
Google Engineer: What I learned in the war  - andrewvalish
http://postcards.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2011/11/11/google-engineer-war/
======
plinkplonk
(I hope I get the tone right on this. I don't mean to insult any person or
institution)

The interesting thing here is how military service is respected to such a high
degree, bordering on worship, in the United States.

Other countries have voluntary armies too,and yes soldiers get _some_ respect
as people who do a necessary and dangerous job, but you don't see the "start
your conversation with "Thank You for your service" " style everyday deference
outside the United States. This is a little baffling to a non
American,especially since America's wars post WW2 are mostly invasions of
random third world countries against underequipped,and mostly untrained
enemies, and even then the victory/defeat ratio is very mixed.

Genuine question, why does a soldier deserve so much more respect than a
doctor or teacher or fireman or policeman or engineer?

Specifically wrt the article under discussion,(to a non American) this article
is a generic feel good article which doesn't say very much at all. (I am sure
Dan is a great person. Just saying there wasn't (imo) much meat to the
article).

~~~
lucasjung
Others have stated some of the big reasons why service members get so much
respect: they risk their lives for their country, they give up some of their
Constitutional rights (although they also gain some extra rights, such as
Article 31 rights), and they generally accept lower compensation than they
might get on the outside (still true, but not nearly as true as it used to
be). I would add another reason: they accept the burden of spending many years
of their lives away from home, often missing major life events (weddings,
graduations, even the births of their own children), as well as the lesser
burden of having to move every 2-3 years.

However, there's another side to your question: why is the U.S. like this, and
not other countries?

My initial response would be to turn that around: why don't people in other
countries hold military service to a higher level of respect, especially
considering that some of the reasons given here for respecting the military
(e.g. giving up rights or accepting lower pay) are _more_ applicable in some
other countries? Just because the U.S. is unique in this regard, doesn't mean
we're the ones doing it wrong. There have been others who felt their nations
didn't give their troops enough respect: [http://www.web-
books.com/Classics/Poetry/Anthology/Kipling/T...](http://www.web-
books.com/Classics/Poetry/Anthology/Kipling/Tommy.htm)

That being said, I think that there are some important differences in U.S.
culture that help to explain the difference. One thing relatively unique about
the U.S. is that, unlike most nations, we do not have an ethnic identity. For
example, Spaniards can feel united in the fact that they are all Spaniards,
the Japanese can feel united in the fact that they are all Japanese, etc.
Certainly there are ethnic sub-groups within most countries, but for the most
part they have a national identity that is rooted in their shared ancestry,
and of a shared history that in almost all cases predates the existing
government by centuries. Since the U.S. lacks that, we have a national
identity rooted in ideals, embodied specifically in the Constitution. There is
certainly a great deal of political disagreement about the specifics of those
ideals (and of the meaning of the Constitution), but the generalities are
largely agreed upon.

So what does this have to do with the regard in which we hold military
service? Well, part of it is an awareness, dating back to our war of
independence, that our Constitutionally guaranteed rights were underwritten by
a lot of individuals who left their homes to fight for those shared ideals
which define us. We literally would never have come to exist as a nation if it
were not for our military services.

We also have an ideal in this country of "Citizen Soldiers." It is not unique
to the U.S. (I believe it originated in ancient Greece, but please correct me
if I'm wrong), but I think that the only nations that currently subscribe
strongly to this idea are the U.S. and Israel. It's the idea that our military
consists primarily of individuals who are not lifelong military professionals:
most of the people in our military serve for only a few years, then go back to
being ordinary Americans. This means that we have a lot of veterans spread
throughout our society, so that almost everyone knows at least one veteran,
raising cultural awareness of military life. Conversely, in a nation where the
military consists primarily of individuals who make a lifelong career of it,
the military tends to be a little less visible to the bulk of the population
because they don't have as many veterans to interact with. There are quite a
few nations with universal conscription (everybody has to serve for a few
years), but with the exception of Israel, I haven't seen this same "citizen
soldier" meme in such nations. I think there are two reasons for this. First,
the time spent is very short (usually 2-3 years, as opposed to the minimum
enlistment in the U.S., which is 4-5 years) and at the end of that time the
choice is "get out, or commit to a life-long career," as opposed to the U.S.
military, which allows a succession of short re-enlistments. The second reason
is most important: in countries with universal conscription, it's just seen as
something everyone has to go through, like high school, and the conscripts are
not fully integrated into the military: they are given minimal combat training
and are used primarily for drudgework, with more thorough combat training
coming only after an individual commits to a professional military career.

Finally, I can't end without addressing this:

> _America's wars post WW2 are mostly invasions of random third world
> countries against underequipped,and mostly untrained enemies, and even then
> the victory/defeat ratio is very mixed._

Our two biggest wars since WWII were Korea and Vietnam. The Korean war was
really a war fought against China on Korean soil. The People's Army is hardly
something to sneeze at. The NVA was also a modern army, equipped and trained
by the Soviets and the Chinese. Our next-biggest war (and longest, by far) was
Iraq, which showed that "underequipped, and mostly untrained enemies" can be
quite deadly.

This statement also seems to imply that we should judge the merits of military
service on the basis of our political views about the particular wars fought,
and on the degree of success achieved. In reality, we judge the merits of
military service on the basis that these individuals volunteered to make
tremendous sacrifices in service to a noble ideal: our Constitution, and the
concept it embodies (a self-governed people).

