown improvements to ImageNet classification accuracy extend to large amounts of generated data, across a range of ResNet and Transformer-based models.
The specific portion of this quote which is quite important in my experience is the segment “across a range of ResNet and Transformer-based models.” Translating to Harrod’s Creek lingo, I think the wizards are saying, “Synthetic data is really good for text too.”
What’s bubbling beneath the surface of this archly-written paper? Here are my answers to this question:
- Synthetic data are a heck of a lot cheaper to generate for model training; therefore, embrace “good enough” and move forward. (Think profits and bonuses.)
- Synthetic data can be produced and updated more easily that fooling around with “real” data. Assembling training sets, tests, deploying and reprocessing are time sucks. (There is more work to do than humanoids to do it when it comes to training, which is needed frequently for some applications.)
- Synthetic datasets can be smaller. Even baby Satan aka Sam Altman is down with synthetic data. Why? Elon could only buy so many nVidia processing units. Thus finding a way to train models with synthetic data works around a supply bottleneck.
My summary of the Googlers’ article is much more brief than the original: Better, faster, cheaper.
You don’t have to pick one. Just believe the Google. Who does not trust the Google? Why not buy synthetic data and ready-to-deploy models for your next AutoGPT product? Google’s approach worked like a champ for online ads. Therefore, Google’s approach will work for your smart software. Trust Google.
Stephen E Arnold, April 27, 2023
The Google Reorg. Will It Output Xooglers, Not Innovations?
April 25, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
My team and I have been talking about the Alphabet decision to merge DeepMind with Google Brain. Viewed from one angle, the decision reflects the type of efficiency favored by managers who value the idea of streamlining. The arguments for consolidation are logical; for example, the old tried-and-true buzzword synergy may be invoked to explain the realignment. The decision makes business sense, particularly for an engineer or a number-oriented MBA, accountant, or lawyer.
Arguing against the “one plus one equals three” viewpoint may be those who have experienced the friction generated when staff, business procedures, and projects get close, interact, and release energy. I use the term “energy” to explain the dormant forces unleashed as the reorganization evolves. When I worked at a nuclear consulting firm early in my career, I recall the acrimonious and irreconcilable differences between a smaller unit in Florida and a major division in Maryland. The fix was to reassign personnel and give up on the dream of one big, happy group.
This somewhat pathos-infused image was created using NightCafe Creator and Craiyon. The author (a dinobaby) added the caption which may appeal to large language model-centric start ups with money, ideas, and a “we can do this” vibe.
Over the years, my team and I have observed Google’s struggles to innovate. The successes have been notable. Before the Alphabet entity was constructed, the “old” Google purchased Keyhole, Inc. (a spin-off of the gaming company Intrinsic). That worked after the US government invested in the company. There have been some failures too. My team followed the Orkut product which evolved from a hire named Orkut Büyükkökten, who had developed an allegedly similar system while working at InCircle. Orkut was a success, particularly among users in Brazil and a handful of other countries. However, some Orkut users relied on the system for activities which some found unacceptable. Google killed the social networking system in 2014 as Facebook surged to global prominence as Google’s efforts fell to earth. The company was in a position to be a player in social media, and it botched the opportunity. Steve Ballmer allegedly described Google as a “one-trick pony.” Mr. Ballmer’s touch point was Google’s dependence on online advertising: One source of revenue; therefore, a circus pony able to do one thing. Mr. Ballmer’s quip illustrates the fact that over the firm’s 20-plus year history, Google has not been able to diversify its revenue. More than two-thirds of the company’s money comes directly or indirectly from advertising.
My team and I have watched Google struggle to accept adapt its free-wheeling style to a more traditional business approach to policies and procedures. In one notable incident, my team and I were involved in reviewing proposals to index the content of the US Federal government. Google was one of the bidders. The Google proposal did not follow the expected format of responding to each individual requirement in the request for proposal. In 2000, Google professionals made it clear its method did not require that the government’s statement of work be followed. Other vendors responded, provided the required technical commentary, and produced cost estimates in a format familiar to those involved in the contracting award process. Flash forward 23 years, and Google has figured out how to capture US government work.
The key point: The learning process took a long time.
Why is this example relevant to the Alphabet decision to blend the Brain and DeepMind units? Change — despite the myths of Silicon Valley — is difficult for Alphabet. The tensions at the company are well known. Employees and part-time workers grouse and sometimes carry signs and disturb traffic. Specific personnel matters become, rightly or wrongly, messages that say, Google is unfair. The Google management generated an international spectacle with its all-thumbs approach to human relations. Dr. Timnit Gebru was a co-author of a technical paper which identified a characteristic of smart software. She and several colleagues explained that bias in training data produces results which are skewed. Anyone who has used any of the search systems which used open source libraries created by Google know that outputs are variable, which is a charitable way of saying, “Dr. Gebru was correct.” She became a Xoogler, set up a new organization, and organized a conference to further explain her research — the same research which ruffled the feathers of some Alphabet big birds.
