Facebook, Amazon etc....

Yeah, having an average salary of 400k* (L5 where I assume most Googlers are) is not an incentive at all.

* Not counting stock appreciation which effectively makes the real salary significantly higher.

The same L5 SWEs (or junior or senior to that level) were the ones who had enough incentive to create the technology that is right now the basis of all LLMs out there including ChatGpt. The reason why Google is behind in AI race right now is lack of vision and risk appetite by its leadership since they were happy sitting on the billions being churned out by the search monopoly. They had the building pieces to launch ChatGPT like product 2-3 years before Open AI ever did.
Also the teams within Google that are working on products that compete with ChatGPT like products are pretty much working start up hours ever since code red was declared by Sundar over it.
 
Guy gets a contract to work from 9 to 5. He leaves the office at 5. "Look at this bum, leaving work early".
 
The same L5 SWEs (or junior or senior to that level) were the ones who had enough incentive to create the technology that is right now the basis of all LLMs out there including ChatGpt. The reason why Google is behind in AI race right now is lack of vision and risk appetite by its leadership since they were happy sitting on the billions being churned out by the search monopoly. They had the building pieces to launch ChatGPT like product 2-3 years before Open AI ever did.
Also the teams within Google that are working on products that compete with ChatGPT like products are pretty much working start up hours ever since code red was declared by Sundar over it.
Finally a quite informed posts. There are a few points I do not necessarily agree though.

First of all, it is not necessary the same engineers/scientists. People leave the companies, new employees replace them. Google has massively increased, since it became Google, and the culture is quite different nowadays in virtually every aspect. However, that never was my point in that post, my point is that Googlers have actually a strong incentive to work hard: They are getting extremely high salaries. If you’re getting paid half a million (close to a million if you are staff/senior staff, and more as principal), then it is probably also expected to work 30-40 quality hours per week.

Second, I agree that the main problem is Google’s leadership and culture rather than the quality of employees. The culture nowadays is somewhere between just another corporate to rotten to the core, instead of the Google culture. Consequently, they have stopped becoming innovative and Pichai’s strategy is to put more adds everywhere cause that brings money. Until it won’t.

Third, I do not agree that they had the technology to do ChatGPT before OpenAI. Yes, Google discovered Transformers (I was in NeurIPS 17 where they were presented), but then everyone knew about Transformers. Their Bert system was never as good as early GPT versions. And frankly, it shows how far they have fallen that Gemini is still not as good as Claude or GPT-4. Until 2021 or so, DeepMind was the most reputable AI organization in the word. Google Brain was probably second. Google Research might have been third. And yet together they cannot make something as good as their tiny competitors (DeepMind even before the merge with Google Brain had more employees than OpenAI and Anthropic combined).

Fourth, since red signal of Pichai, AI teams had to work harder but definitely not startup hours. More like regular hours, with some highly recommended 3 days/week in office rather than basically little to no work with showing to the office the day where you want to do some massage and eat sushi. But it is still normal working hours, with a life-work balance and salary combo that you cannot get anywhere else, probably outside of Nvidia.

Finally, again I agree that the problem is Pichai’s leadership and the culture. He has basically transformed Google to Microsoft under Ballmer, and similar to how Google under Schmidt, Page (and Brinn) obliterated Microsoft, so are doing the other companies to Google. I think they still have top researchers and engineers (DeepMind has easily and by far the hardest FAANG interview), but when you have a rotten culture and bad managers, the engineers won’t be able to do much. In an individual manner, it is still an amazing place to work (amazing salary, chance to coast, great for resume) but for the organization, this is not great. The fact that Mistral in their first year of existence with a couple dozen staff was able to make something as good as Google, shows how deep are Google’s problem. Btw, I would have said the same for Meta until recently, where Zuck started bothering again and effectively made Meta’s employee work again.
 
Killing yourself in work to make someone else millions, when you could go down the road and make 80% and not kill yourself, there is no real incentive there, vs. the gamble of being very early/founding a start up.

You've been posting your bootlicker stuff on all these CEO types for years, so I'm not surprised you agree with this wind bag.
Americans won't have it anyother way, if they did they would have laws mandating PTO, parental leave etc
 
One of the most legendary CEOs of all time, who has lead one of the biggest and most innovative technology companies for over a decade is wrong.

