

Re: Hello from Google - FredericJ
http://amos.me/blog/2012/re-hello-from-google/

======
mikestew
"Best response...ever"? I got bored two paragraphs in, I am confident that the
recruiter didn't go past two sentences. When the hiring manager asks, the
recruiter will just say, "he didn't accept the offer."

That's not to say there isn't validity in what was said (just because it bores
_me_ doesn't make it lack value), but as a response to Google HR it isn't
going to change anything.

~~~
archgoon
Well, that you got bored is more of an issue. The obvious target audience of
this letter is not the recruiter.

~~~
smacktoward
This would make more sense if being contacted by a Google recruiter was an
honor limited to an Elite Few, and therefore the opinions of anyone who's
experienced it would automatically be of interest.

However, I've been contacted by Google recruiters twice, and I'm such a dumb-
ass I'm consistently amazed I can walk around on two legs. If they've made
their way down the "potential recruits" list all the way to me, it's safe to
assume that they cast their net pretty wide.

~~~
nddrylliog
Agreed. Google is really contacting anyone these days. It's probably obvious
that I'm not a good fit there and I still got an e-mail. Most of my friends
have, too, so I don't consider it exclusive at all. It was still a good
occasion to write down a few thoughts though.

------
nddrylliog
Author here: I know HR won't read it, and even most people on HN won't. It's
totally up to you just how much time you invest into reading others' visions.

In that post, I address much more than just "to work at G or not". I address
the general tendency/evolution of the internet, and how I'm unhappy with it.

Re: "video is a solved problem is hilarious": yes, thanks, I'm aware of the
codec mess, and I've been advocating for free and open codecs/protocols for a
long while. I know computers still generally suck at extracting info from
something audio-visual, etc - heck, the post is already too long, do you
really expect me to cover all that?

But, again, see the bigger picture. For me, it's a solved problem because most
people in most situations can watch whatever they feel like on whatever
platform (except for long movies but, again, not because of a tech hurdle).
It's solved as compared to, for example, collaborative music recording, with
web technologies, multitrack, decentralized, with an easy merging process (the
typical use case is producing an acoustic cover of some mainstream track.)

There's so much more I wanted to cover and didn't - if you have particular
questions I'll try to answer them here, or if you want to reach out, send it
my way at amos@movies.io

------
raganwald
Obviously the recruiter and HR will never read the whole thing. In business,
most people learn to skip to the end of long emails to get the call-to-action
or summary, then read the whole thing if they need more background, so I don't
think it's rude to write a long "thanks, but no thanks" email.

Now: Did the author waste his own time? He's the only judge of that. I
personally applaud it. Sometimes the act of writing something like this out
helps you clarify your own personal mission. It's like putting up a pirate
flag on your building. The big companies don't care, but you do, and maybe one
day you'll ship something like Macintosh.

I'm not really plugged into the video scene, so I have no idea how cogent
Amos's comments are about codecs and what-not. But he does a good job of
communicating his passion for independence. If even one person reads that and
thinks to themselves, "Yeah! I'm that passionate about origami folding
displays, I'm going to stick it out," what a glorious win that would be.

------
unreal37
I won't comment on the quality of the post, obviously its a rant.

But the topic of the rant was both how "online video has been solved" and
"it's such a shame that Youtube won online video". He obviously hopes for a
day soon when there are 5 or more places to go for video online that have
equal market share... That will never happen.

Not saying Youtube will be King forever, but fragmented markets are not stable
except if there are other forces at play (like government regulation,
language, or massive costs to switch providers).

It seems that we as a society like having a homogeneous environment more than
a heterogeneous one for most things. I wonder if there are any academic
studies that show that?

My theory is this: in this online world we live in, where there are no
geographic boundaries any more, we need to have some common references when
talking. Take Twitter for example - what if there were 10 other sites like
Twitter and they all had equal market share? How do you get the updates from
all your friends? All your friends would have to join the same one. And so
worldwide, one site would grab the most market share. It HAS to be that way.

Or for video, let's say I create a short video clip, and upload it to 5
different video sites. Now my community is fragmented, and my fan base is
divided. Eventually, one site gives me slightly more comments, slightly more
traffic, slightly more shares, and then that becomes the best site to use for
my type of video and I give more attention to that site. My fans go to that
site as well because it has the best and most active conversation about my
videos. So there has to be a favorite site for videos.

Not saying that you can't have a site for very specific niches. Like funny
videos can be on FunnyOrDie, while Hollywood movies can use Netflix, realtime
streaming can be Ustream... but people need to know where the one place to go
for the content they are interested in. I think it has to be that way.

Can anyone think of a fragmented online business with no outside influence
that keeps it that way? The only one I can think of is "online email", but the
costs of changing your email address (time and hassle wise) is enormous so
switching is not easy.

It's hard to explain, but to me it makes sense that in each market there is a
clear leader and it requires a monumental effort to go to a new leader.

[edited for bad grammar and clarification]

~~~
nddrylliog
Hey there, thanks for what has to be the most insightful and constructive
comment of the thread!

