Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Living the Good Life, Leaving Google Behind

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the calling-in-rich dept.

Google 176

inetsee writes with an article in the San Francisco Chronicle profiling seven early Googlers who have left the company, part of a cohort the article claims amounts to 100 out of the first 300 workers hired by Google. For these former employees, all the acclaimed perks of life at the Googleplex can't compete with calling the shots in their own lives. Google's chef is opening his own restaurant, Olana Khan has started a non-profit that makes micro-loans to entrepreneurs in developing countries, and Aydin Senkut has become an angel investor. Others are simply enjoying retirement, making things in the garage shop or skydiving in South Africa.

cancel ×

176 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Unemployment? (1, Funny)

Professor_UNIX (867045) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555748)

How do you live the good life while unemployed? How are they going to make a living? What, all 100 of them are millionaires and set for life? I doubt that.

Re:Unemployment? (2, Funny)

lucabrasi999 (585141) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555794)

What, all 100 of them are millionaires and set for life? I doubt that.

I hope you are being sarcastic. If you aren't, you obviously have no understanding of the financial markets. In that case, I have a friend in Nigeria that I'd like for you to meet.

Re:Unemployment? (0, Troll)

Professor_UNIX (867045) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555872)

I hope you are being sarcastic.
Naw, just surprised Google is even still in business. They've definitely outlived the other search engines in terms of popularity. It amazes me that it still makes money selling advertising considering the advertising collapse years ago after the dot-bomb failures. How does Google stay in business by offering so much of their stuff for free?

Re:Unemployment? (1, Interesting)

$1uck (710826) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555938)

Maybe the advertising collapse happened because one company owns the entire market? And they own the entire market by giving away so much stuff for free? I'm just pondering here notseriously implying anything, but that sounds similiar to something MS did with OS's and media players/browsers etc. I'm sure someone will come along and tell me why I'm wrong which is fine.

Google is the new Übersoft .. (1)

rs232 (849320) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556734)

Maybe the advertising collapse happened because one company owns the entire market?

Yea, Google is the new Übersoft [ubersoft.net] .. ;)

"I'm just pondering here not seriously implying anything, but that sounds similiar to something MS did with OS's and media players/browsers etc"

Considering people have a choice as to what search engine to use and Google don't have a desktop monopoly I don't think it is at all similar. No doubt once Microsoft embed search directly in the apps that anomaly will soon be corrected.

was: Re:Unemployment? (Score:5, Interesting)

Re:Unemployment? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556834)

You're not wrong exactly, but there was a lot more to what Microsoft did than just bundling and dumping. They carried out any number of anticompetitive practices from literally paying magazine review authors to write favorable reviews about their crap to putting delay loops into the published APIs that literally do nothing else but wrap around the internal APIs with which Microsoft developed software.

So far Google has been known to PLAY WELL WITH OTHERS - they are very much interested in supporting standards and the like. They have been supporting Linux even for apps like google earth and the like. This is the primary difference between Google and Microsoft to my mind. May it last forever.

Re:Unemployment? (3, Informative)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558182)

So far Google has been known to PLAY WELL WITH OTHERS - they are very much interested in supporting standards and the like. They have been supporting Linux even for apps like google earth and the like. This is the primary difference between Google and Microsoft to my mind. May it last forever.
I'd like to point out that Google doesn't compete with Linux, or even Windows, for that matter. They compete with search engines and office software developers.

Re:Unemployment? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558434)

I'd like to point out that Google doesn't compete with Linux, or even Windows, for that matter. They compete with search engines and office software developers.

yes, and they provide APIs which can be used by search engines and office software developers, too. Sorry I didn't give specific enough examples for you.

Re:Unemployment? (4, Interesting)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555956)

How does Google stay in business by offering so much of their stuff for free?


In addition to adverstising, they make their money selling their services to other providers and businesses. Google is not merely a link aggregator but more a service provider. Think Apple. Yes, they sell an operating system but they really make their money on the hardware.

Google is actually a very good business and your surprise at them still being in business, well, let's just say I wouldn't give you my money to invest.

Re:Unemployment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17557042)

Google is actually a very good business and your surprise at them still being in business, well, let's just say I wouldn't give you my money to invest.

Because you, on the other hand, predicted the success of Google and are now enjoying life as a millionaire thanks to your investment?

The advertising market didn't collapse per se (2, Informative)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555972)

Big companies spend about 15% of their budget on advertising, because that's what advertising consultants tell them that they need to spend. That hasn't changed. What happened was that they stopped spending too much of it on untargetted advertising. Google lets them spend it on targetted ads, which even if they don't get clickthroughs still buys them brand awareness among potential customers. Google does this very well indeed, and the question that you should be asking is: how does any other ad-supported service stay in business.

