Google Economics: The Cost of Bard Versus Staplers
April 4, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
Does anyone remember the good old days at the Google. Tony Bennett performing in the cafeteria. What about those car washes? How about the entry security system which was beset with door propped open with credit card receipts from Fred’s Place. Those were the days.
I read “Google to Cut Down on Employee Laptops, Services and Staplers for Multi-Year Savings.” The article explains:
Google said it’s cutting back on fitness classes, staplers, tape and the frequency of laptop replacements for employees. One of the company’s important objectives for 2023 is to “deliver durable savings through improved velocity and efficiency.” Porat said in the email. “All PAs and Functions are working toward this,” she said, referring to product areas. OKR stands for objectives and key results.
Yes, OKR. I wonder if the Sundar and Prabhakar comedy act will incorporate staplers into their next presentation.
And what about the $100 billion the Google “lost” after its quantum supremacy smart software screwed up in Paris? Let’s convert that to staplers, shall we? Today (April 4, 2023), I can purchase one office stapler from Amazon (Google’s fellow traveler in trashing relevance with advertisements) for $10.98. I liked the Bostitch Office Heavy Duty device, which is Amazon’s number one best seller (according to Amazon marketing).
The write up pointed out:
Staplers and tape are no longer being provided to print stations companywide as “part of a cost effectiveness initiative,” according to a separate, internal facilities directive viewed by CNBC.
To recoup that $100 million, Google will have to not purchase 9,107,468.12. I want to retain the 0.12 because one must be attentive to small numbers (unlike some of the fancy math in the Snorkel world). Google, I have heard, has about 100,000 “employees”, but it is never clear which are “real” employees, contractors, interns, or mysterious partners. Thus each of these individuals will be responsible for NOT losing or breaking 91 staplers per year.
I know the idea of rationing staplers is like burning Joan of Arc. It’s not an opportunity to warm a croissant; it is the symbolism of the event.
Google in 2023 knows how to keep me in stitches. Sorry, staples. And the cost of Bard? As the real Bard said:
Poor and content is rich and rich enough,
But riches fineless is as poor as winter
To him that ever fears he shall be poor. (Othello, III.iv)
Stephen E Arnold, April 4, 2023
Ready, Fire, Aim: Google and File Limits
April 4, 2023
Google is quite accomplished when the firm is required to ingest money from its customers. These are individuals and organizations “important” to the company which operates in self-described quantum supremacy mode. In a few other corporate functions, the company is less polished.
One example is described in “Google Drive Does a Surprise Rollout of File Limits, Locking Out Some Users.” The subtitle of the article is:
The new file limit means you can’t actually use the storage you buy from Google.
If the information in the write up is correct, it appears that Google is collecting money and not delivering the service marketed to some of its customers. A corollary is that I pay a yearly fee for a storage unit. When I arrive to park my bicycle for the winter, my unit is locked, and there is no staff to let me open the unit or way to access what’s in the storage unit. I am not sure I would be happy.
The article points out:
The 5 million total file cap isn’t documented anywhere, and remember, it has been two months since this rolled out. It’s not listed on the Google One or Google Workspace plan pages, and we haven’t seen any support documents about it. Google also doesn’t have any tools to see if you’re getting close to this file limit—there’s no count of files anywhere.
If this statement is accurate, then Google is selling and collecting money for one thing and delivering another to some customers. In my view, I think Google has hit upon a brilliant solution to a problem of coping with the increasing burden of its ill-advised promotion of “free” and “low cost” storage cooked up by long-gone Googlers. Yep, those teenagers making cookies without mom supervising do create a mess.
The article includes a superb example of Google speak, a form of language known to please legal professionals adjudicating different issues in which Google finds itself tangled; to wit:
A Google spokesperson confirmed to Ars that the file limit isn’t a bug, calling the 5 million file cap “a safeguard to prevent misuse of our system in a way that might impact the stability and safety of the system.” The company clarified that the limit applies to “how many items one user can create in any Drive,” not a total cap for all files in a drive. For individual users, that’s not a distinction that matters, but it could matter if you share storage with several accounts. Google added, “This limit does not impact the vast majority of our users’ ability to use their Google storage.” and “In practice, the number of impacted users here is vanishingly small.”)