~~~
fauigerzigerk
Your last paragraph really goes to the heart of the matter. In order to earn
my respect, soldiers need to fight for a cause that I consider necessary for
humanity as a whole and one that absolutely requires the use of force. Serving
any nation's interests alone is not enough even if that country's constitution
includes some noble goals.

In my view, many veterans are simply misguided, confused, dangerous
instruments of populist politicians. Some are criminals, and some others are
true heroes. Throwing them all into the same "veterans" bucket and honoring
them all doesn't do justice to any of them.

I'm also skeptical that things learned in a life threatening situation within
a militarized kind of structure are very useful in other situations. In fact,
many countries are blighted by military thinking and many noble causes have
been perverted by that kind of mindset.

~~~
nhangen
I'm a veteran. Served time in Kabul in 2008/09 with the US Army.

While I don't expect anyone to thank me for my service (tbh, it makes me
uncomfortable), I'm offended that you find it so easy to throw all Soldiers
into a single bucket to be judged based on your own ethical standards.

The fact of the matter is that we cannot choose our commander, or our mission,
but we trust that our leaders do their best to do what's right...the same way
we try to trust politicians to do their duties. While it might be true that
there are many bad leaders, Soldiers, and politicians, that doesn't mean we're
all as ignorant as you might think.

What did I learn in life threatening situations?

1\. If I can survive that, I can survive anything. 2\. I am more confident in
making immediate decisions. 3\. I trust myself, and I trust the people around
me. 4\. Hard work and discipline goes a long way.

While I have no interest in a lifetime of military service (I separated
honorably in 2010), if it weren't for my time in the military I don't feel I
would be nearly as willful, determined, and successful as I am today.

Soldier != Servant

~~~
samirageb
It's interesting how the criticism of supporting those that serve usually come
from people that have never enlisted.

Anyone that has served in a war deserves total respect for the sacrifices &
suffering they endured every day, regardless of the ethics of the cause. All
war is bad, not just those we think are 'worth it', so either give soldiers
the respect they deserve every day or be quiet, because many of the liberties
we personally enjoy (not just in US, but every country) have come through
countless lives, right or wrong.

I realize it can make you uncomfortable, but I'll never stop thanking soldiers
in uniform for standing in to defend our country so that I don't have to.
Thank you.

~~~
fauigerzigerk
Yes, many soldiers have given their lives to fight for the freedoms we enjoy
and other soldiers have given their lives to take away those freedoms. That's
exactly why I insist on making a distinction and pay respect only to some of
them.

For instance, I do respect nhangen for defending Kabul against the Taliban. I
do not respect the Taliban soldiers for trying to enforce some weird version
of sharia law in Kabul even though they are also suffering and dying in a war.

------
cletus
I've briefly met Dan. I work in the same office and some months ago we were in
the same class where he was talking about his time in the Marine Corps. I
often hear him when I'm in the micro-kitchen.

So while I don't know him you quickly get a sense of who he is. Grounded,
humble, practical, having integrity and he has some amazing stories. I had no
idea about the full details of his story (from this article) but it's really
fascinating. It's just such a totally different world to the one that the rest
of us, myself included, mostly take for granted.

I'm also glad to be working for a company that does go out of its way to
support veterans and reservists.

