Given how many other useful similar tools remain, it would seem extremely odd this was removed intentionally.
But on the other hand, given all of Google's infra/tests/quality/etc., it would also be extremely odd for this to be removed by accident.
Maybe some component being deprecated internally meant this was easier to shut down than upgrade, but for a feature this simple that wouldn't make a lot of sense either.
This is... kinda baffling, to be honest.
There is no central repository of all search features and if the timer is tested, it is likely forced to trigger with debug flags.
For timer to disappear like this would most likely be caused by a ranking change which prevents it from appearing as the top result (the only position it can render itself in).
huh so I suppose it’s possible there are ghost features no one maintains but might still work?
That said we could argue for days about what a feature is.
That is, in a large org like google (or msft, or...), how much stuff is there that no current employees are aware of?
I work at a relatively small company for a number of years, and it's definitely been a challenge to maintain knowledge of feature creep that has occurred, let alone anything more in depth like what the features were _supposed_ to do.
It also would explain why the DDG one remains, as they don't meet the definition of a gatekeeper.
To what end? Needlessly pissing off lawmakers isn’t a smart strategy.
They know the law was intended to address their abusive pricing arrangements, but they decided, of course, to thumb their nose at it and add a new "platform fee" instead.
Does Google really not have some sort of "Always rank this result first" flag?
One of the most successful engineers I know in big tech told me this once -
“thewarrior you need to understand. In these companies everything happens mainly for one reason - does it get someone promoted or not ?”
I’ll wait to see if this was an accident or not. But I suspect there are systems in place to prevent changes like these from being shipped by accident.
This is one of those tragedy of the commons situations that has bedeviled the industry.
Every org , team , project and task is a pawn in an elaborate multiplayer game of promo chess. Career success is defined not only by technical excellence but also in how well you can align and deliver your projects within the chess game that is currently in play. Fail to learn this and you will burn out or be forced to quit.
What this does to the companies in the long term remains to be seen.
In close second are the platforms that are used for a fraction of a product and will never be wholely migrated onto because they are not fit for purpose.
Third place goes to the platforms that never actually have any product built on top of them - a theme so exciting people love recreating it at there own workplace.
We're all just temporarily embarrassed Linus Torvalds that want the world to build on our apis.
I guess so. I can relate to this 100%. So I guess so. Hate that it is like this, but it is 100% correct.
Those people who don't get promoted are fired?
“Why are you still here ?”
Rachel Kroll explains it well here https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2018/12/29/age/
“ This particular example was about older folks in tech.
As I remember it, the story goes like this: you're supposed to get into this business, get your money, and get out, meaning retire. You sell all your stuff and travel the world and write posts on Medium. You know, the whole pyramid thing, right?
Therefore, if you are still here, and are visibly old, something must be going on. They seem to boil it down to two things.
The first possibility is that the person is a badass. They are one of those people who already made their fortune and only hangs around at the job because they feel like it. They don't have to be there.
The other possibility is that the person is the exact opposite of a badass, and has managed to not cash out despite being in the biz for a very long time. They've made no money, may be living paycheck to paycheck, and really need the job. Basically, the fact they're not "at the top" despite their age means they are crap.”
I now realize that worldview was on its last days, soon enough (I’d say 2007-2008) we started talking about “ninja” and “rockstar” programmers, first in the context of RoR but then it extended, gradually but surely, to almost all of the industry. And then lots and lots of money started becoming available via FAANG-like companies (I’d say starting around 2013-2014, something like that) and all this worldview was dialed up to one thousand.
If you're at a higher level, even if you're content with your position, your manager is rated on how many people earn promotions.