From my vantage point in rural Kentucky, I think the opaque and chaotic approach to file limits is a useful example of what I call “high school science club management methods.” Those folks, as I recall as a high school science club member myself, just know better, don’t check with anyone in administration, and offer non-explanations.
In fact, the “vanishingly small” number of users affected by this teeny bopper professionalism is vanishingly small. Isn’t that the direction in which Google’s image, brand, and trust factor is heading? Toward the vanishingly small? Let’s ask ChatGPT, shall we: “Why does Google engage in Ready, fire, aim antics?”
Stephen E Arnold, April 4, 2023
Has the Google Caught Its Tail in a Digital Shredder?
March 30, 2023
Judge Donato concluded that Google took deliberate steps to make certain chat messages would not be preserved. The intentional campaign suggests that Google’s senior management is careless, forgetful, or possibly mendacious. Here is a statement in a court document issued on March 27, 2023 for Case No. 3:21-md-02981-JD:
Like Mr. Pichai, other key Google employees, including those in leadership roles, routinely opted to move from history-on rooms to history-off Chats to hold sensitive conversations, even though they knew they were subject to legal holds. Indeed, they did so even when discussing topics they knew were covered by the litigation holds in order to avoid leaving a record that could be produced in litigation. As the examples below make clear, Google destroyed innumerable Chats with the intent to deprive Plaintiffs and other litigants of the use of these documents in litigation.
Another court document. presents information which suggests to me a pattern of intentional behavior. This 19 page list of interesting actions is worth the time required to read how the Google presents one face outside the company and another one inside the company. Googzilla appears to have a touch of the Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in its DNA.
I think it would be helpful if I could delete with one action unwanted emails, text messages, and spam calls. Why should Google reserve instant deletion for its estimable professionals?
Net net: After more than two decades of wowing people with mouse pads, massive revenue, and protestations that the company is not misbehaving, I think someone should create a T shirt in bright Googley colors with the legend, “Be evil?”
Sales of the shirt may not create the buzz that OpenAI and ChatGPT has, but it is a start. Googzilla is likely to find its balance compromised due to the loss of its tail. Ouch.
Stephen E Arnold, March 30, 2023
A Xoogler Predicts Solving Death
March 30, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I thought Google was going to solve death. Sigh. Just like saying, We deliver relevant results,” words at the world’s largest online advertising outfit often have special meanings.
I read “Humans Will Achieve Immortality in Eight Years, Says Former Google Engineer Who Has Predicted the Future with 86% Accuracy.” I — obviously — believe everything I read on the Internet. I assume that the “engineer who has predicted the future with 86% accuracy” has cashed in on NFL bets, the Kentucky Derby, and the stock market hundreds of times. I worked for a finance wizard who fired people who were wrong 49 percent of the time. Why didn’t this financial genius hire a Xoogler who hit 86 percent accuracy. Oh, well.
The write up in the estimable Daily Mail asserts:
He said that machines are already making us more intelligent and connecting them to our neocortex will help people think more smartly. Contrary to the fears of some, he believes that implanting computers in our brains will improve us. ‘We’re going to get more neocortex, we’re going to be funnier, we’re going to be better at music. We’re going to be sexier’, he said.
Imagine that. A sexier 78-year-old! A sexier Xoogler! Amazing!
But here’s the topper in the write up:
Now the former Google engineer believes technology is set to become so powerful it will help humans live forever, in what is known as the singularity.
How did this wizard fail his former colleagues by missing the ChatGPT thing?
Well, 86 percent accuracy is not 100 percent, is it? I hope that part about a sexier 78-year-old is on the money though.
Stephen E Arnold, March 30, 2023
Telegraph Says to Google: Duh Duh Duh Dweeb Dweeb Dweeb Duh Duh Duh
March 29, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid. (The anigif is from https://gifer.com/en/Vea.)
That three short taps and three long taps followed by three short taps strikes me as “Duh duh duh Dweeb dweeb dweeb duh duh dun. But I did not get my scout badge in Morse code, so what do I know about real Titanic type messages. SOS, SOS, SOS! I think that today the tones mean “Save Our Search”.
I can decode the Telegraph newspaper article “Google’s Code Red Crisis Grows As ChatGPT Races Ahead.” I am reasonably certain the esteemed “real news” outfit believes that the Google, the destroyer of newspaper advertising revenue, is thrashing around in Lake Tahoe scale snow drifts. If I recall the teachings of my high school biology teacher in 1962, Googzillas do not thrive in cold climates. I suppose I could ask Bing.com or You.com, but I am thinking why bother.