Re:Unemployment? (3, Informative)

FLEB (312391) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556016)

Part of it is that they're not just posting adverts on their own sites, they're also posting ads on services and acting as an ad broker posting ads on other peoples' sites, with a simple, rather unobtrusive, and relevant method to boot. To compare them to past (Web 1.0?) companies, they're not just Yahoo!, they're DoubleClick as well. There are also other sources like licensing their search system to a number of other players (which I suppose makes them a bit "Inktomi" as well).

Even then, I agree that it's a bit odd that they're as high afloat as they are right now, but I think that if things start going sour, they do have respectable and consistently innovative search technologies that they could apply to any number of pay-for products or services (kind of like pre-AOL Netscape did, although not that well, when the browser wars made their flagship browser go freeware-- selling server software and other such things on the reputation of their free products).

Re:Unemployment? (2, Funny)

belrick (31159) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556118)

How does Google stay in business by offering so much of their stuff for free?


They are in the business of selling eyeballs, not search results or email services or... The latter are simply the costs of acquiring eyeballs.

Re:Unemployment? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556232)

They are in the business of selling eyeballs

Google is an Eye Bank [mebtc.org] ?

Re:Unemployment? (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556524)

Same way that NBC, CBS, and ABC has done for years.
They don't give anything away. They sell advertising.
Google sells you. They no more give away their products than a rancher gives away food to his herd.

Re:Unemployment? (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558368)

It amazes me that it still makes money selling advertising considering the advertising collapse years ago after the dot-bomb failures

If advertising on google didn't work, people wouldn't buy ads. However, the advertising does work, so Google makes Gobs of Cash.

Re:Unemployment? (4, Insightful)

cowscows (103644) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555990)

Just because you leave a job doesn't doom you to a future of unemployment. I'm no HR guy, but being one of the early guys at Google probably doesn't look too bad on someone's resume. But besides that, these are likely talented and highly motivated people, and now that they've got some money in the bank, they can do their own thing and put their time and energy exactly where they want to. For some of those people, Google was still doing what they wanted to do, so they still work there. Others are using their money to try to start up their own businesses. Still others might be perfectly content to sit on a couch and play PS3 on a 80" TV all day.

I can promise you that a lot more than 100 people have made millions off of Google. Their stock has gone nuts, there's many billions of dollars to go around. Just one billion dollars divided by 100 people is 10 million each. A million dollars is a lot of money to an individual person, but for these big corporations, that is not an unsual amount of money at all.

Re:Unemployment? (4, Insightful)

Salvance (1014001) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556060)

Actually, they probably ARE all millionaires, or darn close. Microsoft minted millionaires out of thousands of early employees. Google stock has gone up by over 500%, it's pretty reasonable to assume the first 100 employees were given at least 2,000 shares over time in the $1-5 range ... which would make each of them millionaires.

Re:Unemployment? (0)

autophile (640621) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556800)

Google stock has gone up by over 500%, it's pretty reasonable to assume the first 100 employees were given at least 2,000 shares over time in the $1-5 range ... which would make each of them millionaires.

Well... at least $40,000-aires (2000*(25-5))

--Rob

Check the math above, it is way off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17557326)

Actually:

(498.39-5) * 2000)= $986,780.00 which is nearly $1 million.

(The 500% seems to refer to the increase since the IPO, not the option grant since the hypothesis was in the $1-$5 per share range)

Re:Unemployment? (2, Funny)

jafac (1449) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558022)

At the peak of the dotcom boom, I was a millionaire. (at least on paper).

Yet I was a backline support technician, making a base salary of about $65k/yr.

Due to mistakes in judgment, bad investments (I invested in a construction company, and the guy ran it into the ground), and tax laws, I am no longer a millionaire (though I am in a nice house right now).

Let me tell you this: being a millionaire is nothing. You can lose it all overnight. And even when you have it, there's a great temptation to spend it, at least some of it - to "reward" yourself. (otherwise it's just numbers in a bank account somewhere). In any case - if you're a millionaire, just that alone doesn't make you "set for life". Your best assets are your marketable job skills, and your brain, and your connections.

I'd say that when you get up around TEN million in assets, then you can shield yourself from bad decisions or risky investments, and you can maybe quit your day-job, live off the revenue-producing investments.

One is not truly financially independent until one has probably fifty million dollars in assets.

I say again. A million dollars is NOTHING.
Most "middle-class" Americans think they're rich because they have a Ford Explorer and a DVD player, and a 45" plasma screen tv. They have no idea how poor they are.

Re:Unemployment? (5, Insightful)

JazzLad (935151) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558838)

Sheesh. If they're poor, what am I? I make just under 28,000/yr (USD). My TV is a 25" and over about 6-8 years old. Oh, and my wife and I have 2 kids.

Money doesn't make you rich, perceived lack thereof makes you poor. I know many people with far more money than I that complain about money far more than I. If you can afford to put food on the table, a roof over your head and not live in fear for your life, health or well-being, it is hard to justify a claim of 'poor'.

