[cs702]

Looks like a textbook example of Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy.[a]

People like the OP, Justin Poehnelt, who build cool things out of self-motivation that others find interesting and want to use, are now at the mercy of those inside Google who care more about the company's internal bureaucracy and their own role and importance within it. To them, the fact that the OP's project was an instant github hit meant nothing.

--

EDIT: Others here are saying that Justin released his code with Google's branding without asking for approval. If that's true, it wasn't right of him, and his firing was justifiable. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48650310 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48650192

---

[a] https://jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html

[xnx]

Google is worth $4+ TRILLION. There is natural and needed bureaucracy in preserving that. This type of probably well-meaning, but cowboy activity is not worth the risk to Google.

[BLKNSLVR]

Sounds like exactly why they're now a lumbering ineffectual beast, rather than the center for innovation that they used to be.

[jauco]

You’re not disagreeing with gp.

I like the law because you can quite easily formulate it without bias.

Large enough orgs will indeed get people whose job is more closely aligned with the goal vs people whose job is more closely aligned with the existence of the org. _Because_ you need to keep investing energy to keep the org in existence. You can’t just do the goal only.

But being responsible for keeping the org in existence is not the same as responsible for the goals that the org was created for in the first place.

_and_ I can see how the people whose job it is to ensure the org keeps existing will gain the majority vote.

It’s like a law of nature: the way things fall out if you’re not consciously working to have them fall out differently.

(So it can be good for google to fire them from a “let’s keep existing standpoint” even though it might be contrary to having the easiest/optimal to use product. And if that is so, the keep existing vote will have the power) I don’t use google products really that much so I can’t speak to the merits of this example.

[judge2020]

Unlikely that the bureaucracy is what will keep them valuable in the long-term.

[worik]

Yes, very true

But in the long term, we are all dead

[josefritzishere]

How long is has a different answer for everyone.

[overfeed]

Google will likely outlast everyone walking the earth at this moment.

[BrenBarn]

Actually it means less than nothing, it's a negative, because it shows that working outside the system can be popular and potentially woo away users, which challenges the supremacy of the organization.

[logicchains]

People ask why Google's Gemini is falling behind the competition in spite of Google's immense resources, this kind of thing is an example why.

[FuriouslyAdrift]

the Antigravity AI suite is hugely popular among non-developers

[stogot]

So is every other AI tool

[throwaway23597]

Who is in charge of naming things at Google? Like a five syllable word followed by "AI", I couldn't think of a worse name for a product competing for mind share.