The article states:
The company has been left scrambling to react to the surprise success of ChatGPT, which launched to the public last November. Google executives have labeled it a “code red” problem and co-founders Sergei Brin and Larry Page have emerged from semi-retirement to hold meetings with top AI execs to thrash out a response. ChatGPT presents an existential threat to Google’s core business.
The existential trope is a bit of a stretch, but the main point is clear. The Google is struggling in terms of real news’s perception of the beast. Reality does not intrude on some media tropes. Saying the Google is a dinosaur with enough clicks, and the perceived truth smudges the Google chokehold on online advertising… for now.
The article adds:
Speaking to The Telegraph, Krawczyk [a senior director at Google] said: “There is a separate effort for how generative models will look in search; that is not what you see here. “It [smart software] is a very early stage of this technology and we really want to make sure right now we are focused on delivering the right amount of quality.”
Yes, quality. Those Google search results are fascinating because they are usually wide of the user’s query. How wide? Wide enough to chew through the advertising backlog. The idea of precision and recall, time stamps on citations, and the elimination of the totally useless Boolean operators really delivers what Google considers as quality: Revenue. The right amount of quality means the revenue targets needed to float the boat.
Google’s smart software Bard-edition has not yet reached its Orkut or Dodgeball moment. Will it? At this time, I think it is important to keep in mind that if one wants to generate clicks, one must buy Google advertising. Until smart software proves that it can mint money, “real news” outfits may want to find a way to tell the Emperor of Ads, “You know. You look really great in that puffy coat. Isn’t it the same one the Pope was showing off the other day.”
There are those annoying SOS tones again: Duh Duh Duh Dweeb Dweeb Dweeb Duh Duh Duh. Are Sundar and Prabhakar transmitting again?
Stephen E Arnold, March 29, 2023
Google Goofs: Believing in the Myth of Googzilla and the Digital Delphi
March 27, 2023
I used the word “Googzilla” to help describe the digital Delphi located near what used to be Farmer’s Field. When I began work on “The Google Legacy” in 2002, it was evident to me and my research team that Google was doing the Silicon Valley hockey stick thing; that is, slow initial start, some desperation until the moment of insight about GoTo-Overture’s pay-to-play model, and a historical moment: Big growth and oodles of cash.
By 2002, the initial dorm cluelessness about how to raise money was dissipating, and the company started believing its own mythology. The digital Delphi had the answers to questions. Google knew how to engineer for success. Googlers were wizards, alcolytes of the digital Delphi itself. To enter the shrine the acolyte wizard-to-be had to do well in interviews, know about the comical GLAT or Google Labs Aptitude Test, or just know someone like Messrs. Brin and Page or a cluster of former Alta Vista computer types. A good word from Jeff Dean was a super positive in the wizardly walk to understanding.
What couldn’t Google do? Well, keep senior executives from dallying in the legal department and dying on yachts with specialized contractors to name two things. Now I would like to suggest another weakness: Security.
In a way, it is sad that Google acts as if it knows what it is doing and reality discloses some warts, flaws, bunions, and varicose veins. Poor, poor Googzilla 2023.
In September 2022, Google bought Mandiant, a darling of the cyber security community. The company brought its consulting, security, and incident response expertise to Google. The Google Cloud would be better. I think Google believed their own publicity. But believing and doing something other than selling ads and getting paid by any party to the transaction is different. It pains me to point out that despite craziness like “solving death,” “Loon balloons,” and more investment plays than I can count, the Google is about online ads. What about security?
Here’s an example.
I watched a painful video by a Canadian who makes high treble, jarring videos about technology. The video explains that his video channels were hacked and replaced by a smiling Elon and crypto baloney. You can watch the explanation at this link. And, yes, it has YouTube ads. For more information, navigate to “Linus Tech Tips Main YouTube Channel Hacked.”
I have one question: Google, is your security in line with your marketing collateral? Mandiant plus Google? Doesn’t that keep YouTube videos from being hijacked? Nope. The influential Linus and his sorrowful video makes clear that not even YouTube stars can relax knowing Google Mandiant et al are on the job.