The pace of generative artificial intelligence is accelerating. Disruption can be smelled like ozone in an old-fashioned electric power generation station. My team and I attempt to continue tracking innovations in smart software. We cannot do it. I am prepared to suggest that the job is quite challenging because the flow of new ChatGPT-type products, services, applications, and features is astounding. I recall the early days of the Internet when in 1993 I could navigate to a list of new sites via Mosaic browser and click on the ones of interest. I recall that in a matter of months the list grew too long to scan and was eventually discontinued. Smart software is behaving in this way: Too many people are doing too many new things.
I want to close this short personal essay with several points.
First, mashing up different cultures and a history of differences will act like a brake and add friction to innovative work. Such reorganizations will generate “heat” in the form of disputes, overt or quiet quitting, and an increase in productivity killers like planning meetings, internal product pitches, and getting legal’s blessing on a proposed service.
Second, a revenue monoculture is in danger when one pest runs rampant. Alphabet does not have a mechanism to slow down what is happening in the generative AI space. In online advertising, Google has knobs and levers. In the world of creating applications and hooking them together to complete tasks, Alphabet management seems to lack a magic button. The pests just eat the monoculture’s crop.
Third, the unexpected consequence of merging Brain and DeepMind may be creating what I call a “Xoogler Manufacturing Machine.” Annoyed or “grass is greener” Google AI experts may go to one of the many promising generative AI startups. Note: A former Google employee is sometimes labeled a “Xoogler,” which is shorthand for ex-Google employee.
Net net: In a conversation in 2005 with a Google professional whom I cannot name due to the confidentiality agreement I signed with the firm, I asked, “Do you think people and government officials will figure out what Google is really doing?” This person, who was a senior manager, said to the best of my recollection, “Sure and when people do, it’s game.” My personal view is that Alphabet is in a game in which the clock is ticking. And in the process of underperforming, Alphabet’s advertisers and users of free and for-fee services will shift their attention elsewhere, probably to a new or more agile firm able to leverage smart software. Alphabet’s most recent innovation is the creation of a Xoogler manufacturing system. The product? Former Google employees who want to do something instead of playing in the Alphabet sandbox with argumentative wizards and several ill-behaved office pets.
Stephen E Arnold, April 24, 2023
Google: A PR Special Operation Underway
April 25, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
US television on Sunday, April 16, 2023. Assorted blog posts and articles by Google friends like Inc. Magazine. Now the British Guardian newspaper hops on the bandwagon.
Navigate to “Google Chief Warns AI Could Be Harmful If Deployed Wrongly.” Let me highlight a couple of statements in the write up and then offer a handful of observations designed intentionally to cause some humanoids indigestion.
The article includes this statement:
Sundar Pichai also called for a global regulatory framework for AI similar to the treaties used to regulate nuclear arms use, as he warned that the competition to produce advances in the technology could lead to concerns about safety being pushed aside.
Also, this gem:
Pichai added that AI could cause harm through its ability to produce disinformation.
And one more:
Pichai admitted that Google did not fully understand how its AI technology produced certain responses.
Enough. I want to shift to the indigestion inducing portion of this short essay.
First, Google is in Code Red. Why? What were the search wizards under the guidance of Sundar and Prabhakar doing for the last year? Obviously not paying attention to the activity of OpenAI. Microsoft was and stole the show at the hoe down in Davos. Now Microsoft has made available a number of smart services designed to surf on its marketing tsunami and provide more reasons for enterprise customers to pay for smart Microsoft software. Neither the Guardian nor Sundar seem willing to talk about the reality of Google finding itself in the position of Alta Vista, Lycos, or WebCrawler in the late 1990s and early 2000s when Google search delivered relevant results. At least Google did until it was inspired by the Yahoo, GoTo, and Overture approach to making cash. Back to the question: Why ignore the fact that Google is in Code Red? Why not ask one half of the Sundar and Prabhakar Comedy Team how they got aced by a non-headliner act at the smart software vaudeville show?