No, I'm not the guy who sold his house and cars to live poor on purpose, we're just a young family starting out. A big problem, especially here in the States, seems to be that if you are not able to consume everything your heart desires that you are poor and living without. If that describes you, I strongly suggest you spend some time determining what really makes you happy and focus on that.

Sorry for the rant, but those of us that live a bit below the 'living wage' (here in Utah I'd have to make a few thousand more a year to be at it) are tired of hearing about how people that make a multiple of what we do are 'poor.' :)

Re:Unemployment? (1)

Assassin bug (835070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558892)

I'm a graduate student. If I actually had one million dollars (assuming taxes paid), not just assets, I think I could find a way to live very comfortably on its compound interest!

Re:Unemployment? (1)

allacds (567636) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558982)


I'd say that when you get up around TEN million in assets, then you can shield yourself from bad decisions or risky investments, and you can maybe quit your day-job, live off the revenue-producing investments.

One is not truly financially independent until one has probably fifty million dollars in assets.


How are you defining financial independence? My definition is that I have enough money in the bank that, in lieu of working, I could live off the interest on my money and not suffer a loss in my standard of living.

With that in mind, we'll assume a value of $65k for the amount you need per year to make this work (just because that's the amount you mentioned you make).

My calculations tell me that investing X dollars at 4% (a very realistic estimate of return on very very low risk investments) to yield $65k annually makes X = $1.625 million. Even if you bump your expectation of current salary up to $100k, that number still only goes to $2.5million. I suppose you could throw paying cash for a house on top of that, so you can add another $500k or so to the value...but that still puts you up to $3million for a very reasonable middle class existance without working (and no mortgage payment to boot)



Where you got numbers like $10million or $50million as a minimum is beyond me...

People getting tired and moving on (4, Insightful)

hsmith (818216) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555798)

How is this news? They have been at the company 6 years, saw it grow and have ambitions of their own. I am not shocked in the least bit.

Re:People getting tired and moving on (3, Insightful)

lucabrasi999 (585141) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555858)

How is this news?

You must be new here. All you have to do is submit a story, ANY story, that mentions Google and the Slashdot editors start salivating....

Re:People getting tired and moving on (1, Funny)

Speare (84249) | more than 7 years ago | (#17557460)

Ask Slashdot: Does Google Make You Drool?
An anonymous fanboy writes, "Why does POP mail still exist? Why do people still talk about Flickr and GARMIN maps? Should the Linux kernel be rewritten on a micro-google architecture? Nintendo was just copying Google when they came up with the idea of the Wiiiiiiimote. Elvis isn't dead, he's just not attending shareholder meetings anymore. The SEC and DOJ are investigating all the back-dating scandals using a secret new Google API."

Re:People getting tired and moving on (1)

djdavetrouble (442175) | more than 7 years ago | (#17557680)

How is this news?

You must be new here. All you have to do is submit a story, ANY story, that mentions Google and the Slashdot editors start salivating....


Yes, BUT, way before the .com boom and bust and the web 2.0, a common tech dream was to join a groundbreaking company in its infancy.
These technology companies were well funded by venture capital, but usually in the beginning still gave developers, programmers, and any EARLY employee
huge stock grants, thousands of shares for prices like .50 each. This is how companies lured talented people that had to work often insane hours to get something off of the ground. This
happened with Oracle, Sybase, etc. etc. Everyone is dreaming of the IPO payoff. Frequently (especially in the .com bust) these dreams turned
to penny stocks, though, and never reached the strike price.

Re:People getting tired and moving on (4, Informative)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555884)

This just in - the same seems to be true of successful retired employees of McDonalds, Saks 5th Avenue, K-Mart, the Long Island Railroad, AT&T, Mel's Diner, NASA, Frito-Lay, Ford, Mad Magazine, Slappy's Bait Shop, Paramount Pictures, Goya, the NSA, and Roy's Gerbil Grooming.

Re:People getting tired and moving on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17555916)

This just in - the same seems to be true of successful retired employees of McDonalds, Saks 5th Avenue, K-Mart, the Long Island Railroad, AT&T, Mel's Diner, NASA, Frito-Lay, Ford, Mad Magazine, Slappy's Bait Shop, Paramount Pictures, Goya, the NSA, and Roy's Gerbil Grooming.
I'm still pretty upset about my condition after working at that last one. If Roy ever tells you that a Gerbil won't eat a finger, he's lying.

Re:People getting tired and moving on (2, Interesting)

IainMH (176964) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556054)

In the Web 1.0 dotcom world, this was called the Ferrari Effect - you know you're about to get this when your car park is full of Italian sports cars.

Re:People getting tired and moving on (2, Funny)

Bastard of Subhumani (827601) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556708)

No, no no. You must be new here.


Valid responses are along the lines of "oh noes!! Google is dying, eleventyone!!! They are so kewl!!!" or "Har har! Serve them right for being evil! What goes around comes around."