Has the digital Delphi’s acolytes explained the issue? Has the security thing been remediated? What about Google Cloud backups? What about fail safe engineering? So many questions for the folks growing stunted oranges in Farmer’s Field. I want to believe in the myth of the once-indomitable Google. Now Googzilla could lose a claw in a harvesting machine. Even with a limp, Googzilla can sell ads like a champ. Is it enough? Not for some, I fear.
Stephen E Arnold, March 27, 2023
Google and Its High School Management: An HR Example
March 22, 2023
I read “Google Won’t Honor Medical Leave During Its Layoffs, Outraging Employees.” Interesting explanation of some of Google’s management methods. These specific actions strike me as similar to those made by my high school science club in 1959. We were struggling with the issue of requiring a specific academic threshold for admission. As I recall, one had to have straight A’s in math and science or no Science Club for that person. (We did admit one student who published an article in the Journal of Astronomy with his brother as co-author. He had an incomplete in calculus because he was in Hawaii fooling around with a telescope and missed the final exam. We decided to let him in. Because, well, we were the Science Club for goodness sakes!)
Scribbled Diffusion’s rendition of a Google manager (looks a bit like a clown, doesn’t it?) telling an employee he is fired and that his medical insurance has been terminated.
The article reports:
While employees’ severance packages might come with a few more months of health insurance, being fired means instantly losing access to Google’s facilities. If that’s where a laid-off Googler’s primary care doctor works, that person is out of luck, and some employees told CNBC they lost access to their doctors the second the layoff email arrived. Employees on leave also have a lot to deal with. One former Googler, Kate Howells, said she was let go by Google from her hospital bed shortly after giving birth. She worked at the company for nine years.
The highlight of the write up, however, is the Comment Section. Herewith are several items I found noteworthy:
- Gsgrego writes, “Employees, aka expendable garbage.”
- Chanman819 offers, “I’ve mentioned it before in one of the other layoff threads, but companies shouldn’t burn bridges when doing layoffs… departing employees usually end up at competitors, regulators, customers, vendors, or partners in the same industry. Many times, they boomerang back a few years in the future. Making sure they have an axe to grind during negotiations or when on the other side of a working relationship is exceptionally ill-advised.
- Ajmas says, “Termination by accounting.”
- Asvarduil offers, “Twitter and Google are companies that I now consider radioactive to work for. Even if they don’t fail soon, they’re very clearly poorly-managed. If I had to work for someone else, they’re both companies I’d avoid.
- MisterJim adds, “Two thoughts: 1. Stay classy Google! 2. Google has employees? Anyone who’s tried to contact them might assume otherwise.
High school science club lives on in the world of non-founder management.
Stephen E Arnold, March 22, 2023
The Google: Is Thinking Clearly a Core Competency at the Company
March 16, 2023
Editor’s Note: This short write up is the work of a real, semi-alive dinobaby, not smart software.
The essay “The Nightmare of AI-Powered Gmail Has Arrived.” The main point of the article is that Google is busy putting smart software in a number of its services. I noted this paragraph:
Google is retrofitting its product line with AI. Last month, it demonstrated its take on a chatty version of its search engine. Yesterday, it shared more details about AI-assisted Gmail and Google Docs. In Gmail, there are tools that will attempt to compose entire emails or edit them for tone as well as tools for ingesting and summarizing long threads.
Nope. Not interested.
The image of three managers with their hair on fire was generated by https://scribblediffusion.com/. My hunch is that a copyright troll will claim the image as their clients’ original work. I sticking with the smart software as the artist.
I underlined this statement as well:
Most interesting are the ways in which these features seem to be in conflict with one another.
What’s up?
- A Code Red at Google and suggestions from senior management to get in gear with smart software
- Big boy Microsoft continued to out market the Google (not too tough to do in my opinion)
- The ChatGPT juggernaut continued to operate like a large electro-magnet, pulling users from folks who has previously accrued significant experience with large language models.
The write up makes one point in my opinion. Google’s wizards are not able to think clearly. As the article concludes:
For example, in offices already burdened by inefficient communication and processes, it’s easy to see how reducing the cost of creating content might produce weird consequences and externalities. Tim can now send four times as many emails as he used to. Does he have four times as much to say?
Net net: Wow, the Google. The many and possibly overlapping smart services remind me of the outputs from a high school science club struggling to get as many Science Fair project done in the final days before the judging starts. Wow, the Google.
