Steve Yegge on Steve Yegge's Amazon Google post | Hacker News Reader

Steve Yegge on Steve Yegge's Amazon Google post

plus.google.com

185 pointsDanielRibeiro43 comments

My biggest take away from the apology:

"But as it was midnight and I am not what you might call an experienced Google+ user, by the time I figured out how to actually post something I had somehow switched accounts."

Uh, well Google: start there. I see about three things that could use some attention (Google+ adoption, usability and multi-account issues with Google and Google Apps)

The multiple accounts issue is the main reason I don't use G+. It's no longer practical to tie an online identity to a correspondence account.

Well, Google has always had internal accounts for most of the services that are tied to your Google Company account. I don't know if G+ works this way, but I would assume that the problem isn't something that G+ user would encounter until Google releases Google+ for Google Apps.

> Well, Google has always had internal accounts for most of the services that are tied to your Google Company account.

Ironically, this is exactly one of the points that Steve made in his original post.

Until Google Apps support is released, I find it unlikely that Steve's error here will be encountered by many other users. Most Google+ users don't have access to a separate instance of Google+ to trip them up.

I also think it is unbelievably foolish to suggest that "Google+ adoption" needs attention because of this. Why on Earth would you judge inherently aggregate metrics based on a single individual mistake?

Shouldn't everyone at Google be an experienced Google+ user by this point?

Google has so many products, how would you expect a typical, hard-working employee to actively use all of them? They just wouldn't get any work done.

When their bonus is tied to the success of the company in social software, you'd expect them to use it. No? If Google is trying to make an identity play, shouldn't identity start at home?

Steve Yegg doesn't use Twitter either.

If he was someone who was active on Twitter then yes, you'd have point. Otherwise...

Most people make enough money to not need a bonus, so they might value spending their time not caring about Google+. I could make a lot more money as a hitman than as a programmer, but for some reason I choose programming.

OR, just to say, I think he didn't actually screwed up with the accounts - he posted on purpose with his public account, then changed his mind.

Imo, it speaks well of Google’s culture that they have people like Yegge who like Google and also have the freedom to strongly criticize it.

Most companies (small or large) don’t appreciate dissent.

I just left Google after 3 years (to build my own projects). I echo Steve's sentiment that overall, Google is a company that really tries hard to do everything the right way. It's a company full of smart, well-intentioned people. There are many of these internal discussions, all of them would be fascinating to outsiders, but it's just (un)fortunate that this one was accidentally posted.

For a total outsider it is nice to read what people inside google think.

Well, this reminds me a little of Jerry Maguire's "mission statement".

The future of our business.

Fewer clients. Less money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDbV2-tZgbg

... more platforms.

>Most companies (small or large) don’t appreciate dissent.

I may be downvoted but I'm guessing that Google feels the same way. No one/company likes to be ripped even if there is something to learn.

I would hope that Google learns from Steve's comments and adjusts. Many companies fail because those at the top are too sensitive to criticism and are too arrogant to trust those that they've hired.

Here's a copy of the rant: http://siliconangle.com/furrier/2011/10/12/google-engineer-a...

I don't think Google will or should care about this post being public. I think Yegge was generally being really constructive and cares passionately about seeing Google move forward.

Amazon, on the other hand, might take a small hit in recruiting given the way Yegge portrayed their culture as a former insider.

The unmentioned take-away here is not simply the focus on Platforms, but the reminder that 'Circles' are a weak feature to build a social network on. Why? because user's had already build organic circles across multiple social spaces (e.g. professional-only on Linkedin, perhaps family or college-safe on Facebook, close social on gmail, etc). What's the advantage to multiple platforms for multiple circles? you don't accidentally post your internal company rant to the whole world. You don't post pictures of red cups and beer bongs on Linkedin and you don't talk about work on Facebook. This is how users were operating before G+ launched, and is precisely why users aren't diving in.

Quits on stage, retracts. Rants about lack of SOA, retracts. Third time lucky! I do like his writing and speaking though!

Quitting on stage was a misunderstanding.

He didn't retract his rant's meaning, he basically changed the privacy settings back to what he meant them for.

So no retractions at all.

This is on the frontpage of a mainstream Australian news website: "Google engineer slams Google+ as 'pathetic afterthought'"

http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/google-e...

Reinforces value of mainstream news. [if unclear, mainstream's value is < 0]

Ah, I think the significance is that if he didn't retract the essay it would not have hit the news outlets.

Haha. He must've published it on purpose, right? That seems like a Yegge thing to do. Easier to ask forgiveness than permission and all that.

This oversharing problem highlights the fundamental problem with private sharing Google+ was supposed to address: users make mistakes.

Yes, but this is a problem that will only affect Google employees, not the world at large. Steve says he meant to be signed into his internal Google account, not his external Google account.

Steve made that mistake. If I'm using Google+, I could accidentally select the wrong circle to share to.

Happened to me before.

But I luckily noticed right away. But its not really something that Google could completely prevent.

Yes, but that's true of anything, right? You could accidentally misread a traffic signal and drive into the middle of oncoming traffic. But like with sharing on social news sites, you can usually recover quickly enough that it's not a big deal. Slam the brakes, delete the post, etc.

People make mistakes and no software can prevent that.

Account != circles, if you are using the wrong account public sharing does not have the same meaning anymore.

Google+ was supposed to address that?

When I read the original post I thought what a great company! This kind of a culture will enable them to attack themselves before anyone else can. I'd rather have people tell me what I'm doing wrong than false, drunk on kool aid praises.

Are you guys developing your products as services/platforms?

Does anyone know if Amazon have responded in any way yet?

Respond to what? The ramblings of an employee who left over 5 years ago? That hardly seems necessary.

Yegge in 2006: "I was at Amazon for just under seven years, incidentally. Great place to work. I recommend it."

https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/blog-rants

"That hardly seems necessary"

I would say there's enough fallout that damage control should have kicked in. Just look at the original thread, it's full of negativity.

Hmm, I'd consider adwords and adsense as platformization.

I'm not intimately familiar with adwords|sense. But I don't think it meets my definition of platform is something 3rd parties can build on not just with. Can you create an "plugin/app" that uses custom ad selection algorythm? that extends or uses the platform in ways it's creators did not imagine? is there a marketplace somewhere I can upload my "plugin/app" and others use it? etc.

gotta say, this was a great piece. should be required reading for every kid studying cs in college, and for most corp tech managers...

> Accessibility to zero means you have no product at all, whereas dialing Security to zero can still get you a reasonably successful product such as the Playstation Network.

I'm hoping that was a joke. Having the government investigate you for divulging sensitive customer data disqualifies you from being "usable".

That's just Steve style...

Wonder if he felt like this guy. LOL You just hit reply all! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9xGw-SWej8

Reply on news.ycombinator.com