Quick Poll... (5, Funny)

SnapShot (171582) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555864)

If you made multi-million dollars in a start up tech company would you:
1. Leave to pursue your interests.
2. Continue to work at the company until retiremennt.
3. Burn the money in a huge trash barrel and join a Buddist monestary.
4. Hire private detectives to stalk CowboyNeal?

Re:Quick Poll... (5, Funny)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555908)

That blur you would see would be me leaving the building. There are few jobs worth actually staying at if you have the wealth to pursue your own course.

Hell, I could just sit around all day and post on slashdot. Oh, right.

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

zyl0x (987342) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556628)

Isn't that the point of getting a job in the first place? To earn enough money so that you don't have to work anymore, and can just do what you want? It's like winning the lottery but with more work and less solicitors.

Re:Quick Poll... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17557490)

Isn't that the point of getting a job in the first place?

Yes, but don't let the HR department know that when you're trying to get the job in the first place. Despite the fact that they have no loyalty to you, they expect a certain level of loyalty from you and knowing that you'll bolt the moment you're able, you're going to have a tough time convincing them that you're not going to bolt mid-project or otherwise leave them in a tough spot.

Likewise, all the people who are rushing out to spend their millions and live a life of leisure are shooting themselves in the foot. Having a decade or so gap in employment isn't going to look good to a large number of employers should those millions run out.

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

MrAnnoyanceToYou (654053) | more than 7 years ago | (#17559334)

I'm a contractor because I don't lie that well about my motivations. On the good side, I get paid a little more for my insolence. I just have to figure out how to provide my own benefits.

Re:Quick Poll... (2, Insightful)

arivanov (12034) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556876)

While your attitude is quite common in the tech circles, I have yet to observe it in people who have managed to make repeated high achievements. Nearly all consistent high achievers do not red-shift the moment they can, they move away quietly after a time to do different things and usually succeed again in the new thing they do. So based on your attitude you are least likely to manage this even once. In fact I doubt the "even once". All I can say - good luck and all the best as you are least likely to say "thank you for the fish" right on time.

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

johneee (626549) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558504)

And the time for them to go seems to not have anything to do with money - rather, it's where the company is in its evolution.

I know someone who does this, he starts companies, and builds them until they get to the point where he starts to have to do more management than work*. Then he leaves it to people who like management and starts something else where he can do that work* he likes.

*You know what I mean... actual technical work where he can get into the gears and muck around with systems. I'm not trying to say that managing isn't also hard work, because it is.

Re:Quick Poll... (2, Insightful)

Jerf (17166) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558986)

Well, duh. People who cash out at the first opportunity don't try again, so of course they don't replicate their success. You have to play again to win again!

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 7 years ago | (#17559330)

Personally? I've got more interests than my time allows. I would probably never slow down. Some people do fear retirement, as they would be at loose ends. I once worked for the government, and was there for one of the 3 week shutdowns when Clinton and the Congress has a pissing match over the budget. I spent a day finding out that there was nothing worth watching on TV, a day sizing up the things I hadn't been doing around the house (maintenance and such), and the next two and a half weeks pursuing about half a dozen different things. When they unlocked the door and let us back in, I realized that I would be ready to "retire" as soon as I had the money to do so, and shuffleboard would not be on my list of activities.

I surf /. when I get bored at work (the boss knows - I'm the boss), and when I feel argumentative in the evenings.

Re:Quick Poll... (5, Funny)

lucabrasi999 (585141) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555934)

If you made multi-million dollars in a start up tech company

I would sleep with two women at the same time.

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

dctoastman (995251) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556046)

You mean if you had several million dollars, all you would do is "two chicks at one time".

What kind of woman would do that?

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

lucabrasi999 (585141) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556124)

What kind of woman would do that?

Well, the type of women that'd double up on a dude like me.



Thanks for the correction. I knew that I should have looked the quote up on IMDB first.

Re:Quick Poll... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556128)

If you made multi-million dollars in a start up tech company
I would sleep with two women at the same time.
Only two chicks?... Amature.

Re:Quick Poll... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556328)

More than one? Impossible. The interface is serial.

two words... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17557914)

daisy chain

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

theneb (732287) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556352)

This is after all /. To make this clear... If you made multi-million dollars in a start up tech company I would sleep with two women at the same time AND have sex with them :)

Re:Quick Poll... (2, Funny)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556580)

>I would sleep with two women at the same time.
Each to their own. I'd be wide awake and loving it ;-)

Re:Quick Poll... (4, Insightful)

Cutting_Crew (708624) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556670)

personally i would do nothing. i would sit on my ass all day and do nothing.

Re:Quick Poll... (3, Insightful)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556972)

Aw, shucks, you can get that for $500.

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

RESPAWN (153636) | more than 7 years ago | (#17559316)

I didn't know that rufies cost that much...

Re:Quick Poll... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17558298)

Multi-million? I can arrange that for less than a mac mini, I'll even acccept paypal.

Re:Quick Poll... (2, Insightful)

shagymoe (261297) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558466)

Just make sure one (or both) of them are not your wife and/or girlfriend. Trust me.