~~~
jebblue
He does a very commendable job of representing the best about the military and
service that I remember.

------
rdl
From what I've heard, Google does a particularly good job of taking care of
reservists (there are federal laws about not firing, but good companies go
beyond this). Outside of government contracting (where it makes a lot of
business sense to hire reservists or former military), there don't seem to be
a large number of reservists/national guard in the tech community; almost more
foreign-country-compulsory-service veterans (from Israel, etc.) than US
veterans.

Kind of a loss for the military, because tech startups are a great preparation
for actual deployed military operations (which are basically the opposite of
the peacetime bureaucracy). As well, the military is a more diverse
organization in the US than almost any tech company -- it's a great way to get
underrepresented minorities involved.

~~~
dotBen
_there don't seem to be a large number of reservists/national guard in the
tech community;_

Why do you/others think this is?

I'm not a US citizen, so that counts me out. But even so I wouldn't become a
reservest because I feel I have a lot of unique and valuable skills
(engineering, thought leadership in platforms, and media technology) that
wouldn't be capitalizable by the military - certainly not as a reservist. I
wouldn't feel I was utilizing my skills if I was a regular solider or even
reservest officer.

It's similar to volunteering for charity: rather than volunteer to work a day
in a soup kitchen I would be able to bring far more value to a charity by just
work for a day doing my normal job and then donating that day's pay to them.
_(yes you personally learn some good life skills volunteering but I'm talking
about which is better for the charity)_

EDIT: perhaps folks who have downvoted me would like to leave a comment to
help me understand where the skill capitalization for a tech founder/software
engineer is in the reservists, seeing as they clearly feel I'm wrong.

~~~
rdl
I agree with some of your sentiment, but I think you don't have accurate
information on all of the military. The big deal with the reserves/NG (in the
Army, at least) is that there is a huge difference among units; the majority
of army PSYOPs capability is actually in the reserve component, and is as good
as anything in active duty; there are both active duty and reserve units in
other specialties which are pretty widely regarded as incapable/ineffective.
It kind of becomes an evaporative cooling thing -- good people who end up in
bad units find ways to leave, and are attracted to great units. Basically the
same as companies in the civilian world.

In some cases, the services (and government as a whole, and big companies)
don't take advantage of pre-existing skills or aptitudes. In other cases, they
do -- there are incentive/recruiting/fast-track systems for certain types of
professionals. They've gotten better about this since becoming an all-
volunteer force vs. draft. The big problem is that there is a "military way"
to do a lot of things, largely focused on big-vendor enterprise in the IT
space, and you have to work within that. Getting affiliated with a lab, DARPA,
etc. is probably the way to use more interesting tech.

One problem I have personally is that they're very credential-focused; as a
high school and college dropout, I'd be kind of screwed. Otherwise I'd be
really interested in reserve/NG in certain specialties (psyops, civil affairs,
infrastructure parts of embedded advisor teams, rotary/uav aviation, sigint,
SAR, medical, diving). It would also be really difficult for a startup founder
vs. an employee at a larger tech company.

For the donation/volunteer argument, rather than just donating money, my plan
is to do NGO work on the side, and hopefully eventually be able to set up a
specialty communications-in-conflict/disaster zones infrastructure NGO. A lot
of charities ARE saddled by large numbers of unskilled volunteers (or at least
without specific relevant skills), and structure their operations to be labor
vs. skill intensive.

~~~
dotBen
Your argument, if I read it right, is basically that I'm wrong and that the
military is good at capitalizing on people's skills - and you give psyops as
one example and also talk about people's credentials.

Sure, I don't disagree with you that in general, you can specialize in the
reservists.

The point I'm making is that specifically for tech/software engineers/startup
folks -- which was the genesis for the OP comment -- there _isn't_ a great
deal of skill overlap and capitalization. I'm not sure anything you've said
disagrees with that.

