neerkumar

The fact that google fired him doesn't imply they had the right to do so. There are plenty of illegal firings in Europe as well. Then the employee sues the company and wins. If a judge decides that google firing was legal under those motivations, then you would be right (hasn't happened yet).

Also, in the US, often companies offer you money to not sue them when they fire you. Doesn't mean the firing is legal, simply it is easier for everyone involved that way.

Here the guy was likely fired for saying that he witnessed discriminating hiring practices, i.e. quotas, to improve diversity metrics. And firing a whistleblower is illegal in the US as well. Most likely they will reach an agreement (or they have already reached). The guy will get some money and everyone will move on. Much easier than getting involved with legal stuff for both, google and the engineer.

It is really hard to be efficient in terms of headcount. Every single manager inside the organization has a personal incentive in pushing to hire more people cause that's how we measure career growth. So they all come up with all sort of BS to justify hiring more people.

The crazy thing is that it should be exactly the opposite. People should get more credit for achieving X with as few people as possible. Instead it works the other way round.

When FB bought Whatsapp, Whatsapp was handling 20 billion messages a day and was the #1 app on the phone pretty much anywhere in the world, except for US, China, and Australia (it still is). Not that they needed some tool to find that out.

FB did an amazing job in keeping their acquisitions fairly independent and let them keep grow. That's something really hard to do and they deserve credit for that.

It is easy to buy the #1 messaging app in the world, if you have the money. It is hard to make sure those people still stay motivated after the acquisition.

There was a huge harassment culture on Orkut. It was a place where was normal to get insulted. Exactly the opposite of FB, which might be extreme on the other side, full of fake compliments.

One of the things that FB got right was exactly this one. Am not sure how they did it, maybe because they started from highly educated places in the US and that set the tone for everyone who joined later.

Price seems expensive to me as well. In data science there is a similar site which has become pretty popular if you are interviewing in those top tech companies, but it is cheaper.

As the guy above was suggesting, that data science site does personalized feedback and that justifies the high price. Otherwise, the way it is now, it feels like it should be priced similarly to CTCI.

In fairness, it also comes from the fact that booking is especially huge in Europe. So it is hard for a very US based audience like HN to realize how big they are. It is like Whatsapp. 60 billion messages a day, but it doesn't look that big from the US.

"Reserving the conversation around pricing until after you are in contact with a sales person is often helpful" -> such a BS. Everyone in the world knows the reason behind that is charging differently for the same product according to a given company budget.

That's (a bit) clearer. I hadn't seen that.

I think the entire airport experience is a mess and one of the few things I can think of that's actually worse than 20 yrs ago. If you guys gain deep knowledge about their process and can then make it more efficient via technology, it would be huge.

Good luck.

I think this can make sense. I recently traveled with a toddler for the first time. I was amazed by how in certain airports (the Asian ones), when they saw I had a toddler, they managed to speed up the process by sending me to other lines. At the same time, in the US they didn't send me to any special line and was horrible. I would have easily paid 200$ to avoid staying in line with a toddler.

The website though seems so vague. It is really hard to understand exactly what I would be paying for. There is a little bit of everything and nothing is very concrete.