I agree with what you're saying. To me, all this is part of a bigger issue
which is the "mass culture". That society is only comfortable with having one,
perhaps two, providers for every kind of service is similar to the fact that
apparently, society needs blockbusters and music hits to find some kind of
balance. So that when you meet someone, you actually have common points to
discuss.

I haven't yet taken the time to address that issue in blog form, though,
because it's really complex and I don't want to half-ass it. I don't think
it'll ever be completely solved in this lifetime either.

Part of the social factors that, for example, prevent a mass migration from
Facebook or Twitter are the network effects you mention "People go to that
site as well because it has the best and most active conversation.". In my
opinion, this can be somewhat mitigated by having open protocols for
everything. If the discussion happens not on a single platform, but on a set
of platforms all talking the same language, you could (in theory) use any
client to follow the discussion and it wouldn't even matter where the video is
hosted.

Online identity and presence is very hard to define/to bound: e-mail is hard
to switch because your e-mail address contains the domain name of your
provider (user@provider.tld). It's easier to switch from a web hosting company
to another because there you usually control the DNS (except if you're stuck
with a subdomain, which sucks) - so for example, I've been able to switch
amos.me from ImmediateVPS to Linode to prgmr without any downtime/relocation
issues. E-mail is similarly easy to switch if you own the domain name.

But e-mail and personal websites are only part of your online identity:
usually, your whole identity is spread among several services: Twitter,
Tumblr, HackerNews, Reddit, Flickr. Most people use their homepage as
hub/registry to list all their online accounts, but there has to be a better
way.

But, again, the thing about open protocols is that reducing the switching cost
from one service to another is generally not in the interest of any single
provider. Only few companies have convictions strong enough to really make
migrations seamless. For others, they're mostly coerced to do so because of
privacy laws (example: Google's Data Liberation Front) and give you a .zip of
your data, but you can't just seamlessly import it into another service.

This discussion is too vast, really. I'd love to see the death of mass culture
and to see a reversal in the centralization process, but, like you, I have my
doubts and questions about it.

------
iamdave
Cut out everything but the last sentence, hit send. Good for a long form blog
post, utterly _terrible_ as an email to a _recruiter_. Lots of great, and
perfectly valid points presented, just not the right material to turn down a
job/interview offer.

~~~
grey-area
I imagine this was written more as an open letter to Google, i.e. it is
addressed to a wider audience and written with an eye for publication, rather
than in the expectation of a dialogue with the HR department at a huge
corporation.

~~~
iamdave
The same thought came through my mind, which lead to multiple revisions of my
comment. Granted, I agree with quite a lot of what the author is saying here.

~~~
nddrylliog
Granted, there's very little chance that the recruiter herself will find
interest in the whole post. Hence the blog post.

As others have pointed out, recruiters are trained to skip down to the call
for action, so the fact that 85% of it is irrelevant is not really a problem.

------
Jun8
As many have commented here, the poor recruiter most probably just didn't
understand/read it and quickly hit delete.

For people who have worked on video coding and video content analysis, the
paragraph that starts with "For example, for me, video distribution is a
solved problem." is hilarious! Video codec landscape is a mess; free codecs
still are a problem, wireless video distribution is spotty, etc. And, we still
don't have robust automatic methods to label videos for a variety of domains
and have to rely on user provided tags, a la YouTube.

His point about licensing being a big problem is spot on, though.

------
kabdib
I usually just say:

"Thanks, but I'm insanely happy where I am right now. Check back in a year if
you want to."

This gets a polite "Okay, I'll contact you next year," and often they do.

------
axlerunner
You wasted precious time from your life with this response. They stopped
reading after the first few sentences.

~~~
islon
But WE are reading it, so, not wasted.

~~~
axlerunner
You read the whole thing??

~~~
xk_id
I personally read about 85% of it. It was interesting

------
codegeek
Your last line "I appreciate you reaching out, but I don't think this is for
me." would have been enough. I can assure that the HR did not even read
through the whole thing. Not to say that you did not have valid points but you
were barking up the wrong tree.

------
arbuge
Tried to read a bit of this before deciding to just skip forward to the last
sentence. I'm 110% sure that's what the recruiter did too.

What's so "best" about it? Wouldn't a simple "Thanks, but no thanks" have
worked just as well?

------
hkarthik
Everyone's saying it was inappropriate to send this response to a recruiter,
but maybe the intent was to see if this email would make its way to Sergey
Brin or Larry Page.

I would love to see their response to it.

------
fasttimes
This was neither a good response to a recruiter nor a good blog posting.

------
nopenopenope
Wants more choices but calls everything but youtube and vimeo crap
aggregators.

