Google and Its High School Management: An HR Example
March 22, 2023
I read “Google Won’t Honor Medical Leave During Its Layoffs, Outraging Employees.” Interesting explanation of some of Google’s management methods. These specific actions strike me as similar to those made by my high school science club in 1959. We were struggling with the issue of requiring a specific academic threshold for admission. As I recall, one had to have straight A’s in math and science or no Science Club for that person. (We did admit one student who published an article in the Journal of Astronomy with his brother as co-author. He had an incomplete in calculus because he was in Hawaii fooling around with a telescope and missed the final exam. We decided to let him in. Because, well, we were the Science Club for goodness sakes!)
Scribbled Diffusion’s rendition of a Google manager (looks a bit like a clown, doesn’t it?) telling an employee he is fired and that his medical insurance has been terminated.
The article reports:
While employees’ severance packages might come with a few more months of health insurance, being fired means instantly losing access to Google’s facilities. If that’s where a laid-off Googler’s primary care doctor works, that person is out of luck, and some employees told CNBC they lost access to their doctors the second the layoff email arrived. Employees on leave also have a lot to deal with. One former Googler, Kate Howells, said she was let go by Google from her hospital bed shortly after giving birth. She worked at the company for nine years.
The highlight of the write up, however, is the Comment Section. Herewith are several items I found noteworthy:
- Gsgrego writes, “Employees, aka expendable garbage.”
- Chanman819 offers, “I’ve mentioned it before in one of the other layoff threads, but companies shouldn’t burn bridges when doing layoffs… departing employees usually end up at competitors, regulators, customers, vendors, or partners in the same industry. Many times, they boomerang back a few years in the future. Making sure they have an axe to grind during negotiations or when on the other side of a working relationship is exceptionally ill-advised.
- Ajmas says, “Termination by accounting.”
- Asvarduil offers, “Twitter and Google are companies that I now consider radioactive to work for. Even if they don’t fail soon, they’re very clearly poorly-managed. If I had to work for someone else, they’re both companies I’d avoid.
- MisterJim adds, “Two thoughts: 1. Stay classy Google! 2. Google has employees? Anyone who’s tried to contact them might assume otherwise.
High school science club lives on in the world of non-founder management.
Stephen E Arnold, March 22, 2023
The Google: Is Thinking Clearly a Core Competency at the Company
March 16, 2023
Editor’s Note: This short write up is the work of a real, semi-alive dinobaby, not smart software.
The essay “The Nightmare of AI-Powered Gmail Has Arrived.” The main point of the article is that Google is busy putting smart software in a number of its services. I noted this paragraph:
Google is retrofitting its product line with AI. Last month, it demonstrated its take on a chatty version of its search engine. Yesterday, it shared more details about AI-assisted Gmail and Google Docs. In Gmail, there are tools that will attempt to compose entire emails or edit them for tone as well as tools for ingesting and summarizing long threads.
Nope. Not interested.
The image of three managers with their hair on fire was generated by https://scribblediffusion.com/. My hunch is that a copyright troll will claim the image as their clients’ original work. I sticking with the smart software as the artist.
I underlined this statement as well:
Most interesting are the ways in which these features seem to be in conflict with one another.
What’s up?
- A Code Red at Google and suggestions from senior management to get in gear with smart software
- Big boy Microsoft continued to out market the Google (not too tough to do in my opinion)
- The ChatGPT juggernaut continued to operate like a large electro-magnet, pulling users from folks who has previously accrued significant experience with large language models.
The write up makes one point in my opinion. Google’s wizards are not able to think clearly. As the article concludes:
For example, in offices already burdened by inefficient communication and processes, it’s easy to see how reducing the cost of creating content might produce weird consequences and externalities. Tim can now send four times as many emails as he used to. Does he have four times as much to say?
Net net: Wow, the Google. The many and possibly overlapping smart services remind me of the outputs from a high school science club struggling to get as many Science Fair project done in the final days before the judging starts. Wow, the Google.
Stephen E Arnold, March 16, 2023
Google: Poked Painfully in Its Snout
March 15, 2023
The essay “Why Didn’t DeepMind Build GPT3?” identifies three reasons for Google getting poked in its snout. According to the author, the reasons were [a] no specific problem to solve, [b] less academic hoo haa at OpenAI, and [c] less perceived risk. My personal view is that Googlers’ intelligence is directed at understanding their navels, not jumping that familiar Silicon Valley chasm. (Microsoft marketers spotted an opportunity and grabbed it. Boom. Score one for the Softies.)
Google’s management team reacting to ChatGPT’s marketing success. The art was created via https://scribblediffusion.com/ who owns the creative juices required to fabricate this interesting depiction of Google caught in a moment of management decision making.
These reasons make sense to me. I would suggest that several other Google characteristics played a role, probably bit parts, but roles nevertheless.