If you must, then just make sure you've got the rules all worked out ahead of time. You don't want the best 45 minutes of your life to be followed by the worst month of your life.

Re:Quick Poll... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17558830)

you don't need millions to sleep with two women at the same time unless... nevermind.

Re:Quick Poll... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17558890)


I'd buy you a green dress. (But not a real green dress, that's cruel.)

Re:Quick Poll... (1)

speculatrix (678524) | more than 7 years ago | (#17557318)

3. Burn the money in a huge trash barrel and join a Buddist monestary.

You mean like the K Foundation did? The K Foundation burn a million quid [wikipedia.org] .

I think I'll start a new web page entitled "please give me a million so I can set fire to it", each doner will get a little bit of the ash. It's sure to work!

No need to be a millionaire to pursue your dream (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17555932)

If you are young, healthy, single, and debt-free, you dont need to be a millionaire to pursue your dream. Ramen noodles, a backpack, and a good attitude is all you need. I don't understand why people think they need to "pay their dues" before doing what they really want to do in life.

You live only once. You are young only once. So, you should do whatever it is you really want to do.

This, of course, is why it is so important to live frugaly and avoid debt -- it can rob you of your freedom. There's nothing worse than some student debt with a side dish of some credit cards, a long-term cell phone contract, and a car lease.

Re:No need to be a millionaire to pursue your drea (1)

sleigher (961421) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558692)

I agree with you. I did exactly that during my 20's. I spent all my time pursuing what I really wanted to do and when that didn't pan out I became a sysadmin........

Re:No need to be a millionaire to pursue your drea (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 7 years ago | (#17559172)

Yeah, but if there's one thing that makes it much easier to make money, it's money. It's certainly possible to start your own business with nothing, and build it all from scratch and be successful. But you're not guaranteed success, you're going to have to work very hard, and probably get a little lucky.

Working somewhere else and saving some money before heading out on your own is no guarantee of success either, but it's likely to put you in a better position, as not being on the verge of starvation can be less stressful. Many businesses do not start out making money on day one.

Finally, there are just some fields where you cannot just go it alone from the very beginning. The reasons may be practical, or they may be legal, or both. You can't just decide one day that you're going to be a doctor and open up your own hospital in your extra bedroom. You can't suddenly decide that you want to be an architect and start designing office buildings.

In the meantime... (4, Informative)

Piroca (900659) | more than 7 years ago | (#17555966)


I've done about 10 interviews with them, they went OK (although they don't really seem to know what they are doing in their hiring process...) but after the "on-site" interviews 2 months ago they simply forgot to get back to me with feedback. I imagine this happens with a lot of people, they spend several months being interviewed with google and getting this sucky treatment. Google deals with the hiring process as an investment, and as it seems, so do the job applicants. Part of the people that get actually hired will spend some time in the company and get away for a "promotion" in another company just because they've worked for Google, partially motivated by the way the company dealt with them since the beginning.

Re:In the meantime... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556238)

after the "on-site" interviews 2 months ago they simply forgot to get back to me with feedback.
No offense, but that seems like more of a "declined" than a "forgot."

Re:In the meantime... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556330)

they simply forgot to get back to me with feedback

Well, I hate to be the one to break the news to you.....well, let's just say that is not a good sign. Maybe you need to search on the term "litigation" in this Ask Slashdot Story [slashdot.org] .

Re:In the meantime... (1)

Piroca (900659) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556752)


The funny thing is that they do actually take months to decide. They seem to interview a lot of candidates, then make a decision. If you are one of the first ones to be interviewed in a batch, you can get to wait for a long time.

In my case, I simply couldn't care less anymore. During these 2 months I've been waiting I managed to be interviewed at another company and get a very good proposal. I won't mention what is its name because I don't want to be hated by the Slashdot community.

Re:In the meantime... (2, Funny)

SquareVoid (973740) | more than 7 years ago | (#17557726)

I won't mention what is its name because I don't want to be hated by the Slashdot community.
You accepted a job at SCO?

Re:In the meantime... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17558184)

Microsoft has been snatching up Google leftovers for a while now

Re:In the meantime... (1)

Piroca (900659) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558808)


That's pretty much overrated. Microsoft is a bigger company (6x bigger than Google) that already have a lot of good people working for them. Microsoft doesn't need to grow as fast as Google to survive, and they actually have better compensation plans, corporate life, etc. Besides, it's actually easier to find something interesting to do at Microsoft than in Google, given that Microsoft is in a lot of different markets (from videogames to big iron). Just apply for a job in each company, go to each one, talk with people and see how they work, and you'll figure all that out. I must say that initially I was very inclined to work at Google, but after I interviewed with several different people there it was a big letdown for me. At Microsoft, I interviewed with 2 different teams, and got a very positive impression. As I told before, a lot of people consider working at Google now as an investment, so expect to have a rather high turnover in the next few years, especially if it faces any kind of crisis in its only profitable market (not an issue at Microsoft, that company has been in the market competing and managing to survive for a long time).

