Comment by dontbenebby | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dontbenebby | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>I think that Google's available talent pool is shrinking. Many very talented engineers have left, and many new potential engineers would not want to work there. Sure, there are still plenty who do, but I would say their options are narrowing over time.

I think you overestimate how skilled you need to be to work at Google. Google has famously put people through enormous hoops to work there, regardless of the complexity the engineering the new hire will work on.

Organizations like NSA also have a negative reputation, but find plenty of people to hire. They just look outside Stanford,CMU, etc.

I suspect that as the people who don't have to work there stop applying, Google will widen it's parameters to snare in the people who have to work there.

(I've met many a person at Defcon who did a stint in the intel community because they saw it as the only path to a high paying job if you don't have an elite upbringing and don't want to directly kill people.)

Sure, any employer can always choose to lower their standards, but wouldn't you argue then, that the quality of their output is also likely to suffer?

The goal here is to ensure their ethical competitors have access to resources they don't.

Lot of companies have already a recruitment policy based on other parameters than skills, so they already chose the PR boost at the cost of output.

You seem to think that technical ability and ethics are somehow related. That's a sad misconception which leads to all kinds of bad results. There are many people with very high ability that have an ethical framework which would make them feel right at home in dictatorial regimes. They probably wouldn't even notice it. "I'm just doing my job" is alive and popular.

No, I don't think they're related at all. But if some percentage of high ability users have ethical concerns, it reduces the overall pool of high ability individuals available to them, while more ethical companies have their pick from the entire pool.

>You seem to think that technical ability and ethics are somehow related. That's a sad misconception which leads to all kinds of bad results.

Sure, but I also think if you have enough money to retire early, you're less likely to do something you don't agree with. Many people don't have that luxury.

>Sure, any employer can always choose to lower their standards, but wouldn't you argue then, that the quality of their output is also likely to suffer?

No. As I previously stated Google puts people through enormous hoops to work there. That has no bearing on the quality of the worker.

For example, it's been noted that past a certain IQ, there is diminishing returns - eg, past ~130 IQ you're no more likely to win a Nobel Prize.

I think the real threat is that Google "lowers" it's standards and output remains the same. This would threaten the business models of "elite" schools who pretend to have a monopoly on talent.

Maybe true in the very early days but Google has 100K employees now. It's a mixed bag of skilled and mediocre.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com