The Verge has a long and detailed profile of and interview with Sundar Pichai, the man at Google responsible for just about anything you use.
We sat down with Pichai to hear his vision for the Google of the future. He laid out a plan to improve Google’s products through machine learning – but more importantly, he sketched out a grand effort to deliver computing capabilities to billions of people around the world. Both in the way he manages his internal teams, and in his belief that technology can change people’s lives for the better, Pichai advocates an egalitarian ethos.
If there’s one thing that stood out during the I/O keynote yesterday, it was that Google was really hammering on the fact that it wants to create products for everyone. It wasn’t said with so many words, but the clear implication was “unlike Apple, which only builds products for rich people in the west”.
This egalitarian view permeated every aspect of the keynote, including the people on stage – instead of the usual procession of western, white 40-something men, almost half of all the presenters were women (I think there were three, like a VP of engineering), and a few people weren’t even western to begin with. This is unprecedented for technology companies – Apple, for instance, hasn’t ever had a woman present on stage (although Tim Cook did interview a supermodel on stage once).
We need this. Technology needs this. We need people from “new” economies, as well as women, to play a big part in the development of our technology to ensure that technology isn’t just designed for rich white people, but for everyone. Pichai knows this, and it was drop-dead obvious throughout the entire keynote.
Say what you want about Google – and there’s a lot to say – but in this aspect, they are so far ahead of the competition it’s not really a competition to begin with.
I only see that as seeking volume. It’d be strategically foolish not go for the “Next 5 billion” of missed opportunities.
See, Facebook’s year in review feature designed by 28yo bros from the valley caused some people to see and relive sad memories: deceased children, losing house to fire, break ups.
It’s not just more women, blacks or homosexuals.
Algorithms designed by people in a bubble. Not just a first world bubble, but people who have not and most probably will not live a regular life where you have more pressing needs than Endomondo, Amazon and all that jazz.
So do those outside of the bubble really care if these corporations hire some female african PhDs to develop tools for that cheaper Android phones? Nah, they need to own their destiny first: land, countries, laws, trade, etc.
Now that’s a bubble your in. It matters because, with a greater participation of non programming bros, their is greater opportunity for those who aren’t young white males. It shows that its possible. People will give them a chance. That’s why it matters.
Why “only” then? Is there anything wrong with “seeking volume” AND making a useful and affordable product for people living outside of the western world? I don’t see anything wrong with making profits out of producing something that makes the lives of poorer people easier. You win and they win. Even if Google “only seek volume” that doesn’t mean that what they do is bad. And Google never pretended that they are doing charity work. For sure they want to make money as well, or else their business would not be sustainable. People of my country (a developing country) have benefited a lot from western technology. Their lives would be much harder without such technology. And good for these companies to win money by selling that. I happily pay them for that!
Edited 2015-05-29 21:45 UTC
Why “only” then? Is there anything wrong with “seeking volume” AND making a useful and affordable product for people living outside of the western world? I don’t see anything wrong with making profits out of producing something that makes the lives of poorer people easier. You win and they win. Even if Google “only seek volume” that doesn’t mean that what they do is bad. And Google never pretended that they are doing charity work. For sure they want to make money as well, or else their business would not be sustainable. People of my country (a developing country) have benefited a lot from western technology. Their lives would be much harder without such technology. And good for these companies to win money by selling that. I happily pay them for that!
I’m not saying volume it’s bad, of course not.
What I meant was that it’s not coming out of thoughtfulness but just facing facts with cold calculation.
Adding pretense about caring for diversity to this is false imo.
It’s always about wrapping the word “profit” with flowery sentimental words when it comes to tech companies. PR-speak has to resonate with your target market/audience. At least Pichai’s PR-speak resonates with the average Joe on the street/plantation/paddy-field. Tim Cook seems to try to do the same in his speeches (from what I’ve seen), but the problem for him is that his efforts are often countered by the pompous holier-than-thou “serving humanity” or “what we were put on this earth to do” crap that Jony Ive spouts.
And so the unicorn-shaped Google fanboy in Mr. Holwerda stood still, once again, in its full glory…
You can believe in fabled dreams if you want, anyway.
And clearly it’s working. Certainly Thom is convinced. Google has always pushed the “no really, we’re doing good” image. Of course the reality is they want the eyeballs in front of their advertisers.
So let’s look at diversity. Well here’s some actual numbers.
http://fortune.com/2014/08/29/how-tech-companies-compare-in-employe…
What’s the conclusion based on measurements of: Overall gender diversity, overall ethnic diversity, gender diversity of the leadership team, ethnic diversity of the leadership team and gender diversity among technical workers.
Apple ranked 2nd most diverse, Google ranked 9th.
But Google paraded out some women and non-white ethnicities at their conference so trick people into believing they are diverse.
By the way, you know who is really getting those next 1 Billion people connected? They are. There are tons of local indian and chinese companies that are way better at getting their own populations connected than Google ever will be.
Edited 2015-05-29 20:36 UTC
You do realise that ranking higher here, in this industry, is like winning a “which water is the wettest” contest, right? Apple was 80% male, Google 83%. Apple was like 65% white, Google 71%. Yay, bring out the party poppers and champagne, we did it boys.
This industry is the playground for white men, and we all know it. The only way to ensure that this finally, finally, finally gets fixed and attract more women and non-western people, is from the top: show that men and women are equal. The best way to do that, is to fucking show it during the most popular keynote thing you do. Google did this. Apple has not (yet).
What a load of bull! As someone working in this industry I’ve never come across any situations where people were judged by their race, or where someone was treated differently because they were a girl. And I fail to see how it helps anyone to show a girl rather than a male at a keynote unless she truly was the best candidate for the job.
When Obama became the first black President of the United States nobody but the racists cared that he was black. He won because he was seemingly the best candidate for the job. Not because some stupid statistics indicated that it must now be a black mans turn to occupy this seat!
Ever considered the possibility that this industry is white man male dominated because, historically, this was the group of people first brought up with computer tech? There ARE other possible explanations than that we are all racists you know!
Which is exactly why we need women, non-white people, non-westerners, etc. You’re not disagreeing with me at all.
Yes we know Thom you are like the bible. At some point you have said everything and its opposite so you are always right.
Sure neither of them are wildly diverse. The point is you were quite easily tricked by their theatrics. Always good to look up the real story when a company tries to convince you of something.
k.
By the way, you don’t find the west arrogance nauseating that they need to save those next billion with their magical technology? Fact is the next billion are perfectly capable of doing that themselves.
Unfortunately, it’s all about pretending, not about substance. Otherwise, Google wouldn’t be pressing an over-reliance on “cloud”, which requires internet connections most developing countries don’t have.
For example, they could push for portable apps (at least for the free-of-cost apps), instead of downloading the same files over and over on many devices. They could push for movie purhcases instead of Play Movies. Same for Music.
All that “for the developing world” show in this year’s I/O was a lip-service while google makes a killing because of cloud reliance. It’s like the “green cars” of traditional automakers, which only live inside car shows and test groups (with few exceptions), while they are making a killing from their “parts and service” divisions.
Edited 2015-05-29 23:21 UTC
This does not necessarily have to do at all with egalitarian views, this may be just smart long term planning.
Let me quote respected mobile expert Tomi Ahonen on Google:
It’s quite clear that no such egalitarian views are needed to pursue a strategy like that. It is about being in everybody’s pockets once the mobile revolution is over.