Re:In the meantime... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556754)

they simply forgot to get back to me with feedback.

Forgot? As in, conveniently forgot?

Google can afford to treat people this way when they don't want to hire them because even if they tell bad stories lots of other people will still want to work for them.

Re:In the meantime... (1)

Piroca (900659) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558642)


There's no liability in sending a dismissal letter. It's cheaper than dealing with candidates calling recruiters, and bad reputation. If they don't answer back after months (as they seem to do systematically, if you research about their practices) it's because they are collecting information about a lot of candidates before making a decision.

Re:In the meantime... (1)

cloudmaster (10662) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558112)

Agreed - if I hadn't known better, I would have thought I was dealing with some small-time company who's never hired an IT person of any sort before. I quit the interview process a few steps in, because no job's worth that kind of pain in the ass.

Good Luck (2, Funny)

Eradicator2k3 (670371) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556148)

FTA: "Aydin Senkut has become an angel investor"

Angels have lots of grace, so I guess Aydin is trying to get some of that. Unless he's interested in snow angels, which are ridiculously cheap to manufacture and require only snowfall, a few seconds and a cold/wet backside. Problem is that the ROI is about zero.

once again, the rich play while the poor pay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556280)

i mean, good on em, but really, this is exactly what is wrong

capital isn't going to producers but exploiters

we can all argue about what earning means, truth is tanstafl

some one has to pay

100 out of 300 in 6 years, not that bad actually (4, Interesting)

aadvancedGIR (959466) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556284)

When in school, I attended an Accenture (Andersen Consulting at that time) hiring event in which I was told that I could be VP in 5 years just because almost everyone just quit within the first 3 years (with some money and a breakdown). The funny thing is that they managed to tell this almost as something positive.

Re:100 out of 300 in 6 years, not that bad actuall (2, Informative)

pubjames (468013) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556470)

Me too. I thank the Lord that Andersen Consulting rejected me - several years later I met a couple of the guys that did get in and they were both depressed and on the verge of leaving. Some of their friends at the company had even had breakdowns.

Worst Day Fishing better than Best Day Working (5, Insightful)

MDMurphy (208495) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556490)

I've seen the bumperstickers saying "The Worst Day Fishing is Better than the Best Day Working". That kind of sums it up. Even if it's the best place in the world to work, if you don't have to work and can be doing something else, there's a lot of fun things out there.

There are lots of people out there who "love their jobs", but in reality it's only relative. They love their jobs, when compared to other jobs. If you don't have to work, there are lots of other things to do out there.

Re:Worst Day Fishing better than Best Day Working (1)

ysegalov (849765) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558428)

The thing is, in Googleplex they have a fishing pond.

Who? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556598)

Olana Khan

http://www.khaaan.com/

Do you want to work for Google? (5, Insightful)

Cutting_Crew (708624) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556630)

if you are single with no family and want to work all your life and spend most of what you earn on outrageous housing costs, higher taxes, and urban sprawl then google is the place for you. Just like most of northern cali/simi valley/san fran the culture is also secluded and anti-social. how many couples walking on the sidewalks do you see? or people walking their dogs? heaven forbid i get a flat tire or run out of gas. i'll be walking to the gas station on my own.

if you have a family and they are first in your life above anything else(including work), want to save and not throw money away on outrageous housing costs and want privacy without having to drive one hour one way to work then google is not the place for you even if you could get a job there.

more people are figuring out that they dont want to work 50 or 60 hours a week because they want to do other things, stay healthy and just have a life outside of work. most people dont want to work where they feel like they live in China and Japan, where workers typically work 70 hour weeks, but of course their country works and thats all it does, yet where is the reward? It's hard to enjoy rewards in life that you earn if you are too busy working. Our culture has turned into the mindset slowly and on a different scale of china. that to be successful we have to work all the time and nothing else comes before it, including family. I am not sure where or when this trend started.

there is a reason why we have weekends and a reason why most people dont work more than 40 hours a week. its to take a breather from work so we can refresh. its also a reason that people have burnout and productivity decreases. In google's case there are enough people that want to work for them that have the mindset that google is their life and that is why google provides things like laundromats, bringing your pets to work, 3 gourmet meals and swimming pools. if people just wanted to go home for lunch and promptly go home after 5 or 6 pm then what would the need be to offer all these ameneties? think about that one for a moment.

I know that they have offices in NYC and Seattle as well as sporatic jobs here and there but NYC and Seattle is the same as Simi Valley/Mountain View -- that is heavy traffic, no privacy(unless you want to drive 1 hour one way to work), up to the sky housing costs and taxes and living in a culture where everyone wants to work their whole life and thus they think their employees should have the same attitude. Trying to not to sound too stereotypical i am sure there are other smaller places in these areas that at least offer stable working conditions.