Since 2006, Google fragmented; that is, the idea of Google providing great benefit as an heir to the world of IBM and Microsoft gave Google senior managers a Droit du seigneur. However, the revenue for the company came from the less elevated world of online advertising. Thus, there was a disconnect after the fraught early years, the legal battle prior to the IPO, and the development of the mostly automated systems to make sure Google captured revenue in the buying and selling and brokering of online advertising. After 2006, the split between what Google management believed it had created and the reality of the business was institutionalized. Google and smart software was perceived as the one right way. Period. That way was a weird blend of group think and elite academic methods.
Also, Google failed to bring direction and focus to its products. I no longer remember how many messaging services Google offered. I cannot keep track of the company’s different and increasingly oblique investment arms. I have given up trying to recall the many new product and service incubators the company launched. I do remember that Google wanted to solve death. That, I believe, proved to be a difficult problem as if Loon balloons, digital games, and dealing with revenue challengers like Amazon and Facebook were no big deal. The fragmentation struck me as similar to the colored particles tossed during Holi, just with a more negative environmental effect. Googlers were vision impaired when it came to seeing what priorities to set.
Plus, from my point of view Google professionals lacked the ability to focus beyond getting more money, influence, and access to the senior managers. In short, Google demonstrated the inability to manage its people and the company. The last few years have been characterized by employee issues and other legal swamps. The management method has reminded me of my high school science club. Every member was a top student. Every member believed their view was correct. Every member believed that the traditional methods of teaching were stupid, boring, and irrelevant. The problem was that instead of chasing money and closeness to the “senior managers”, my high school science club was chasing validation and manifestation of superiority. That was baloney, of course, but what do 16 year olds actually understand. Google’s management is similar to my high school science club.
Are there other factors? Sure, and these include a wildly fluctuating moral compass, confusing personal objectives with ethical objectives, and giving into base instincts (baby making in the legal department, heroin on a yacht with a specialized contractor, and March Madness fun in Las Vegas).
Who will chronicle these Google gaffes? Perhaps someone will input a text string into ChatGPT to get the information many have either ignored, forgotten, or did not understand.
Stephen E Arnold, March xx, 2022
Interesting Critique of the Google
March 14, 2023
I know there are other browsers available. For many people Google Chrome is THE browser. Microsoft figured out that Credge was cheaper and probably less likely to be zapped by the Google. Vivaldi is a browser working to attract users and provide a less money-centric software cocoon for online users. It too uses the Chromium engine.
I read “Vivaldi Co-Founder: Advertisers Stole the Internet from Us.” The article is mostly content marketing; nevertheless, I noted a handful of assertions and factoids I found thought provoking.
Here are a few. My observation about the comment appears in italics.
… part of the issue companies like Google may have is that Vivaldi blocks a lot of tracking and gets around advertisements in novel ways. No surprise I believe.
Android’s Privacy Sandbox can track users by creating an offline profile on them and show relevant advertisements based on that. No surprise I believe. Google dies without ad revenue.
… data can be used to influence how people vote, à la Cambridge Analytica. No surprise. Control the information, gain power.
the current state of advertising is less profitable for sites now than it was before widespread tracking was in place. No surprise but Google benefits because it “owns” the rights to charge people to enter and leave Club Ad via its swinging door.
The situation is clear: A small company faces a long slog up Mt. Everest without cold weather gear. Does the government of Nepal care? Nope.
Stephen E Arnold, March 14, 2023
If Google Is Online Advertising, Why Does Malvertising Thrive?
March 14, 2023
I think this question struck me after reading a few paragraphs of “Malvertising on Google Ads: It’s Hiding in Plain Site.” The essay is designed to cause a reader to embrace the commerce malware service provided by Kolide. How do I know? Here’s the statement that tipped me off:
Want to see how Kolide can get your entire fleet updated, patched and compliant? Watch Kolide’s on-demand demo today.
Despite the content marketing sway in the article, I noted an interesting comment about Google. After citing a Googley statement about the online ad giant’s good intentions and methods for dealing with malware, the write up says:
Unfortunately, the search engine does not provide a definition nor examples of what falls under “egregious violations.” And given how easy it is for bad actors to simply make a new account when a new one is shut down, this approach doesn’t meet the requirements for reliability or scalability. Still, when you look at things from Google’s perspective, these policies make sense.
In my opinion, Google happily delivers malvertising because Google sells advertising. The company does not want to harm its revenue. Just as the pop ads running on top of YouTube videos, Google is not losing revenue. The company says, “No more overlays in a few months.” Why? Is it because Google will introduce Amazon-Twitch style unskippable ads, insert more unskippable commercials in videos, and add more end-of-video ads? Absolutely. Google is not going to give up revenue in my opinion.
