Postmortem of my 9 year journey at Google

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Overall reaction to the postmortem

  • Mixed reception: some found it relatable and concise; others criticized it as shallow and overly focused on compensation.
  • Several commenters felt the “I made a lot of money” framing dominated, underplaying technical depth and personal reflection.
  • Others defended short, bullet‑style posts as more readable than long, exhaustive memoirs.

Money, stock, and career strategy

  • Many comments focus on equity:
    • Some sold Google stock early and “lost” millions in hindsight; others diversified and feel that was still the right risk decision.
    • Consensus that past Google equity performance was exceptional and not a generalizable expectation.
  • Debate over what “set for life” means: some think 7‑figure net worth + high ongoing earning power qualifies; others say cost of living and career risk make that optimistic.
  • Regret is common from older engineers who did not “chase money” earlier.

Google vs other big tech & historical arc

  • Some argue Google is now “just another big tech company” like Microsoft/IBM; others insist it remains top‑tier in talent and engineering rigor.
  • Multiple comparisons of interview difficulty and talent bar vs Microsoft/Amazon; mixed but generally claim Google/Meta keep a higher centralized bar.
  • Sense that early Google was wilder and more fun; modern Google is more bureaucratic, optimized, and risk‑averse.

Levels, promotions, and IC vs management

  • Rapid promotion (L3→L4 in months, L6 in ~9 years) triggers debate: uncommon but not unheard‑of.
  • L5 is widely described as a “sweet spot” with strong pay, interesting work, and less stress; some intentionally avoid L6+ due to quality‑of‑life tradeoffs.
  • View that leaving and re‑entering is often the easiest way to level up.

SRE vs SWE

  • Strong thread: SRE is often described as stressful, interrupt‑driven, and under‑rewarded relative to SWE, despite high skill demands.
  • Others counter that in well‑run orgs SRE can be rewarding, promotion‑friendly, and rich in complex engineering (automation, capacity planning, large migrations).
  • Broader argument about specialization: some think QA/SRE/DBA should be fully embedded in dev teams; others say splitting roles is necessary at scale but incentives are misaligned.

Google’s internal tooling and engineering culture

  • Recent tools (Boq/Pod, P2020, Rollouts, automated capacity, BCID) are praised for standardization: easier onboarding, safer rollouts, strong security and compliance.
  • Some mourn the loss of “wild west” experimentation and argue heavy process/freezing of infrastructure slows innovation.
  • There is frustration over executive decisions like cutting core tools (e.g., Code Search) to “save money” despite broad productivity impact.

Ethics, ads, and “evil Google”

  • Several commenters criticize Google as fundamentally an ad and surveillance business, misaligned with sustainability and user interests.
  • Others argue that many companies behave similarly and that Google still often pushes for strong internal security and user privacy.
  • Manifest V3 and ad‑blocking restrictions are cited as emblematic of tension between security claims and ad‑business incentives.

Culture, geography, and work–life balance

  • Repeated reports of US‑centric decision‑making; non‑US offices can feel sidelined or stuck with awkward meeting times.
  • Some praise flexible arrangements (60–80% workload) as life‑changing; others note many companies refuse part‑time even when employees are willing to trade pay.
  • Complaints about middle‑management bloat, meeting overload, and shifting priorities undermining sense of impact.

Privacy and trust in Google products

  • Some engineers say working at Google increased their trust in its data security and privacy controls.
  • Others point to incidents like high‑profile cloud data loss and government surveillance concerns, questioning how “safe” data really is.