~~~
thrill
FWIW, I'm retired from the USAF. I also hold an ECE degree. In the military I
did nothing that _required_ my degree (though I got to fly fighters for a
career, so it was awesome anyway). The military has a different mission than
the "real world", and using your background and expertise and self-discipline
and stamina and perspectives and judgement and ethical view are called upon at
any given time, and occasionally, all at once - and sometimes there is failure
- and you continue. The great value of such service is in learning to do the
mission, to live with the frustrations of political vacillation that can
decide what was worth great risk one day now might cost votes, to work with
others that humble you with their own talent once you mature enough to
recognize it, to absolutely be there when someone depends on it, and to
develop and develop with those around you such that you know they will also be
there when you need it. I did get to do a multi-year job once that drew
heavily on my engineering education, and it was great too - but following
Heinlein's thoughts on over-specialization, sometimes breadth is worth more
than depth - sometimes much more. Vince malum.

------
01Michael10
I almost chocked on my cereal after reading the first paragraph of this
article. The author appeared to be really suggesting that a person should
consider taking a active duty stint in a war zone to learn things one can't
else where to further their career goals? I hope some kid isn't reading this
propaganda. War is not like playing the Call of Duty 4 game!

I am thinking Dan Cross, the Google engineer would have had a different
perspective on his active duty time if his legs had been blown off... Really,
there are other things one can do to learn the same lessens. Say like the
Peace Corps...

------
codeslush
I spent four years in the U.S.M.C in the enlisted ranks. This article is an
interesting read, but only really scratches the surface of what one learns in
the military. I didn't spend a single day in a war zone, and still learned
patience and acceptance. I also learned much, much more - and they are skills
that have helped me in my civilian life - personally and professionally.

I won't enumerate everything here; if I tried, I would fail. But I will
attempt to highlight many of those that repeatedly surface:

1\. Attention to detail. I don't think it matters what your military
occupation is, you will certainly be subjected to this, at least in the
Marines. It starts with boot camp, and continues through your career. The
little things make a big difference. While some of the military training
tactics leave you, this one seems to stay - at least that's been my
experience.

2\. Initiative. If something doesn't look right, can be done better, needs to
be done - do it! I don't even think I recognized this was instilled in me
until I was back in the civilian sector. It does wonders for a career!

3\. Respect. Respect for everyone - above, beside and below you. This was
especially difficult for me during my first two years of enlistment. I thought
I knew it all. The promotion structure in the military has a huge time factor
built into it. For me, I thought many of those of higher rank were ignorant.
Guess what? It doesn't matter! You learn to respect them. You learn to
understand you're ignorant too. You learn how to work with all different types
of personalities, levels of intelligence, ethnicity, etc... - and you learn
how to respect each of them for what they bring to the table. You never know
what a person has been through to get to where they are now or why they make
the decisions they make. There is almost always a reason. Respect them enough
to try to understand. This has allowed me to work with and for all types of
people in the civilian sector and I somehow manage to get along with almost
everyone. In the rare event that I don't get along with someone, I'm able to
deal with it without trashing them. It's usually representative of some flaw
of my own anyway.

4\. Camaraderie. Especially true during times of war, but also true in times
of peace. The "bond" Dan spoke about comes from a lot of factors, but they all
boil down to difficult, common experiences and trust. Civilians don't always
understand some of the methods in which these bonds are created. By the time I
got my blood stripes pinned on, it was not an accepted practice because of
media exposure. But I wanted to earn them and my unit allowed it. It's a
hazing ritual that is very painful to go through. My wife thought I was nuts.
I feel that I earned those stripes and I know my unit had my back during the
process. You've seen stories in the media where some of these events have gone
bad. Examples include: Blood/Wing Pinning and Shellback Ceremony. I would
suggest boot camp is largely a hazing ritual in and of itself. Controversial
as it may be, I believe these rituals play an important part in the life of a
soldier. It may not look good on TV, but neither does some of the stuff that
happens while fighting for your life in the middle of a battle (things I know
nothing about).

5\. Tenacity. Everything isn't always easy. You don't quit at something just
because it is hard or because you can't figure it out or because someone
pissed you off. Keep pressing forward.

6\. Integrity. Integrity is more than just telling the truth. It's being the
truth. It's being true to you and to your (fill in the blank). It's being
professional. It's standing up for people when they aren't there to stand up
for themselves. It's not gossiping. It's not trying to cheat to get ahead of
the next person. It's about doing your best and when success comes, you know
you earned it honestly.

7\. Adapt and overcome. Speaks for itself.

