- readsa Hacker News discussion tree
- becomessubtree size → mass; reply tempo → hue
- writes
--w--cat - you seebig subthreads loom in the type; fast exchanges run warm, slow ones cool
No canvas is drawn here — the field is invisible; these variables are its only output. Without it you would build: comment scores plus a collapse heuristic.
Data honesty
- Data source
- Real Hacker News discussion tree via the Algolia API (hn.algolia.com).
- Snapshot
- Committed snapshot in src/data/examples/, stamped snapshotAt on refresh via scripts/snapshot-examples.mjs — the build never fetches, so it is deterministic.
- Live refresh
- Upgrades to live in the browser: a polite poll (wireLiveChip) that skips hidden tabs and retires after failures. The committed snapshot is the SSR baseline and the no-JS truth.
- Not claimed
- The field reads subtree size as mass and reply tempo as hue. It does not evaluate the quality or truth of any comment — it makes the shape of the conversation legible.
Fundamental · invisible fields · threads
Arguments have structure.
A comment thread is a binding structure: every reply binds to the comment it answers, and busy subtrees heat up while dead ends go quiet. Most thread UIs flatten that into uniform rows, so you reconstruct the argument by reading all of it. These are the first 160 comments of a real Hacker News discussion — the CrowdStrike boot-loop thread — run as a field.
Each comment is a body whose mass is the subtree it spawned — a comment that started an argument is heavy; a reply nobody answered sits at the floor. Reply tempo shows as heat: warm comments landed minutes after their parent, cool ones took hours. Hover or focus any comment and its full ancestor chain plus its direct replies light up — the discussion's real shape, readable before you read a word. Collapse any subtree with its caret — the hidden comments leave the field, not just the page — and expand it back when you want the argument. The field is invisible: no particle swarm, only type weight, ink, and anchor.
size = subtree — the replies a comment spawned · color = tempo — warm replies landed within minutes of their parent, cool ones took hours
- Aa size = replies spawned — most comments spawn none and sit at the floor; that is the real shape of a discussion
- color = the heat lens (reply tempo)
- hover or focus → the full ancestor chain + direct replies light
- indent = depth, capped at 6 — deeper replies hold the cap
- the caret collapses a comment's whole subtree — a "+N replies hidden" chip holds its place, and the field re-runs over what's still visible
- the ink is live — --w is the subtree's weight and --cat the tempo lens; --d is the engine's local density (hold a comment and the field gathers — its binding chain charges with it) and --field-attention the pattern's eased attention as you scroll.
-
I am not going to share much more than what I already have, but I think this speaks to the experience of working in big tech and the disruption caused by AI both at the level of teams/roadmaps/incentives and changing user behavior.
-
I haven't been following along with your story closely so forgive me for asking you to repeat things that you've probably already said, but did they just fire you out of the blue or did they talk to you and it didn't go well?
-
Sorry to hear your story. Since I’ve never work at FAANG, does Google have strict procedures (and approvals) before launching a product? And if so, did this go through that process?
-
> does Google have strict procedures (and approvals) before launching a product? I worked at Google in the past, most recently ending in early 2015, and can confirm that the answer to this question was yes when I was there - presumably still the case today with different details. I have no idea whether the procedures were followed in this case, nor do I h
-
It was certainly the case for me back circa... I can barely remember, 2008/2009? Everyone just launched tools internally, although it was pretty easy to get approval to launch something externally, although most people didn't bother. The environment back then had tons of internal tools all over the place.
-
Oh yeah, I'm referring to external launches, not to internal launches.
-
I’ve been gone a few years, but there was a process for contributing OSS code outside the company, and another for releasing company code externally, etc It seemed to mostly work. Some people complained it was too slow, others seemed to manage fine. I think Chris DiBonas’ team ran all of that.
-
DiBona definitely started the OSS group and process, and ran it for many years.
-
Their process is a well-known template other organizations look at when creating their own: https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/releasing
-
It would help if you clarify whether you followed the OSS release process guidelines, which are very clearly documented. "Fired for making a thing" is different from "fired for not following the rules".