Stephen E Arnold, March 16, 2023
Google: Poked Painfully in Its Snout
March 15, 2023
The essay “Why Didn’t DeepMind Build GPT3?” identifies three reasons for Google getting poked in its snout. According to the author, the reasons were [a] no specific problem to solve, [b] less academic hoo haa at OpenAI, and [c] less perceived risk. My personal view is that Googlers’ intelligence is directed at understanding their navels, not jumping that familiar Silicon Valley chasm. (Microsoft marketers spotted an opportunity and grabbed it. Boom. Score one for the Softies.)
Google’s management team reacting to ChatGPT’s marketing success. The art was created via https://scribblediffusion.com/ who owns the creative juices required to fabricate this interesting depiction of Google caught in a moment of management decision making.
These reasons make sense to me. I would suggest that several other Google characteristics played a role, probably bit parts, but roles nevertheless.
Since 2006, Google fragmented; that is, the idea of Google providing great benefit as an heir to the world of IBM and Microsoft gave Google senior managers a Droit du seigneur. However, the revenue for the company came from the less elevated world of online advertising. Thus, there was a disconnect after the fraught early years, the legal battle prior to the IPO, and the development of the mostly automated systems to make sure Google captured revenue in the buying and selling and brokering of online advertising. After 2006, the split between what Google management believed it had created and the reality of the business was institutionalized. Google and smart software was perceived as the one right way. Period. That way was a weird blend of group think and elite academic methods.
Also, Google failed to bring direction and focus to its products. I no longer remember how many messaging services Google offered. I cannot keep track of the company’s different and increasingly oblique investment arms. I have given up trying to recall the many new product and service incubators the company launched. I do remember that Google wanted to solve death. That, I believe, proved to be a difficult problem as if Loon balloons, digital games, and dealing with revenue challengers like Amazon and Facebook were no big deal. The fragmentation struck me as similar to the colored particles tossed during Holi, just with a more negative environmental effect. Googlers were vision impaired when it came to seeing what priorities to set.
Plus, from my point of view Google professionals lacked the ability to focus beyond getting more money, influence, and access to the senior managers. In short, Google demonstrated the inability to manage its people and the company. The last few years have been characterized by employee issues and other legal swamps. The management method has reminded me of my high school science club. Every member was a top student. Every member believed their view was correct. Every member believed that the traditional methods of teaching were stupid, boring, and irrelevant. The problem was that instead of chasing money and closeness to the “senior managers”, my high school science club was chasing validation and manifestation of superiority. That was baloney, of course, but what do 16 year olds actually understand. Google’s management is similar to my high school science club.
Are there other factors? Sure, and these include a wildly fluctuating moral compass, confusing personal objectives with ethical objectives, and giving into base instincts (baby making in the legal department, heroin on a yacht with a specialized contractor, and March Madness fun in Las Vegas).
Who will chronicle these Google gaffes? Perhaps someone will input a text string into ChatGPT to get the information many have either ignored, forgotten, or did not understand.
Stephen E Arnold, March xx, 2022
Interesting Critique of the Google
March 14, 2023
I know there are other browsers available. For many people Google Chrome is THE browser. Microsoft figured out that Credge was cheaper and probably less likely to be zapped by the Google. Vivaldi is a browser working to attract users and provide a less money-centric software cocoon for online users. It too uses the Chromium engine.
I read “Vivaldi Co-Founder: Advertisers Stole the Internet from Us.” The article is mostly content marketing; nevertheless, I noted a handful of assertions and factoids I found thought provoking.
Here are a few. My observation about the comment appears in italics.
… part of the issue companies like Google may have is that Vivaldi blocks a lot of tracking and gets around advertisements in novel ways. No surprise I believe.
Android’s Privacy Sandbox can track users by creating an offline profile on them and show relevant advertisements based on that. No surprise I believe. Google dies without ad revenue.
… data can be used to influence how people vote, à la Cambridge Analytica. No surprise. Control the information, gain power.
the current state of advertising is less profitable for sites now than it was before widespread tracking was in place. No surprise but Google benefits because it “owns” the rights to charge people to enter and leave Club Ad via its swinging door.
The situation is clear: A small company faces a long slog up Mt. Everest without cold weather gear. Does the government of Nepal care? Nope.
Stephen E Arnold, March 14, 2023
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