Some of the comments here speculate about why the military doesn't have a
larger tech representation. Other comments question the intellectual capacity
of some of the soldiers. Let me say this: I worked with some of the smartest
people of my life while in the Marines. I worked with some of the more
challenged too. I worked with some of the smartest people in my life while in
the civilian sector. I worked with some of the more challenged too.

I didn't reenlist for two primary reasons: (1) I wanted to make more money as
a provider for my family and (2) I didn't want to relocate my family every two
or three years. Yesterday represented 16 years since my last day of active
duty service, and I can reflect back and say it was one of the best
experiences of my life.

Happy Veteran's Day to all past and present military members.

~~~
rednaught
Thank you for your words and your service. I too was in the enlisted ranks
spending 6 1/2 years in the Army in Combat Arms (Scout) and Special Operations
(PSYOP) and then was granted early discharge to start fall semester at UNC in
1997.

The article does a great job with the mention of accepting diversity.
Understanding ethnocentrism was one of the fundamental teachings from PSYOP
and enlightened me in ways like nothing else.

Codeslush's words ring true and reflect what I would say regarding another
poster's comments about capitalizing on skills. The Army allowed me to
capitalize on life. My sacrifices were miniscule for what I think I gained
with my service. We are fortunate that military service today in the U.S. is
voluntary and as such is a very personal choice that is often misunderstood by
many (even friends and family).

Be a generalist and open to any opportunity. If you are good at what you do
and are dependable you'll make great connections with all ranks whether their
enlisted or officer(commissioned/non-commissioned or warrant). And if you
really excel there will be plenty of opportunities to work directly for (and
yes with) O-6s and higher and see an entirely different military. If you're
able and willing, the world by way of the military can be simply amazing.

I have always been a techie and still remember being playfully bashed for
carrying around my Sharp 286 laptop after rotation back to staging at
Hohenfels in Germany. The next hot startup, the successor to Geocities ->
Friendster -> Myspace -> Facebook and the next bubble will be waiting for you
to provide your date of birth and phone number whenever you're ready. Social
media will still be around and solutions will still need to be solved. What
won't wait for you is your youth and the opportunities that are tied to it.

I would choose the same path all over again today if I was 18 (or even 30) and
wondering about what life might have in store for me. Toujours Pret!

------
thorie
I like the point he made about not giving exact instructions on taking a box
from point A to B.

Looks like it's better to hire smart, capable people and not micromanage them
- than it is to hire cheap people and tell them exactly what to do.

~~~
hugh3
Many of the enlisted men in the military aren't all _that_ smart, and most of
'em are pretty darn cheap.

If there's a takeaway lesson it's that even not-so-smart, cheap-to-hire people
are actually surprisingly capable of doing stuff, if you create a management
environment where they _have_ to do it and know they aren't gonna get any
mollycoddling from the higher-ups. Here is the task. Go do it. Come back to me
when it's done.

~~~
rdl
The argument of elite selection vs. elite training is interesting. I think
USMC, particularly in WW2 and in general during the draft period, had general-
population induction, but through training and organization produced an elite
force. Other elite units, like the Navy SEALs, seem to focus on elite
recruitment and selection.

I'm not sure which works better for a tech company. Clearly only the USMC
process scales once you need to hire a lot of people.

~~~
lucasjung
The SEALs do both: they are very picky about who gets into BUD/S, BUD/S weeds
out all but the best, and then they continuously train to stay the best.

I actually believe that the USMC's formula for success doesn't scale without
limit. They are _way_ smaller than the Army, and I'm sure that's a big part of
how they are able to maintain the kind of cohesive culture needed to sustain
excellence.

Also, even during the draft era, the Marines had another tool that you didn't
consider: attrition. I don't mean the combat kind, I mean washing out the
people who can't cut it. It's amazing how thoroughly they can transform a
young person, but even so there are some people that just aren't good enough,
and the Marine Corps has always been the most willing of all services to get
rid of dead weight. So it's not selection vs. training, it's a three-way
combination of selection, training, and attrition.

------
rcthompson
Interesting perspective on the fluidity of the chain of command. I think the
stereotypical view of military life is that you "just follow orders", orders
that are spelled out down to the last detail, rather than "Go solve this
problem, and I trust you to figure out the best way to do it".

------
mkramlich
Well-written and concise. And not a typical topic for HN. Yet still related.

------
jlyke
Excellent read, thanks for sharing.

~~~
entropie
I totally agree. Thanks for sharing.