Second, I loved the “could cause harm.” What about the Android malware issue? What about the ads which link to malware in Google search results? What about the monopolization of online advertising and pricing ads beyond the reach of many small businesses? What about the “interesting” videos on YouTube? Google has its eye on the “could” of smart software without paying much attention to the here-and-now downsides of its current business. And disinformation? What is Google doing to scrub that content from its search results. My team identified a distributor of pornography operating in Detroit. That operator’s content can be located with a single Google query. If Google cannot identify porn, how will it flag smart software’s “disinformation”?
Finally, Google for decades has made a big deal of hiring the smartest people in the world. There was a teen whiz kid in Moscow. There was a kid in San Jose with a car service to get him from high school to the Mountain View campus. There is deep mind with its “deep” team of wizards. Now this outfit with more than 100,000 (more or less full time geniuses) does not know how its software works. How will that type of software be managed by the estimable Google? The answer is, “It won’t.” Google’s ability to manage is evident with heart breaking stories about its human relations and personnel actions. There are smart Googlers who think the software is alive. Does this person have company-paid mental health care? There are small businesses like an online automobile site in ruins because a Googler downchecked the site years ago for an unknown reason. The Google is going to manage something well?
My hunch is that Google wants to make sure that it becomes the primary vendor of ready-to-roll training data and microwavable models. The fact that Amazon, Microsoft, and a group of Chinese outfits are on the same information superhighway illustrates one salient fact: The PR tsunami highlights Google’s lack of positive marketing action and the taffy-pull sluggishness of demos that sort of work.
What about the media which ask softball questions and present as substance recommendations that the world agree on AI rules? Perhaps Google should offer to take over the United Nations or form a World Court of AI Technology? Maybe Google should just be allowed to put other AI firms out of business and keep trying to build a monopoly based on software the company doesn’t appear to understand?
The good news is that Sundar did not reprise the Paris demonstration of Bard. That only cost the company a few billion when the smart software displayed its ignorance. That was comedic, and I think these PR special operations are fodder for the spring Sundar and Prabhakar tour of major cities.
The T shirts will not feature a dinosaur (Googzilla, I believe) freezing in a heavy snow storm. The art can be produced using Microsoft Bing’s functions too. And that will be quite convenient if Samsung ditches Google search for Bing and its integrated smart software. To add a bit of spice to Googzilla’s catered lunch is the rumor that Apple may just go Bing. Bye, bye billions, baby, bye bye.
If that happens, Google loses: [a] a pickup truck filled with cash, [b] even more technical credibility, and [c] maybe Googzilla’s left paw and a fang. Can Sundar and Prabhakar get applause when doing one-liners with one or two performers wearing casts and sporting a tooth gap?
Stephen E Arnold, April 25, 2023
Divorcing the Google: Legal Eagles Experience a Frisson of Anticipation
April 24, 2023
No smart software has been used to create this dinobaby’s blog post.
I have poked around looking for a version or copy of the contract Samsung signed with Google for the firms’ mobile phone tie up. Based on what I have heard at conferences and read on the Internet (of course, I believe everything I read on the Internet, don’t you?), it appears that there are several major deals.
The first is the use of and access to the mindlessly fragmented Android mobile phone software. Samsung can do some innovating, but the Google is into providing “great experiences.” Why would a mobile phone maker like Samsung allow a user to manage contacts and block mobile calls without implementing a modern day hunt for gold near Placer.
The second is the “suggestion” — mind you, the suggestion is nothing more than a gentle nudge — to keep that largely-malware-free Google Play Store front and center.
The third is the default search engine. Buy a Samsung get Google Search.
Now you know why the legal eagles a shivering when they think of litigation to redo the Google – Samsun deal. For those who think the misinformation zipping around about Microsoft Bing displacing Google Search, my thought would be to ask yourself, “Who gains by pumping out this type of disinformation?” One answer is big Chinese mobile phone manufacturers. This is Art of War stuff, and I won’t dwell on this. What about Microsoft? Maybe but I like to think happy thoughts about Microsoft. I say, “No one at Microsoft would engage in disinformation intended to make life difficult for the online advertising king. Another possibility is Silicon Valley type journalists who pick up rumors, amplify them, and then comment that Samsung is kicking the tires of Bing with ChatGPT. Suddenly a “real” news outfit emits the Samsung rumor. Exciting for the legal eagles.
The write up “Samsung Can’t Dump Google for Bing As the Default Search Engine on Its Phones” does a good job of explaining the contours of a Google – Samsung tie up.
Several observations:
First, the alleged Samsung search replacement provides a glimpse of how certain information can move from whispers at conferences to headlines.
Second, I would not bet against lawyers. With enough money, contracts can be nullified, transformed, or left alone. The only option which disappoints attorneys is the one that lets sleeping dogs lie.
