

Eric Schmidt: “It Is A War For Talent” - davidedicillo
http://techcrunch.com/2010/11/15/google-schmidt/

======
mikecane
What _kind_ of "talent"? The egregious metadata of Google Books has been
brought up in book circles again and again. Fixing that should not require the
kind of hiring hoops that programmers go through. Librarian and other
specialist degrees existed long before there was ever a Google. Some things
Google just doesn't want to be bothered with. (And when it comes to books,
ditto for Apple.) [typo edit]

~~~
ig1
There's no significant return to google for fixing the metadata. It's not that
google can't do it, it's that they don't want to do it.

Google is a company which is about scale. Hiring librarians is not a scalable
solution to fixing metadata. Figure out a way to automate that fixing and I'm
willing to bet Google will offer to hire you.

edit: As it happens I actually looked at working on a fairly similar problem
for my undergraduate thesis (automated dating of works of unknown provenance)
so if someone wants to talk about ideas for how to fix it feel free to email
me.

~~~
waterlesscloud
It's pretty obvious that Google just wants the raw data of the books for later
projects, and the concept of making them available to the public as they have
is nothing more than the thinnest of fig leaves. They're getting far, far more
value from the libraries they're scanning than they are providing back to the
world, and it's because of their atrocious metadata processes.

And if someone figures out how to automate the process, you'd be a fool to be
"hired" by Google. That's something that should be paid for at a much higher
rate than any salary.

~~~
ig1
Most people simply don't care about metadata. The average user searching for
information doesn't use metadata fields to search, they just use free-form
text search.

I understand the importance of good data for academics (bad metadata on
electronic book archives drove me crazy when I was researching etymology for
the OED), but for most people it doesn't really matter.

~~~
mikecane
Thanks to all of you who replied. Interesting perspectives on things.

------
vinhboy
Just out of curiosity, any "talent" here, on HN, being aggressively recruited
by google/facebook? Or is this some other kind of "talent" they are looking
for.

Wouldn't most talented people want to start their own company anyways?

~~~
olivolive
I also get e-mails every 6 months from Google.

A few years ago Google required a 3.75 or higher college GPA. That is an
amazing GPA for the college I went to, so I've never applied. I wonder if they
have relaxed that criteria.

~~~
crux_
In retrospect, my college GPA of 3.1415 doesn't seem so smart. =)

(Note: I didn't hit it exactly; it was a while ago but I think I recall I
ended up at 3.139.)

~~~
enjo
Better than my college GPA of did not finish:) I had a 3-something when I
left...except that I didn't take a final or two that last semester (weather
was really nice).

I think the GPA thing at Google is just stupidly silly. I've accomplished
quite a bit in my career. Thankfully I don't really need Google, but it does
drive me nuts that there is a place that I can't work:)

~~~
btilly
I personally know a number of people working at Google who not only didn't
maintain that kind of GPA, they didn't graduate at all.

GPA is only useful as a filter for people just out of college. If you've been
in the work force for a while, there are better measures available.

------
wyclif
The comments in that TechCrunch thread are why I don't read TechCrunch
anymore. Mike Arrington really needs to mod the trolls.

------
bni
This reminds me of William Gibsons "New Rose Hotel" short story. A couple of
more years and switching jobs will be "defection". Bring on the teenage
prostitutes, neurotoxins and japanese coffin hotels.

------
nradov
The contrary view is that 'talent' doesn't actually matter.
<http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_07_22_a_talent.htm>

------
brown9-2
Looks like someone is lifting xkcd's "Online Communities" map in the
background of that picture of Schmidt (or paying homage, I hope).

~~~
tonystubblebine
The map: <http://map.web2summit.com/>

------
phlux
I went through a ~2-3 month interview process with google at the end of which
they said "You did great, it looks like we will have an offer to you tomorrow"

The next day, I got a call from them saying "Well, unfortunately we wont be
giving you an offer, because you dont have a PMP certification."

(When I went into the process, for an infrastructure PM, I stated that my lack
of a PMP cert may hurt me - they said "Oh no, we don't want people to come
here with a predisposition of the process they feel they need to impose on how
we work" -- I was so freaking enraged over that experience.)

I was later told "You scored really well on the interview process, why not
apply for another position?"

To which I only had a big FU to the whole experience.

~~~
prodigal_erik
Yeah, the latency of their hiring amazes me. I lean towards small shops, but
for some reason I entertained a phone screen from them a few years ago. Well,
they called me several weeks later hoping for an onsite, but I had already
interviewed for, accepted, and started another position in the meantime. I
don't see why they would expect anyone good to remain available long enough
for them to have a chance with, unless the candidate has singled out Google as
the only place they're even considering for a month if not an entire quarter.

~~~
hga
Yeah, that reminds me of my Thinking Machines experience. I later heard it
took them another two tries to fill the position I was applying for, I think I
heard the second guy timed out on them as well.