Shifting the responsibility for identifying and remediating issues with Google ad-delivered malware is good for cyber security companies and super good for Google. My view is that we have one more example of specious behavior from a company unable to get its ethical compass focused on any direction but its revenue.
Stephen E Arnold, March 13, 2023
Is It Groundhog Day? Googzilla Chases Its Tail
March 10, 2023
In the buzz of Code Red, Google has a management fix for the damage caused by Microsoft’s ChatGPT marketing attack. “Google Dusts Off the Failed Google+ Playbook to Fight ChatGPT” states:
Google’s ChatGPT panic seemed a lot like its response to Google+, and several employees relayed that same sentiment to Bloomberg. Just like with G+, the report added that “current and former employees say at least some Googlers’ ratings and reviews will likely be influenced by their ability to integrate generative AI into their work.”
Google+ (try and search that, Google search fans). Does Google Plus work? How about a combo of “Google+ Plus Orkut” as a query?
The write up passes along a quote by an unnamed Google wizard:
“We’re throwing spaghetti at the wall, but it’s not even close to what’s needed to transform the company and be competitive.”
My take on this reference to Google+ or Google Plus is:
1. The sources for this story are not Googley and, therefore, cannot appreciate the management brilliance
2. The Google is out of ideas; that is, the Code Red thing and idea that it will be smart software everywhere is a knee jerk reaction
3. Googzilla is chasing its tail; that is, senior management has not idea what to do and hits upon this idea, “Google+ or Plus was a success. Let’s do that again.”
Net net: Is it groundhog day at the Googleplex? Next question: What confidence does one have in groundhogs?
Stephen E Arnold, March 10, 2023
Bing Begins, Dear Sundar and Prabhakar
March 9, 2023
Note: Note written by an artificial intelligence wonder system. The essay is the work of a certified dinobaby, a near80-year-old fossil. The Purple Prose parts are made up comments by me, the dinobaby, to help improve the meaning behind the words.
I think the World War 2 Dear John letter has been updated. Today’s version begins:
Dear Sundar and Prabhakar…
“The New Bing and Edge – Progress from Our First Month” by Yusuf Mehdi explains that Bing has fallen in love with marketing. The old “we are so like one another, Sundar and Prabhakar” is now
“The magnetic Ms. OpenAI introduced me to her young son, ChatGPT. I am now going steady with that large language model. What a block of data! And I hope, Sundar and Prabhakar, we can still be friends. We can still chat, maybe at the high school reunion? Everyone will be there. Everyone. Timnit Gebru, Jerome Pesenti, Yan Lecun, Emily Bender, and you two, of course.”
The write up does not explicitly say these words. Here’s the actual verbiage from the marketing outfit also engaged in unpatchable security issues:
It’s hard to believe it’s been just over a month since we released the new AI-powered Bing and Edge to the world as your copilot for the web. In that time, we have heard your feedback, learned a lot, and shipped a number of improvements. We are delighted by the virtuous cycle of feedback and iteration that is driving strong Bing improvements and usage.
A couple of questions? Is the word virtuous related to the word virgin? Pure, chaste, unsullied, and not corrupted by … advertising? Has it been a mere 30 days since Sundar and Prabhakar entered the world of Code Red? Were they surprised that their Paris comedy act drove attendees to Le Bar Bing? Is the copilot for the Web ready to strafe the digital world with Bing blasts?
Let’s look at what the love letter reports:
- A million new users. What’s the Google pulled in with their change in the curse word policy for YouTube?
- More searches on Le Bing than before the tryst with ChatGPT. Will Google address relevance ranking of bogus ads for a Thai restaurant favored by a certain humanoid influencer?
- A mobile app. Sundar and Prabhakar, what’s happening with your mobile push? Hasn’t revenue from the Play store declined in the last year? Declined? Yep. As in down, down, down.
Is Bing a wonder working relevance engine? No way.
Is Bing going to dominate my world of search of retrieval? For the answer, just call 1 800 YOU WISH, please.
Is Bing winning the marketing battle for smarter search? Oh, yeah.
Well, Sundar and Prabhakar, don’t let that Code Red flashing light disturb your sleep. Love and kisses, Yusuf Mehdi. PS: The high school reunion is coming up. Maybe we can ChatGPT?
Stephen E Arnold, March 9, 2023
Take That Googzilla Because You Have One Claw in Your Digital Grave. Honest
March 8, 2023
My, my. How the “we are search experts” set have changed their tune. I am not talking about those who were terminated by the Google. I am not talking about the fawning advertising intermediaries. I am not talking about old school librarians who know how to extract information from commercial databases.
I am talking about the super clever Silicon Valley infused pundits.
Here’s an example: “Google Search Is Dying” from 2022. The write up contains one of the all-time statements from a Google wizard I have encountered. Believe me. I have noted a few over the years.