Caf posters who have never lead a company and are not even in this field are obviously right.
How many hours a day do you work in the office?
 
Googlers have actually a strong incentive to work hard: They are getting extremely high salaries. If you’re getting paid half a million (close to a million if you are staff/senior staff, and more as principal), then it is probably also expected to work 30-40 quality hours per week.
3 days a week 10:30-18:30. I am far from a hard working example though, probably spend more time shitposting in Caf than coding.

Well the work ethic of people like you and the highest paid Googlers are the reason that Google is failing. According to the ex-CEO whose quote caused this thread to be bumped. Because those hours are probably less than half the sort of hours worked by people working in start-ups. Which seems to be his expectation.
 
Well the work ethic of people like you and the highest paid Googlers are the reason that Google is failing. According to the ex-CEO whose quote caused this thread to be bumped. Because those hours are probably less than half the sort of hours worked by people working in start-ups. Which seems to be his expectation.
I actually agree with you that the work ethic (or the lack of it) of people like me are one of the two reasons why Google is failing. The other is the bad leadership.
 
I actually agree with you that the work ethic (or the lack of it) of people like me are one of the two reasons why Google is failing. The other is the bad leadership.

Well then do you agree he’s talking bollox when he expects people to work startup hours despite already being very well paid and lacking the incentives that workers at startups have to work long hours?
 
Well then do you agree he’s talking bollox when he expects people to work startup hours despite already being very well paid and lacking the incentives that workers at startups have to work long hours?
No, I do not agree. The incentives are there: top 0.1% salary, 20% annual bonus, stock refreshers. You don’t work hard, it is okay, just go find another job for 20% of that money. It is what Meta are doing nowadays, you work hard or you do not work there at all. And surprisingly, they are quickly catching up.

Employees do not own anything to companies but the same is also for the reverse. The idea that you get half a million per year but do not bother showing to work is unique only in big tech. Banking, consulting, hedge funds, medicine and pretty much every other similarly paid profession, you have to work hard. In big tech nowadays, most people work as hard as Sancho in training.
 
Finally a quite informed posts. There are a few points I do not necessarily agree though.

First of all, it is not necessary the same engineers/scientists. People leave the companies, new employees replace them. Google has massively increased, since it became Google, and the culture is quite different nowadays in virtually every aspect. However, that never was my point in that post, my point is that Googlers have actually a strong incentive to work hard: They are getting extremely high salaries. If you’re getting paid half a million (close to a million if you are staff/senior staff, and more as principal), then it is probably also expected to work 30-40 quality hours per week.

Second, I agree that the main problem is Google’s leadership and culture rather than the quality of employees. The culture nowadays is somewhere between just another corporate to rotten to the core, instead of the Google culture. Consequently, they have stopped becoming innovative and Pichai’s strategy is to put more adds everywhere cause that brings money. Until it won’t.

Third, I do not agree that they had the technology to do ChatGPT before OpenAI. Yes, Google discovered Transformers (I was in NeurIPS 17 where they were presented), but then everyone knew about Transformers. Their Bert system was never as good as early GPT versions. And frankly, it shows how far they have fallen that Gemini is still not as good as Claude or GPT-4. Until 2021 or so, DeepMind was the most reputable AI organization in the word. Google Brain was probably second. Google Research might have been third. And yet together they cannot make something as good as their tiny competitors (DeepMind even before the merge with Google Brain had more employees than OpenAI and Anthropic combined).

Fourth, since red signal of Pichai, AI teams had to work harder but definitely not startup hours. More like regular hours, with some highly recommended 3 days/week in office rather than basically little to no work with showing to the office the day where you want to do some massage and eat sushi. But it is still normal working hours, with a life-work balance and salary combo that you cannot get anywhere else, probably outside of Nvidia.

Finally, again I agree that the problem is Pichai’s leadership and the culture. He has basically transformed Google to Microsoft under Ballmer, and similar to how Google under Schmidt, Page (and Brinn) obliterated Microsoft, so are doing the other companies to Google. I think they still have top researchers and engineers (DeepMind has easily and by far the hardest FAANG interview), but when you have a rotten culture and bad managers, the engineers won’t be able to do much. In an individual manner, it is still an amazing place to work (amazing salary, chance to coast, great for resume) but for the organization, this is not great. The fact that Mistral in their first year of existence with a couple dozen staff was able to make something as good as Google, shows how deep are Google’s problem. Btw, I would have said the same for Meta until recently, where Zuck started bothering again and effectively made Meta’s employee work again.

