My favourite right now is Looker. Dashboards are beautiful and ad hoc query creation is dead simple and on point. You will save yourself many "oh could you re-run this data but split it out by device type?" moments because your clients should be able to do it themselves extremely easily.
For the record I thought it was a terrible movie and ripe with inconsistency compared to the real thing, but I can only assume the director and writers took to creative license in an attempt to appeal to a larger audience.
My sarcasm was actually intended to indicate that opinions can never be "wrong" in some objective sense as they represent subjective experience. The notion that your opinion can't be valid because you worked for "only" three months is nonsensical. People who worked for Google for a day have opinions as valid as anyone else's.
I admit, there are places where my post may have struck some chords with those have been following recent events in the area of privacy and transparency.
However from the perspective of someone who has worked in something like investment banking, I stand by my comment that Google's approach to transparency (at least internally) is headed in the right direction.
>I stand by my comment that Google's approach to transparency (at least internally) is headed in the right direction.
So you admit that your entry omitted any discussion of where Google is headed in the wrong direction? That it was completely one-sided?
>>Dare I call the Google the "holy grail" for many aspiring software developers?
What you are doing, what you have done, is easily termed "gushing." You are so eager to affirm what Google has done for you this summer.
You're even gushing to the person that has come to back you up, when you probably don't even know him. (Or maybe you do, and that's even worse. Is he here to back you up, not to argue of his own accord?)
---
I'll tell you what I think is going to happen. This post just might hit the top of HN. You'll get maybe 5-10 new twitter followers. You'll go back to your senior year. Your 1-post blog will languish because you'll be fucking busy (because yeah, you got a Google internship, so you're damn good and that means you should spend your senior year in Toronto focusing on Toronto, not on what the Internet thinks).
I'll get assorted votes in this topic, depending on the crowd that arrives. Depending on how this comment is received. I'm the sort of person that thinks you're not doing good writing if you don't get downvotes, and you should practice by getting downvoted to oblivion so you know how to get close to the real line.
It's just a small bump in the daily discourse of the Internet.
---
Where is your cynicism?
(Edit: Did you notice how my flattery of your Google internship (maybe) made my comment more palatable to you?)
I'm not sure why you feel it necessary to be a cynic. I don't see why there is a reason to etch the flaws out in everything. I could caveat everything I say but what would be the point of that? Especially in a section labelled: "What I liked about working at Google".
I also don't see the point in you playing fortune teller - so what if my blog has 1 post? Why does it matter to you what I do or do not do with my life after its been read?
I appreciate your criticism of my writing, and certainly welcome more of it, but if you're going to be passive aggressive about it I'm afraid I don't see the point in it either. From your reply it seems like your suggestion is to "add cynicism".
Lastly, your thinly veiled insults do not make your post more palatable to me.
>I don't see why there is a reason to etch the flaws out in everything.
>> Then you will forever be a terrible engineer. We seek out flaws!
I understand and fully embrace this! As hard as it is to believe, I choose when to and not to be a cynic. However, I've found that I often focus too much on the negatives at times and need to brighten up.
> And I want you to consider that your internship has been a product as much as it is an opportunity for you.
I ABSOLUTELY agree with this. In my mind Google did a damn good job of it. But why point this out specifically?
An employee's experience at any company is manufactured regardless of position or industry - pay, hours, office environment, management structure... These are all factors of the job. What I'm saying is that Google does a better job of manufacturing this than many others do.
> Your employer is not your friend.
I don't believe in this. What about the startup CEOs that literally recruit (and hire) their friends? What about the small businesses of the world that closely maintain relationships with their employees?
I think the point you are trying to hint at is more in line with "HEY. This Big Tech Company created an experience for you just to make you think one way about them but really doesn't care about you at the end of the day. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!"
And I totally understand that. But you also understand that it is an opportunity - you said so yourself! All I'm trying to do with this post is encourage others to consider this opportunity for themselves as well.
>I ABSOLUTELY agree with this. In my mind Google did a damn good job of it. But why point this out specifically?
Because it's your blind spot. Because it makes you a liar. More loyal to Google than you are to your engineering experience.
You didn't say anything about what you coded.
Show us some code, asdfprou. Did Google make you a better coder?
You still believe that _your_ cute little experience is worth "[encouraging] others to consider having that experience for themselves as well."
SHEEPLE don't have anything to worry about. No one's learned your lesson. You assumed that it was given in your first paragraph.
That's why I put this in terms of this blog post's unimportance. No one is paying attention!
>All I'm trying to do with this post is encourage others to consider this opportunity for themselves as well.
But you don't even display knowledge of what that opportunity is. Is it an opportunity to make blog posts like yours? To have a good in-route with Google after your senior year?
You're actually the precise example of what Google wants: young engineers excited about working at Google.
It certainly comes to no surprise to anybody that a company as large as Google will have mixups in their hiring/recruiting process.
Often one arm of the organization does not know what the other is doing, although I am sure Google is constantly trying to improve their internal communications in order to prevent exactly this.
As for your point about the black list... I would say it would likely be closer to a note that has been placed in your recruiting profile instead.
I actually spent most of my time in the San Bruno office, which is where YouTube's team mostly sits, but occasionally ventured to the SFO office and the MTV offices.
I've heard great things about the New York offices as well as the Zurich, Tokyo, and London offices though!
Personally, I've talked to Googlers all over the world and there seems to be a consistency in openness and passion.
At this point I consider Calico to be a part of Google (although separately incorporated). Not sure about you but I definitely see "extending the average life expectancy of the human population" as a difficult problem.
But even discounting this (naysayers will cry foul at the fact that it technically is a separate company), I think organizing the world's information is certainly an extremely difficult problem. And certainly one that Google is attempting to solve in more ways than search.
Also - self driving cars? Certainly you will agree that is not trivial.
Thanks Dewitt! I had a feeling that my lack of tenure was going to be a point of contention, so having someone with as much experience as you backing the story certainly helps!
