Really I can't think of anything more google than that. No idea why shareholders still tolerate their crap.
Honestly, I’d love to know what childhood trauma afflicted Google to be the way it is.
Other than, you know, a company that calls themselves "Open"AI, who now even consider it too dangerous (due to competition), to even release the number of parameters of their most recent model, much less talk about the actual research.
Due to transformer deep neural networks mostly pushed forward to a 2017 paper called "Attention is all you need". Prompted by your question I searched where the people who wrote this paper work at, and... (unsurprisingly drum roll), a team from Google.
Do you think the general public gives Xerox PARC a lot of credit for modern computing? I don't think so, and it's fine. It will just be well known among technology enthusiasts and historians of technology.
I also think The Dream Machine should be required reading in a history class in all CS curriculum, but I'm not in academia.
A suit essentially plays a defensive game. He can't take risks. CEO is just a job. The goal is to not ... things up and basically collect a hefty paycheck every year. You become a suit by being highly risk averse and if you take risks and if it doesn't pan out you will be kicked out.
A founder CEO type is essentially a wild high energy high risk charismatic type. You can't compare someone like SAMA or Zuck or Steve Jobs or Elon who won't take no for an answer and go all in to make their dreams come true.
It will be extra creepy because, you wont even be logged in, it will just identify you by using all the data it has about you.
Occasionally when you are chatting to it, it will blurt out some some embarrassing or private information about you.
Shareholders have no option. Larry + Sergey are still majority shareholders iirc.