I don't know the composition of Open AI team right now since they have hired a lot recently but they had a high % of Xooglers for quite some time. There are various reasons why these people left Google to join a company like Open AI. Most of them have more to do with general bureaucracy within Google & lack of leadership vision which made launching products like ChatGpt harder than them perceiving Google allowing them or their peers to coast. All big companies by the very definition of being big in terms of employee count will have a set of employees who do the bare minimum and a set who are still ambitious to execute.
About 6 months before the hype around ChatGPT launch started, NYT carried article on how a Google engineer was claiming that their in-house GPT style chat bot called lambda was sentient. Not saying this version was as good as what OpenAI eventually launched but if Google had continued to aggressively pursue improvements over it in previous years, they would be much better placed.
I would repeat that teams working AI products are absolutely not coasting within Google now. May be they are not working 80hrs or so every week like some start ups. But a delta of 10 or so hours in or outside office is not going to make a difference. In general Google simply has too much to lose and the reputation risk of launching the wrong AI product drowning their search monopoly is too high for them right now.
 
Says the person who created an account to voice criticism about the way professional football players play and professional managers manage.
Mate you're posting this on a football discussion forum, and to the best of my knowledge you are neither a footballer nor a manager.
Touché.

On the other hand, when people said that SAF is an idiot and is talking bollocks about tactics people were right to call you out.

Schmidt has been as a flawless CEO as anyone. He took a startup run by two kids, one of which had a bigger God complex than Musk, and turned it into the best software company ever. He probably knows what he is saying.
 
Last edited:
No, I do not agree. The incentives are there: top 0.1% salary, 20% annual bonus, stock refreshers. You don’t work hard, it is okay, just go find another job for 20% of that money. It is what Meta are doing nowadays, you work hard or you do not work there at all. And surprisingly, they are quickly catching up.

Employees do not own anything to companies but the same is also for the reverse. The idea that you get half a million per year but do not bother showing to work is unique only in big tech. Banking, consulting, hedge funds, medicine and pretty much every other similarly paid profession, you have to work hard. In big tech nowadays, most people work as hard as Sancho in training.

They clearly aren’t there. Otherwise they would be working longer than the 30-40 hours you mention and closer to the startup hours yer man seems to think Google needs. That’s the thing about incentives. They change behaviour. If the behaviour isn’t changing then the incentives aren’t there.
 
I don't know the composition of Open AI team right now since they have hired a lot recently but they had a high % of Xooglers for quite some time. There are various reasons why these people left Google to join a company like Open AI. Most of them have more to do with general bureaucracy within Google & lack of leadership vision which made launching products like ChatGpt harder than them perceiving Google allowing them or their peers to coast. All big companies by the very definition of being big in terms of employee count will have a set of employees who do the bare minimum and a set who are still ambitious to execute.
About 6 months before the hype around ChatGPT launch started, NYT carried article on how a Google engineer was claiming that their in-house GPT style chat bot called lambda was sentient. Not saying this version was as good as what OpenAI eventually launched but if Google had continued to aggressively pursue improvements over it in previous years, they would be much better placed.
I would repeat that teams working AI products are absolutely not coasting within Google now. May be they are not working 80hrs or so every week like some start ups. But a delta of 10 or so hours in or outside office is not going to make a difference. In general Google simply has too much to lose and the reputation risk of launching the wrong AI product drowning their search monopoly is too high for them right now.
OpenAI pays on average a bit over 800k for the equivalents of L5 but most of them are in stocks that obviously you cannot cash out until it does IPO (or gets sold). Getting in OpenAI is probably as hard as in Google, and unsurprisingly a lot of Google scientist joined it cause it felt like early days Google.

Lambda was a few months before ChatGPT but nowhere as good. Gemini is far better than Lambda ever was and only now it is catching up with GPT/Claude. So that engineer was talking bollocks.

I wouldn’t say that AI Google teams are coasting now, but they (and Meta’s) were definitely coasting for a couple of years. Now they are working ok hours for 3 days per week and coasting on the other two.