Blitzscaling 08: Eric Schmidt on Structuring Teams and Scaling Google
Greylock1 HN recommender · recommended in 1 month, 2016-2024
673K views · 11 years ago · interview · dated
Stanford Blitzscaling class session where Reid Hoffman interviews Eric Schmidt about structuring teams and scaling Google. Topics include Alphabet, hiring, and how Chrome and Android operated inside the company.
Cited as a first-hand source for how Google's leadership thought about hiring, organization and the Alphabet restructuring.
37:16Eric Schmidt and Peter Thiel - Fortune Debate, 2012
kykeon
208K views • 11 years ago
1:04:32Innovation Agenda | Barack Obama | Talks at Google
Talks at Google
898K views • 19 years ago
0:32Charlie Rose Eric Schmidt
Gregory Ferenstein
12K views • 13 years ago
1:22:45Building Software Systems At Google and Lessons Learned
Stanford
257K views • 15 years ago
15:05Steve Yegge, "What Would You Do With Your Own Google?" - OSCON Data 2011
O'Reilly
66K views • 15 years ago
1:13:21A Conversation with Peter Thiel and Niall Ferguson - Institute of Politics
Harvard University
26K views • 14 years ago
1:04:31Agile Project Management with Kanban | Eric Brechner | Talks at Google
Talks at Google
441K views • 10 years ago
54:11Ed Catmull, Pixar: Keep Your Crises Small
Stanford Graduate School of Business
217K views • 17 years ago
25:59Peter Norvig at Startup School 08
startupschool
6K views • 17 years ago
1:02:53Gabe Newell: Reflections of a Video Game Maker
The LBJ School
919K views • 13 years ago
1:20:41Peter Thiel on Stagnation, Innovation, and What Not To Name Your Company | Conversations with Tyler
Mercatus Center
140K views • 11 years ago
55:17Google I/O 2009 - The Myth of the Genius Programmer
Google for Developers
1.2M views • 17 years ago
1:20:29Stanford Seminar - Google's Steve Yegge on GROK
Stanford Online
30K views • 14 years ago
1:10:02Building Software at Google Scale Tech Talk
Google TechTalks
58K views • 14 years ago
1:00:25Moishe Lettvin - What I Learned Doing 250 Interviews at Google
Etsy Eng (Etsy Engineering)
713K views • 12 years ago
1:02:04Gabe Newell: On Productivity, Economics, Political Institutions, and the Future of Corporations
blogphilofilms
714K views • 13 years ago
51:22Principles of Technology Leadership | Bryan Cantrill | Monktoberfest 2017
RedMonk Tech Events
79K views • 8 years ago
59:15Clayton Christensen: Disruptive innovation
Saïd Business School, University of Oxford
455K views • 13 years ago
9:11Disruptive Innovation - Clayton Christensen (Part 2)
modplanman
36K views • 17 years ago
29:13Jim Goetz and Jan Koum at Startup School SV 2014
Y Combinator
38K views • 12 years ago
7 comments from Hacker News
The perception of autonomy at Google was somewhat marketing. In reality the company was extremely rigorous and top down. They used the perception to hire the creative genius types they wanted. Eric Schmidt (Former CEO of Google) discusses it here: ▶ this video
Google famously only hired people with elite education credentials in the beginning. "We also didn't want to hire anyone from what were considered lesser universities" Eric Schmidt ▶ this video
This implies there's something else that's not "procedures/calls" out there, i.e. subroutines. What else is there, can we name one of them? Subdividing a big problem into a set of smaller problems is not just some specific way of programming, it's not even a specific way of factoring a system. It's universal, as in the entire Universe essentially is factored this way. We have areas of "widening" cohesion and coupling (implementation) and areas of "narrowing" cohesion and coupling (interfaces, incl. argument/return types). These occur both horizontally and vertically as we move towards smaller and smaller problems to solve. Your actual CPU works this way, itself. So I'm very curious what we're talking about and why the dismissive attitude towards procedures i.e. "cobble it together out of procedure calls". In these conversations usually people just bring up something else that's also a procedure, but we call it something else, like "message passing to object methods". That's a useful metaphor at a higher level for sure. But let's not forget a method is just a procedure that runs and does things like any other procedure. ----------- Thanks for the great questions! I am particularly delighted by the slight incredulity expressed as to whether it's actually possible for there to be anything else. This has been my thesis for a while, that the call/return style has become so incredibly dominant that it is now largely synonymous with programming itself and thus something that is prog
It is hard to encapsulate what is unique about a language in a pithy one-liner. This one is the best I could come up with so far. And yes, I am also annoyed by hyperbolic claims and titles, for example I remember a paper claiming a "Language for Cloud Services" (not sure whether they specifically mentioned AWS). Turned out to be a minimalistic FP language with rudimentary concurrency support. Applicability to cloud services was an obvious extension left to the reader. Grmph. > Is it really true? Yes, I believe it is true. It has taken me many years to figure this out, and I realise that it is highly non-obvious to the point of being startling and yes, seemingly over-the-top. The "About" explains it a little bit further: > By allowing general architectures, Objective-S is the first general purpose programming language. > What we currently call general purpose languages are actually domain specific languages for the domain of algorithms. Maybe this should also go on the home page? Anyway, a super short and also still pithy and incomplete justification: All current mainstream programming languages are descendants of ALGOL. The ALGOrithmic Language. And that's not just a naming thing. I talk about this in much more detail here: "Can Programmers Escape the Gentle Tyranny of Call/Return?" ( link ) In short, we started using procedures to both compute results, which was what we used computers for in general when we started this CS thing, and then incidentally also to organise thos
I heard in a lecture of Blitzscaling with Eric Schmidt that google founders got the Google Chrome and Android projects running inside google without him knowing the real breath and intentions of the projects. ▶ this video
Eric shared some of his thoughts shortly after announcing Alphabet at Stanford's Technology-enabled Blitzscaling class if you're interested in some of the motivation and types of problems they're trying to solve with it [0] [0] ▶ this video
I was watching a video[0] the other day and Eric Schmidt said since the Playboy interview they have not given any more. ▶ this video