The speaker is the former champion of search engine optimization and denier of Google’s destruction of precision, recall, and relevance in search results. Here’s the statement:
You said in the post that quotes don’t give exact matches. They really do. Honest.— Google’s public search liaison (that’s a title of which to be proud)
I love it when a Googler uses the word “honest.”
Net net: The Gen X, Y’s, and Z’s perceive themselves as search experts. Okay, living in a cloud of unknowing is ubiquitous today. But “honest”?
Stephen E Arnold, March 8, 2023
Google: Code Redder Because … Microsoft Markets AI Gooder
March 6, 2023
Don’t misunderstand. I think the Chat GPT search wars are more marketing than useful functionality for my work. You may have a different viewpoint. That’s great. Just keep in mind that Google’s marvelous Code Red alarm was a response to Microsoft marketing. Yep, if you want to see the Sundar and Prabhakar Duo do some fancy dancing, just get your Microsoft rep to mash the Goose Google button.
Someone took this advice and added “AI” to the truly wonderful Windows 11 software. I read “Microsoft Adds “AI” to Taskbar Search Field” and learned that either ChatGPT or a human said:
In the last three weeks, we also launched the new AI-powered Bing into preview for more than 1 million people in 169 countries, and expanded the new Bing to the Bing and Edge mobile apps as well as introduced it into Skype. It is a new era in Search, Chat and Creation and with the new Bing and Edge you now have your own copilot for the web. Today, we take the next major step forward adding to the incredible breadth and ease of use of the Windows PC by implementing a typable Windows search box and the amazing capability of the new AI-powered Bing directly into the taskbar. Putting all your search needs for Windows in one easy to find location.
Exciting because lousy search will become milk, honey, sunshine, roses, and French bulldog puppies. Nope. Search is still the Bing with a smaller index than the Google sports. But that “AI” in the search box evokes good thoughts for some users.
For Google, the AI in the search box mashes the Code Red button. I think that if that button gets pressed five times in quick succession, the Google goes from Code Red to Code Super Red with LED sparkles.
Remember this AI search is marketing at this time in my frame of reference.
Microsoft is showing that Google is not too good at marketing. I am now mashing the Code Red button five times. Mash. Mash. Mash. Mash. Mash. Now I can watch Googzilla twitch and hop. Perhaps the creature will be the opening act in the Sundar and Prabhakar Emergency Output Emission Explanation Tour. Did you hear the joke about Microsoft walks into a vegan restaurant and says, “Did you hear the joke about Google marketing?” The server says, “No.” The Softie replies, “Google searched for marketing in its search engine and couldn’t get a relevant answer.”
Ho, ho
Stephen E Arnold, March 6, 2023
A Xoogler Explains Why Big Data Is Going Nowhere Fast
March 3, 2023
The essay “Big Data Is Dead.” One of my essays from the Stone Age of Online used the title “Search Is Dead” so I am familiar with the trope. In a few words, one can surprise. Dead. Final. Absolute, well, maybe. On the other hand, the subject either Big Data or Search are part of the woodwork in the mini-camper of life.
I found this statement interesting:
Modern cloud data platforms all separate storage and compute, which means that customers are not tied to a single form factor. This, more than scale out, is likely the single most important change in data architectures in the last 20 years.
The cloud is the future. I recall seeing price analyses of some companies’ cloud activities; for example, “The Cloud vs. On-Premise Cost: Which One is Cheaper?” In my experience, cloud computing was pitched as better, faster, and cheaper. Toss in the idea that one can get rid of pesky full time systems personnel, and the cloud is a win.
What the cloud means is exactly what the quoted sentence says, “customers are not tied to a single form factor.” Does this mean that the Big Data rah rah combined with the sales pitch for moving to the cloud will set the stage for more hybrid sets up a return to on premises computing. Storage could become a combination of on premises and cloud base solutions. The driver, in my opinion, will be cost. And one thing the essay about Big Data does not dwell on is the importance of cost in the present economic environment.
The arguments for small data or subsets of Big Data is accurate. My reading of the essay is that some data will become a problem: Privacy, security, legal, political, whatever. The essay is an explanation for what “synthetic data.” Google and others want to make statistically-valid, fake data the gold standard for certain types of processes. In the data are a liability section of the essay, I noted:
Data can suffer from the same type of problem; that is, people forget the precise meaning of specialized fields, or data problems from the past may have faded from memory.
I wonder if this is a murky recasting of Google’s indifference to “old” data and to date and time stamping. The here and now not then and past are under the surface of the essay. I am surprised the notion of “forward forward” analysis did not warrant a mention. Outfits like Google want to do look ahead prediction in order to deal with inputs newer than what is in the previous set of values.
You may read the essay and come away with a different interpretation. For me, this is the type of analysis characteristic of a Googler, not a Xoogler. If I am correct, why doesn’t the essay hit the big ideas about cost and synthetic data directly?
Stephen E Arnold, March 3, 2023
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
