Discussion about this post

User's avatar
David Kiferbaum's avatar

I worked at Google from 2015-2023 and noticed a calamitous change in culture over that period of time. Employees can no longer speak freely (most importantly, in confronting leadership, as epitomized at once-famous TGIF meetings). This culture of accountability and radical anti-hierarchy was a check on the inevitable decline into BS-heavy corporate comms. Sundar killed this emblem of managerial accountability in late 2019. What's left is a risk-averse, feudal empire spanning hundreds (low thousands?) of directors and VPs fearful of losing their multi-million-dollar comp and equity awards for capably and dutifully managing their sprawling serfdoms. These serfdoms so often come into conflict with one another (despite having to coordinate on new product launches) that innovative, disruptive work often never ships. And even if you get past that coordination problem, if it could do *anything* to put the core search ad business at risk, it's seen as not worth it for the company. So to answer your question, I think it's part classic innovators dillemma, and part managerial paralysis.

Expand full comment
Notes from the periphery's avatar

My view is that the “big efficiencies from AI” are largely a mirage. This is not unique to Google. All the big companies need to tread a fine line between feeding investors what they want to hear (AI hype about productivity force multipliers), yet also face the reality that AI is severely lagging in delivering those productivity gains except in extremely menial jobs (largely NOT in big tech: copywriters, low level graphic design), is extremely expensive to train models, differentiate custom models (because proprietary data is harder to find and privacy regulations do exist), not to mention the extremely high hardware costs and the lagging of primary research innovation in AI.

In short, we’re in the buzzword trap, big tech needs to say “me too, look at me I’m leading the way” but there’s no easy path to unique differentiation, no proven business model, and therefore no quick path to revenue. Metaverse 2.0

Also, much of the primary research was done by Google scientists with the psychological safety of the zirp years that they wouldn’t be laid off. Short term thinking leads employees to busy work and metrics hacking, not deep R&D innovation.

Expand full comment
47 more comments...

No posts