In Seattle's case i dont know how in the world all these tech companies keep people in that area. Traffic is still heavy but most of all for me i just cant bear the thought of at most 3 months of sunshine and cold rainy winters. I was there in november 2 years ago and the sun did come out 2 days out of the week(the rest of the week it was raining) but you still couldnt see the sun because it was so overcast. Maybe theres a reason why it's the #1 suicidal city in the country.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (3, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556706)

if you have a family and they are first in your life above anything else(including work), want to save and not throw money away on outrageous housing costs and want privacy without having to drive one hour one way to work then google is not the place for you even if you could get a job there.

My wife's cousin and her husband from California came to our wedding in September of 2005. In November of 2005 they moved here to get away from California's housing market, traffic, and to give themselves a better chance of having some savings for the rest of their life.

It was a major culture shock for them to move away from the West Coast to the Midwest. They spent the entire first year complaining and working on how to move back. They made it the year and went back to visit at Christmas of 2006 for three weeks. My wife and I were convinced that they would return with a U-Haul.

What surprised us was that they were reminded of why they left CA and moved here. They hated the fact that it took three hours to drive between their parents' houses (a distance of only 75 miles), the fact that houses that go for $210k here are going for $1 million+ there, and the fact that it's just so much faster.

So while there are other options out there, the time it takes to move away from your home where you are comfy does take a while. If you give a shot make sure you allow the time to adjust to your new surroundings. You might actually end up happier in the long run.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556764)

Cela ressemble à de vous sont prêt de se déplacer plus d'en Francais. Bonjour !

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (3, Insightful)

P.J. Hinton (3748) | more than 7 years ago | (#17556810)

An old adage sums it up best...

Do you live to work, or do you work to live?

Sounds like the ex-Google employees in question have decided the latter. Good for them!

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17556960)

That's funny, I work for Google and work exactly 40-hour weeks. Not all of those 40 hours are spent working, either. My manager doesn't expect any more out of me. I have quite a good life and walk my dog all the time.

Try not to generalize so much. You simply make a fool of yourself.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17557804)

Yeah, look at Dennis Crowley, recently hired by Google to work on Dodgeball. He was getting a lot more work done on the site before they hired him. I guess he's having too much fun using his site than working on it.

It's actually kind of sad in a way.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17557844)

sure, but i don't think he was talking about the cleaning staff.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17557992)

Hey, You! Back to work!

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 7 years ago | (#17559024)

A generalization is invalid if there's even one person who it doesn't apply to? Okay.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17557008)

They have offices all over the united states, not just Mountain View, NYC, and Seattle. Think Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Boulder, and Atlanta.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (1)

DKP (1029142) | more than 7 years ago | (#17557784)

You just described Rochester NY seatle is the only rainyer city in the country besides rochester. Oh and a freind of mine is trying to get a job at google has had interviews for about 6 months now.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17558026)

Our culture has turned into the mindset slowly and on a different scale of china. that to be successful we have to work all the time and nothing else comes before it, including family. I am not sure where or when this trend started.
You are aware, of course, that a normal work week up until the 1920's in this country was dawn until dusk 6 days a week? If anything we are moving away from that...

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (3, Insightful)

jafac (1449) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558162)

Your rant really boils down to a simple question - and that is the age-old question that has worried humans since they changed over from hunter-gatherers (who "work" about 13-hrs a week to survive) to agrarian, and later to industrial and post-industrial (which are really just facets of the same asset-accumulation that began in agrarian societies):

Work to live?

Or Live to work?

Personally, I'm glad I don't live full-time in an animal skin tent with a life-expectancy of 30.

But you gotta draw the line somewhere.
Unfortunately, everybody's got a different idea of where that line should be.
Some people have no idea where their line should be.
Some people are perfectly happy living to work, and working 70hr weeks as a result. It's not my place to criticise such people, but only as long as they don't criticise my line of 40hrs.

So the point is - find your line. And draw it.

hell yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17558344)

I'm a lot better off living in a 1250 square foot old house a mile from work where I have a set schedule and almost no stress. My wife works nearby too so we both go home during our hour long lunch break and play with the dog every single day. Our neighborhood isn't a bunch of cookie-cutter houses full of cookie-cutter people, every single house is unique and everyone we have met is friendly and looks out for each other.
I never work more than 40 hours in a week. I never sit in traffic on my way to or from work. I never have a boss screaming at me about a deadline. I have never had a request for vacation rejected, in fact every time I have had to leave work for an emergency no one has batted an eye.
I know I could earn a hell of lot more if I moved to the Bay, but it just isn't worth it. Most of the added pay would get eaten by the increased cost of living and the quality of life wouldn't be nearly as good.