Third, the growing upswell of anti-Google sentiment is noticeable. That may be a far larger problem for Googzilla than rumors about Samsung. Perceptions can be quite real, and they translate into impacts. I am tempted to quote William James, but I won’t.
Net net: If Samsung wants to swizzle a deal with an entity other than the Google, the lawyers may vibrate with such frequency that a feather or two may fall off.
Stephen E Arnold, April 24, 2023
Google: Any Day Now, Any Day Now
April 21, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I read what could be a recycled script from the Sundar and Prabhakar Comedy Show. Although not yet a YouTube video series, the company is edging ever closer to becoming the most amusing online advertising company in Mountain View.
“Google Devising Radical Search Changes to Beat Back A.I. Rivals” is chock full of one-liners. Now these are not as memorable as Jack Benny’s “I’m thinking it over” or Abbott and Costello’s “I don’t know is on third”, but the Google is in the ball park.
I liked these statements:
The tech giant is sprinting. [Exactly how does Googzilla sprint?]
Google is racing [Okay, Kentucky Derby stuff or NASCAR stuff? One goes at the speed of organisms, and the other is into the engineering approach to speed. Google is in progressive tense mode, not delivering results mode.]
…we’re excited about bringing new A.I.-powered features to search, and will share more details soon.” [I laughed at the idea of an outfit in panic and Red Alert mode getting exciting. Is this like a high school science club learning that it has qualified to participate in the international math competition or excite like members of the high school science club learning that the club will not be expelled for hijacking the principal’s morning announcements.]
“Modernizing its search engine has become an obsession at Google…” [I wonder if this is the type of obsession that pulled the Google VP to his yacht with a specialized contractor allegedly in possession of a controlled substance or the legal eagle populating his nest or the Google HR mastermind who made stochastic parrot the go-to phrase for discrimination and bias.’’]
The article contains more comedic gems. The main point is that my team and I cannot keep pace with the number of new applications of the chatbot technology. Amazon is giving the capability away free. China’s technical sector continues to beaver away adding to its formidable array of software capabilities. Plus we spotted a German outfit able to crank out interesting videos of former President Obama making fascinating statements about another former president.
The future and progressive present tenses are interesting. Other firms are outputting features, services, and products at a remarkable pace.
And what’s the Google search sensitive professionals doing? Creating more grist for the Sundar and Prabhakar Comedy Show.
The only problem is that Google continues to talk, do PR, and promise. What’s that suggest about quantum supremacy or delivering relevant search results? I do know one thing. If I want an answer, I am going to run the query on the You.com service, thank you very much.
Stephen E Arnold, April 21, 2023
The Google Will Means We Are Not Lagging Behind ChatGPT: The Coding Angle
April 20, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I read another easily-spotted Google smart software PR imitative. Google’s professionals apparently ignore the insights of the luminary Jason Calacanis. In his “The Rise of AutoGPT and AO Anxieties” available absolutely anywhere the energetic Mr. Calacanis can post the content, a glimpse of the Google anxiety is explained. One of Mr. Calacanis’ BFFs points out that companies with good AI use the AI to make more and better AI. The result is that those who plan, anticipate, and promise great AI products and services cannot catch up to those who are using AI to super-charge their engineers. (I refuse to use the phrase 10X engineer because it is little more than a way to say, “Smart engineers are now becoming 5X or 10X engineers.” The idea is that “wills” and “soon” are flashing messages that say, “We are now behind. We will never catch up.”
I thought about the Thursday, April 13, 2023, extravaganza when I read “DeepMind Says Its New AI Coding Engine Is As Good As an Average Human Programmer.” The entire write up is one propeller driven Piper Cub skywriting messages about the future. I quote:
DeepMind has created an AI system named AlphaCode that it says “writes computer programs at a competitive level.” The Alphabet subsidiary tested its system against coding challenges used in human competitions and found that its program achieved an “estimated rank” placing it within the top 54 percent of human coders. The result is a significant step forward for autonomous coding, says DeepMind, though AlphaCode’s skills are not necessarily representative of the sort of programming tasks faced by the average coder.
Mr. Calacanis and his BFFs were not talking about basic coding as the future. Their focus was on autonomous AI which can string together sequences of tasks. The angle in my lingo is “meta AI”; that is, instead of a single smart query answered by a single smart system, the instructions in natural language would be parsed by a meta-AI which would pull back separate responses, integrate them, and perform the desired task.
What’s Google’s PR team pushing? Competitive programming.
