Hacker News Reader

Comment by fermienrico | Hacker News Reader

It is funny how no one ever speaks of Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google - I never hear anything from him. About the only time I've seen Sundar say anything is a few mins of pre-rehearsed teleprompted speech at Google I/O, mostly about AI buzzwords.

Sundar - if you're reading this, get on talk shows. Talk about your company and it's future in candid, off-the-cuff manner. Put the corporate lingo behind and speak in honest, truthful and unambiguous ways. You should be on Joe Rogan, you should be doing more interviews and generally have a lively presence. Look at how Stripe founders defend their company: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22937303

What kind of leadership is this? In my opinion, Google's image and its opinion has gone down hill since Sundar's appointment as CEO, but that's just a general emotion I have - not sure if it is financially or more widely true.

View on HN

A large part of Google's zeitgeist is the idea that they're these spunky mysterious geniuses with bicycle meetings and volleyball courts. A really smart engineer going on Joe Rogan would be an unmitigated disaster as Rogan would constantly cut off his rhetoric knowing his audience would be completely uninterested in any substantial technical speak.

It's people like Musk who understand PR and market manipulation who benefit from talkshow rounds.

Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the real Google on full display, piercing the veil of youtube DRM, Dragonfly, and Android app store permissions. But Google will intelligently avoid that at all costs.

Someone once called Rogan's podcast intellectual tourism and I haven't been able to prove them wrong.

It reminds me a lot of Malcolm Gladwell. I have mixed feelings about MG but there has been a fair bit of controversy [1] over his true nature as a journalist while he projects and speaks as a scientist or intellectual.

[1]: https://www.thecrimson.com/column/behavioral-economist/artic...

He's also been a paid spokesperson for big tobacco without making that relationship clear while he is speaking.

Totally agree, that's why I love it. I guess it comes if you prefer a depth-first or breadth-first path in learning.

That's a great term. Sounds like a lot of YouTube channels and podcasts.

The good thing about Rogan is that he doesn't pretend to be more than that.

Exactly. I have zero issues with that, and the fact that Joe Rogan is aware of it helps a ton.

I like listening to all the various guests he invites, like doctors or even professional archers. I like hearing them talk about their stuff deep enough where I, as a person who knows not much at all about their specialty topics, can learn something. But it would become not that interesting to me if every single guest of his would dive so deep, I would not be able to understand anything without reading a tons of pre-req material.

It is a really difficult thing to balance, between going too in-depth and being too surface-level. And, I feel like, that's why Joe is so popular, as he nails it very well.

For the topics that I want to dive very deep into, I can just listen to specialized podcasts on those topics. But as a general "seeing tons of cool stuff and learning about basics of really diverse topics I would never see otherwise", Joe's podcast is great. Plus, Joe manages to open up people, to the point where they get really candid and, for the lack of a better word in my mind, human. Even the people who hold very opposing views to those of Joe's.

Maybe I'm stupid but could someone enlighten me as to what "intellectual tourism" might mean? Is that like, a normal person pretending to be intellectual, or is it like browsing Wikipedia with no specific purpose except for the brain snacks? I can't even tell if that's an insult to Joe Rogan or not.

I don't think it's meant to be an insult. The way I interpret it, "intellectual tourism" means looking at / listening to "intellectual" topics, but only in a cursory manner with little deep conversation.

Agree with the other poster, not an insult at all. Think pop-science books or discussing Mayan art over beers.

I'd personally be thrilled if more people were intellectual tourists. In my professional technical life, I'd far rather talk to people with a superficial understanding than people who's mental model is part TV-hackers, part magic.

Have you ever seen that episode of The Office where the boss comes back from vacation to Jamaica? I see it as that but for wanting to sound smart and intellectual.

I think you're hung up on the interviewer and missing the larger point. Replace Joe Rogan with Lex Fridman or whatever...it doesn't matter.

> Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the real Google on full display, piercing the veil of youtube DRM, Dragonfly, and Android app store permissions.

Then you better stop interviewing engineers, and start interviewing the business people. Most of the latter's job description is figuring this sort of stuff out.

Google is too big to be elite now. 120,000 people, they're just another corporation.

99% of people would love to have Google on their resumes not with standing the salaries and perks. Don't kid yourself. Google is still elite. You can also go on Blind and see where everyone wants to work.

A lot of people who get rejected by Google keep spewing the anti Google propaganda here.

Sorry dont get me wrong, its probably still the top FANG to work for. Just that it isn't elite.

So if FAANG isn't elite, what is?

It still has incredibly smart people. And the hiring bar is common across the company. Now don't name a 5 person shop as "more elite".

Top in every sense but salary. Google no longer pays top of market except in hyper niche specializations. You'll get more cash at F & N.

Google matches F very easily. Know 2 people whose F was outmatched by G. They were not niche jobs.

If they have to match, that's another way of saying their default offer is a lowball, and that's why G offers are ~20k less than F (check levels.fyi).

That's because FB has to pay higher to attract the same talent. Many many people join G at lower offers as well.

From being the product manager of both android and google chrome to having to appear in your trashy youtube recommends section because you want to watch him defend company policy.

People love and trust Google, dude. It's one of the most beloved brands in America (and probably the world). He's handling this perfectly.

The only reason to do that is when you want the stock price higher or if you need support, and he doesn't need anything.

What was Stripe up to 24 days ago? Closing a $600m round.

Why would Sundar or Google benefit from this?

Engaging with their future talent pool? When communities like HN and other tech hubs start thinking adversarially about your company, it has major consequences. People in the talent pool aren't stupid - they're trading off their time for a salary, but also trading the opportunity cost.

Given a choice between Google and say... Stripe - where would you work?

You'd be surprised where 99% of HN would work regardless of their comment history. Google has no shortage of smart people coming in. And not that HN is some elite bunch of "10x rockstars". Most efficient workers probably don't have time for the nonsense here.

As long as Google keeps the salaries up there won't be a lack of people wanting to work there.

I _think_ I'd like this, but imagine if he turns out to be like Zuck. A robot that lives in his own Silicone Valley bubble.

Yeah, I presume even if Sundar wanted to get out in the Public, their shareholders wouldnt want to. Stripe founders don't have to worry about externalities since it is a private company.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com