Re:Do you want to work for Google? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17558970)

As someone who's worked for Google Mountain View for awhile, my experience couldn't be less like what you're describing.

how many couples walking on the sidewalks do you see? or people walking their dogs?
Quite a large number, generally while my wife and I are out walking our dog.

if you have a family and they are first in your life above anything else(including work), want to save and not throw money away on outrageous housing costs and want privacy without having to drive one hour one way to work then google is not the place for you even if you could get a job there.
Actually, I'm married, consider my family more important than my job, am saving for a house (and in the meantime paying barely more than I did the last place I lived), and bike to work in about 15 minutes, or drive in ten.

more people are figuring out that they dont want to work 50 or 60 hours a week because they want to do other things, stay healthy and just have a life outside of work.
Sounds like me. I only work about 40 hours a week. I'm in the office a few hours more than that, but take away mealtimes and it's right about 40.

In google's case there are enough people that want to work for them that have the mindset that google is their life and that is why google provides things like laundromats, bringing your pets to work, 3 gourmet meals and swimming pools. if people just wanted to go home for lunch and promptly go home after 5 or 6 pm then what would the need be to offer all these ameneties? think about that one for a moment.
Maybe the reason is that for those of us who occasionally have something unusual come up, it's really wonderful that the company does what it can to help out. Emergency childcare when your normal provider suddenly becomes unavailable? Got it covered. Washer and dryer break down? No problem. Want to actually see your dog during the day for once instead of leaving him at home? Sure.

I don't feel any need to stay at work extra hours because taking advantage of more perks would let me do so -- rather, if I find I _need_ to take care of something else while at work, the perks are conveniently present.

I know that they have offices in NYC and Seattle
And many, many other locations...

heavy traffic, no privacy(unless you want to drive 1 hour one way to work), up to the sky housing costs and taxes and living in a culture where everyone wants to work their whole life and thus they think their employees should have the same attitude. Trying to not to sound too stereotypical i am sure there are other smaller places in these areas that at least offer stable working conditions.
Trying not to sound too stereotypical, I think you're overgeneralizing and are basically smoking crack. You can find people who care for nothing but work and people who have other priorities in life in every place you go, and large numbers of each. And in Seattle and Mountain View both (sorry, never been to New York), there are plenty of places to get away, and there's plenty of privacy even in the midst of bustle, unless of course your definition of privacy is "on the side of a mountain three miles off the grid", in which case Google isn't the only company you might have to drive an hour to work for.

Google would make a good hitman (2, Funny)

BillGatesLoveChild (1046184) | more than 7 years ago | (#17557406)

Leave Google behind? I don't think so. Google will always find you. Google knows everything. Does this make Google God. Maybe the ancients screwed up the spelling?

Sounds like Google is becoming bureaucratic :( (1)

supremebob (574732) | more than 7 years ago | (#17557710)

Reading the stories of those retired millionaires, it sounds like Google is slowly turning into another big bureaucratic tech company like IBM or Microsoft. Stories about suits roaming the hallways and ingenious ideas for server consolidation being shot down due to risk doesn't exactly make me feel enthusiastic about the companies future.

I just hope that Google's management is careful about managing it's growth, and doesn't allow the bean counters to take over and end the era of free gourmet lunches and time for creative side projects.

Re:Sounds like Google is becoming bureaucratic :( (1)

DMorritt (923396) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558000)

everywhere has bureaucrats, but as long as the bureaucrats dont get over the top and forget the Coefficient of Inefficiency [wikipedia.org]

The real story.... (5, Insightful)

Alascom (95042) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558042)

The real story isn't that 1/3 of the first 300 employees left Google... Its the fact that 2/3 of them STAYED even after having the wealth to do whatever they want. That is a pretty strong endorsement for Google that they can keep people working and happy, even when the people don't NEED the job!

Re:The real story.... (1)

MarcoAtWork (28889) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558886)

how can you assume that all 300 'first employees' had the same amount of stock options? I've seen before startups where if you are employee 1-10 you get a couple million options at $0.01, if you are employee 11-50, you get several hundred thousand stock options at $0.50, while if you are employee #51 and up (after the higher ups decide that the startup is viable, that it will go public, and that the less dilution the better) you get maybe 5,000 options at $5.00. When you go public and/or get acquired, although employees #51 and up will get a nice bonus, only 1-50 will actually have enough money to quit and do whatever (11-50 for a few years, 1-10 for the rest of their lives).

I strongly doubt that the first 300 google employees were treated the same way compensation-wise.

Nothing compares with freedom (1)

coldtone (98189) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558094)

Even with all the many perks at Google, you just can compete with freedom. Doing only what you want to do, and doing it the way you want to. That's something worth more then money.

But you need money to get there, it's the truth. Live below your means and you will get there. Live above your means and you never will, no matter how much you make.

Entrepreneurialism (1)

adambha (1048538) | more than 7 years ago | (#17558196)

Since when is it surprising to see entrepreneurial people leave an entrepreneurial company to pursue entrepreneurial interests?

In other unbelievable news, thirsty people choose water to quench their thirst. Tonight, at 6...

You're thinking it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17558598)

I'll say it:

Fuck. Lucky bastards.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>