Google's Moonshot Factory Falls Back Down to Earth 25
Alphabet's moonshot factory, X, is scaling back its ambitious projects amid concerns over Google's core search business facing competition from AI chatbots like ChatGPT. The lab, once a symbol of Google's commitment to innovation, is now spinning off projects as startups rather than integrating them into Alphabet. The shift reflects a broader trend among tech giants, who are cutting costs and focusing on their core businesses in response to the rapidly evolving AI landscape.
The link goes to a paywall (Score:3)
above
To the moon... (Score:5, Informative)
To the moon Alice...or not.
Cue the music from Futurama "We're landing on the moon..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Archived version of article (no paywall) https://archive.ph/2jwd2 [archive.ph]
JoshK.
Re: (Score:3)
"That's not an astronaut, that's a TV comedian! And he was using space travel as a metaphor for beating his wife."
Re: (Score:2)
Quite. Here's a clip where Ralph does send Alice to the moon metaphorically...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Guess now Alice is "over the moon" and now in the bliss of outer space. :)
JoshK.
The other MeToo movement (Score:2)
Shoving AI into all their existing products because ... well ... all the other fat cats are doing it.
If you get fired for going against the grain, you look like a rogue loser when you go job hunting.
If you get fired for going WITH the grain, you look like a generic loser when you go job hunting, but all your competitors are also a generic loser, leveling the playing
Re:The other MeToo movement (Score:5, Interesting)
The biggest hope for google is that ChatGPT is an unsustainable business model, because it's not thoroughly infused with spam like google is. But if competing means google would have to dial back monetization to re-prioritize the user experience, that would be an extremely painful proposition for what has become a profit-bloated company.
More like failure factory (Score:4, Insightful)
'X', the super original name loved by the world's richest, was a great exercise in proving that you can fix engineering challenges that everyone thought you could solve by throwing money at it... by throwing money at it. And because of the amount of money thrown at it you get impractical and expensive solutions that nobody really wants.
Re:More like failure factory (Score:4, Funny)
Re:More like failure factory (Score:4, Funny)
No, it's [A-WYZ]
cutting costs and focusing on their core business (Score:2)
That's not why they are spinning off these as separate companies. Alphabet etc. know full well just how dangerous AI can be, and doing this limits them from liability if they are just acting as a holding company.
Re:cutting costs and focusing on their core busine (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
That might sort of be a reason, but I think the main reason is that the X lab was predominately a recruiting tool for high-end engineers. About a decade ago, it was beaten in during the Google interview process you got to spend 20% of your time working on X lab pet projects.
I'm not 100% certain, but I suspect you're confusing X with the other moonshot team, Area 120 (which was gutted in January of 2023 [techcrunch.com]).
As far as I know, X Development is organized as a separate company under Alphabet, which means that is not part of Google. I can't imagine you'd be able to do work for a different Bet as a 20% project. I could be wrong, but I'd be surprised, as the accounting overhead would be nontrivial.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You know I'm not actually sure either, but the Bloomberg article we're commenting on actually talks about the 20% time and while it technically exists, it's become nonexistent for new hires. But apparently X was spun off in 2023 into a separate alphabet entity, so perhaps that's just been part of the death spiral.. splinter it to Alphabet so it's not part of the 20% time anymore, then start spinning down projects.
Oh. My bad. I assumed it always was a separate bet. In that case, maybe it did attract some people, but I thought it was always kind of assumed that most people doing 20% projects would be doing things like contributing to open source, working on shared infrastructure, etc. It's not like X would have had the budget for an army of 20-percenters even back when it was under Google, presumably.
Re: (Score:2)
Regular Google employees didn't have anything to do with X. When he was more active, Brin would sometimes go around to offices talking about X projects; invariably he'd be asked how one could get into them as an engineer, and invariably the answer would be "you can't" (e.g. "What you do is important too")
Re:cutting costs (Actually follow the Money) (Score:2)
In related news ... (Score:4, Funny)
Google's Moonshot Factory Falls Back Down to Earth
Google renames effort, "Blue Origin". :-)
It was never going to last (Score:5, Interesting)
Responsible for Google Glass (Score:2)
On that one project alone, I say shut it down! Shut it all down!
Losing sight (Score:1)
You have one shot - that other departments free of overhead can innovate you out of your captive market hole. If you're lucky, it just might work.
Tripling down on "core business" WTF does that mean. How did your "cor
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Toshiba : restructuring until nothing was left (Score:2)
Toshiba sold off every 'underperforming' division to focus on their core business.
Until they sold off everything and were left with no core business to focus on.
Philips went down the same path until they ended up with what they started with : electric shavers.