This guy is no different than someone who protests Wal-Mart and shops there.

~~~
nddrylliog
You're right, that part was definitely excessive/simplistic.

There are probably hundreds of small start-ups trying to 'fix' mainstream
video distribution right now. The point is, their scale is ridiculous compared
to the ones I've listed.

For example, in movie streaming, you've got a few biggies: Netflix, Amazon,
iTunes - and of course stuff like Ultraviolet, the studios' proprietary
solutions for "buy a piece of plastic and be able to stream them from our
Windows client". And in the smaller, you've got stuff like Indieflix,
KinoNation, Izkara (admittedly more focused on indie content, because of the
licensing problems I've discussed above). But none of them can expand to the
size of the biggies, because the market is locked.

So, 'low-budget, mildly interesting indie films' is the equivalent of 'cat
videos' for movie distribution. It's sad but it's true - every interesting
indie flick will be spotted at a festival (e.g. Sundance) and then they'll be
contacted by sales agents, whose job will then be to convince the producers
that they need DRM, and that they need to sell exclusive rights to this or
that entity, and then presto, that content is locked to a single/few platforms
and other smallers can't compete.

The reason why mainstream video distribution is locked is more about social
than it is about licensing, but I think the situations can be compared.

------
streptomycin
_And decision on the part of a single entity can ruin a lot of people's lives,
because we are so dependent on it. (Example: Twitter API rules, sparking the
App.net too-soon-to-be-called-a-revolution)._

A too-soon-to-be-called-a-revolution that trades one monolithic ruler for
another.

~~~
nddrylliog
Yup. I'm personally a lot more excited about tent.io, but there's already so
much irrelevant to a recruiter here that I didn't care to mention it.

------
anonymouz
While the increasing centralization is indeed worrying, I think this should
not be conflated with the contrast big company vs. small startup.

Most startups also seem to be building centralized walled garden solutions,
just on a smaller scale than Google.

~~~
nddrylliog
Entirely agree. Big company acqui(hi)ring smaller start-ups is a different
problem than increasing centralization. Both equally worrying imho, though.

------
erode
HN is just turning into submissions of drivel. This time by a narcissistic
code hipster who think part of having a good career involves telling everyone
how hardcore you are because you turned down an _interview_ at Google.

~~~
nddrylliog
I didn't submit it, nor would I have liked it to - but it's a bit too late to
stop.

I posted it on my blog for my circle of friends/followers, because I was
interested in feedback on my view of the general evolution of the internet.
This is not a PR stunt, I don't really care (no offense) what anyone in this
thread thinks of it. Besides, that wouldn't really make sense right? I'm not
asking for anything, why I would I want a large number of people to read it?

~~~
waterlesscloud
I wouldn't worry about 90% of the comments here. They're mostly from people
you weren't targeting anyway.

I thought it was interesting and insightful and I hope you continue to write
down your thoughts on the direction and potential directions for the future.

~~~
nddrylliog
Thanks a lot! It's not my first HN shower, but I'm still having a hard time
not caring about negative comments.

I'll definitely keep blogging whatever happens. Thanks again for the support.

------
dasil003
I'd like to point out that a great number of the comments here are in
violation of the first HN commenting guideline. We are veering away from
constructive criticism into aspie-with-a-mean-streak territory.

~~~
mnicole
But if you add a little heart, it makes it less demeaning.. right?

These comments are embarrassing. Writing is a great exercise and more people
should do it outside of attacking people for their blog posts on things
they're obviously passionate about and working towards a better solution for.

------
anons2011
"Best response to a Google Recruiter ever"

Right...

 _i·ro·ny The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally
signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect._

------
msg
tl; dr I won't work for Leviathan.

I'm not sure I would write such a letter. It is a half truth, and you might
have to eat those words if Google gets involved in something that interests
you.

------
zensavona
I'm sure he doesn't give a fuck.

Why are you getting so high and mighty, turning your nose when the guy just
_reached out to you and offered you a job?_

------
southphillyman
If this is how you reject an interview I'd hate to see how you reject an
offer.

------
capo
Only if you think that an uninformed philosophical rant is any sort of answer
to a recruiter whose job consists of getting you to interview for her/his
employer. They don't control the whims of the whole industry.

~~~
briancurtin
Nor is it likely that they care. This was a huge waste of time if it was
really written for and sent to a recruiter.

If they even got one paragraph in I'd be surprised. Delete - next candidate.

~~~
user24
This would be true if you were reading this in front of his personal email
client.

Fact is, it's an open letter, and therefore guaranteed to connect with his
target audience who are not, in fact, google.

------
nixygirl
I imagine this person sitting down in from of a mirror and reading this out
loud while typing. Naked. This person is obviously pretty full of himself.

~~~
nddrylliog
Thanks for the good laugh! I ought to try that.

Re your other comments: for someone busy working 100%, how did you get time to
create an account specifically to answer to this thread?
<http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=nixygirl>

Also, let me remind you a few of the HN guidelines (source:
<http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>)

> Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face to face conversation.

> When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names.
> E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened
> to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

I personally don't mind, but a lot of people have been complaining about HN
being aggressive lately, and I fear that kind of comments makes it worse.