Code Red? Yeah, that’s the here and now. The reality is that Google is in “will” mode. Imagine for a moment that Mr. Calacanis and his BFFs are correct. What’s that mean for Google? Will Google catch up with “will”?
Stephen E Arnold, April 20, 2023
Business Baloney: Wowza, Google Management Is on the Ball
April 19, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid
I read “Google CEO Sundar Pichai Broke the Rules on OKRs. Why It Worked.” I looked at this story in Inc. Magazine because Google has managed to mire itself in deep mud since Mr. Pichai (one half of the Sundar and Prabhakar Comedy Act) got top billing. Sucking the exhaust of the Microsoft marketing four-wheel drives strikes me as somewhat dispiriting.
Scribble Diffusion’s imagineering of a Google management meeting with slide rules, computing devices, and management wisdom. Art generated by smart software.
I will enumerate a few of these quicksand filled voids after I pull out two comments from the rather wild and wooly story which is infused with MBA think.
I noted this comment:
…in 2019, Pichai cut out quarterly OKRs altogether, choosing to focus solely on annual OKRs with quarterly progress reports. Pichai’s move might have gone against conventional OKR wisdom, but it made sense because _Google was no longer in startup mode._ [Editor’s note: The weird underscores are supposed to make my eyes perk up and my mind turn from TikTok to the peals of wisdom in the statement “Google was no longer in start up mode. Since I count Google as existing since Backrub, when Mr. Pichai took the stage, the company was 20 years old. Yep, two decades.]
Here’s another quote to note from the Inc. article:
Take shortcuts and do what you need to do to keep things afloat. [Editor’s Note: The article does not mention the foundation short cuts at the GOOG; specifically, [a] the appropriation of some systems and methods from a company to which Google paid before its IPO about a billion dollars in cash and other considerations and [b] a focused effort to implement via acquisitions and staff work a method designed to make sure that buyers and sellers of advertising both paid Google whenever an advertising transaction took place.]
Now the fruits of Mr. Pichai’s management approach:
- Personnel decisions which sparked interest in stochastic parrots, protests, staff walk outs, and the exciting litigation related to staff reductions. Definitely excellent management from the perspective of taking shortcuts
- Triggering a massive loss in corporate value when the Google smart software displayed its dumbness. Remember this goof emerged from the company which awarded itself quantum supremacy and beat a humanoid Go player into international embarrassment
- Management behavior — yep, personal behavior — which caused one Googler to try to terminate her life, not a balky Chrome instance, death by heroin on a yacht in the presence of a specialized contractor who rendered personal services, and fathering a Googler to be within the company’s legal department. Classy, classy.
What about the article? From my point of view, it presents what I would call baloney. I think there are some interesting stories to write about Google; for example, the link between IBM Almaden’s CLEVER system and the Google relevance method, the company’s inability to generate substantive alternative revenue streams, and the mystery acquisitions like Transformic Inc., which few know or care about. There’s even a personal interest story to be written about the interesting interpersonal dynamics at DeepMind, the outfit that is light years ahead of the world in smart software.
But, no. We learn about management brilliance. Those of you familiar with my idiosyncratic lingo I conceptualize Google’s approach to running its business as a high school science club trying to organize a dance party.
Stephen E Arnold, April 19, 2023
Google Is Humming Like a Well Oiled High School Science Club: A Sensitive Science Club
April 18, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I believe everything I read on the Internet. Therefore, I am accepting as the truth inscribed on the floor of the Great Pyramid of Giza. (It’s numbers in case you did not know this factoid.)
The article “Dream Job Nightmare: Google Leaves New Hire Jobless and Without an Apartment” reports this slick personnel move executed with extreme prejudice by the Google. Yep, that Google. I noted this statement in a letter quoted by BoingBoing:
Unfortunately, these [Google internal budget] reviews mean that we have had to make the difficult decision to terminate the contract of employment which you signed with Google UK Ltd, and this letter is formal notice of termination.
What makes this statement interesting is that the never hired but fired Googler is:
- The individual fired before starting the Google job lives in Russia
- Getting in and out of Russia is not a simple nor risk free process
- Getting a job in the gloom of the special operation in Ukraine is more difficult that it was before the tanks got mired on the road to Kiev.
I suppose there is an upside to this story: Opportunities exist to enlist in the Russian armed forces. With computer skills, there are openings in the computer branch of several Russian agencies. In fact the boss of one of the advanced persistent threat units may be seeking his future elsewhere.
I am impressed with the coordination within the Google human resources people unit. I think this is one more example of how Google works to maintain the management panache of a high school science club organizing a field trip to a junior cotillion dance.
Stephen E Arnold, April 18, 2023
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