-
To clarify, I was on the Google Workspace Developer Relations team, the majority of my work was that exact OSS release process. It is not clearly documented and always changing. You can read some of it here, https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/releasing/... , but like I said it is always changing. Relevant: https:&
-
Something in the explanation is missing here. It's still not clear to me from any of the provided context whether you got approval to release this. At least from my understanding of your role, if you had approval and used an official google repository, you would not get fired for merely publishing code that accesses a documented API through documented e
-
...By the way, on a different subject, 4 days ago, had read your comments on a different post dealing with Alzheimer's. Just now, asked you a follow up question, and it's easy for them to get buried in your hackernews comments threads, so thought I'd just mention it. Thanks!
-
There was a Ariane/Launch with bits flipped including the eng bit from my manager.
-
The OSS release process has always stated that you can't use Google branding for a unilateral launch. You aren't making yourself look better
-
The "G" logo is a GitHub organization setting that applies to all repos in GitHub.com/googleworkspace and has for years.
-
Straight from that page: >This includes side projects that have not gone through IARC, even for DevRel engineers. So did you do this "Launcher2" or "Ariane" thing and get the approvals? If so, it seems your ass would be covered. If not... I can sympathize that the process seems convoluted and could particularly bite a DevRel accustomed
-
Yes there was a launch with eng bit flipped by manager.
-
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it really sounds like you knew the policy in depth, and even contributed to the design of the policy, but when it came to your pet project you ignored it by skipping the release process? Am I missing something?
-
Wasn't ignored or skipped.
-
How do you explain "This is not an officially supported Google product."? https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli
-
There are plenty of such projects with similar disclaimers under Google's own /google/ organization. To give a few examples: https://github.com/google/python-fire / https://github.com/google/pytype/blob/main/docs/index.md / https://github.com/google/dopam
-
Really sorry to hear about this. It's so ironic because your tool is something that made G workspace so much more useful to me personally and was a deciding factor in which calendar project I used. Getting fired for making a product more useful to customers is quite ironic. Thank you for your work on the tool! Paired with a claude skill I wrote around i
-
Yikes. I see Justin posted this, and I'm sure he can't say much - but this is an absolutely insane story. Google has gone from encouraging 20% time (to create amazing projects like this) to firing people for doing it. There seems to be some true maliciousness going on at Google. You have this, you have the open source Gemini CLI getting replaced wi
-
its what happens when a company runs out of ideas and is mostly run by people with MBAs. Good ideas are now risky because it steps on the toes of someone's fiefdom
-
There have always been lots of ideas. The issue is the management consultants and finance took over.
-
They’ve been GE’d.
-
Maybe the policy is that you can’t just release 20% time projects publically?
-
I've never worked for an employer, from pizza delivery, to corporate intern, to multiple startup, to FAANG, that didn't have this VERY CLEARLY worded in the employment agreement, right up top: 1. Any work you do during company time/resources/equipment, is company property. 2. Anything public related to work, or that could be considered as
-
The policy was always crystal clear, but at the same time, tons of people found it confusing. "I wrote this at home on my personal computer in my free time? Why does google own it? how can that be legal" came up a lot. People would get into huge fights with OSPO over this.
-
> "I wrote this at home on my personal computer in my free time? Why does google own it? how can that be legal" Interesting. Did they read their contract before signing it?
-
yes, many engineers (especially at google) are armchair lawyers and have all sorts of opinions about contracts and licenses.
-
Writing at home is irrelevant if what you're doing is related to the company's business. You can't be working for Google and making a browser, a document editor, a spreadsheet, a mapping site, etc... It doesn't matter if you do it on your own time. Yea, you can grow coffee and sell it at retail stores on your own time. No you can't c
-
Its almost like the junior technofeudalists think the rules dont apply to them.
-
Keeping a very strict "firewall" between your personal and corporate life is the best way to avoid such situations, but then again, these are Google employees we're talking about...
-
He released the product with Google branding making it look extremely like an official Google project, and then it went viral and blindsided everyone who would have been involved in creating or approving this kind of tool internally. If I released a tool personally that I hadn't told anyone at work about and put my company's logos all over it and i
-
You're absolutely allowed to release 20% time projects publicly. As in any large bureaucracy, there's a process for that which is taught during onboarding. What you're not allowed to do is skip the process. There's nothing Google specific about it and I've seen similar firings at other companies too. Skipping legal and corp comms rev
-
When has 20% projects ever been about bypassing every launch process and just posting your product publicly? Google may be a big bureaucracy now, but launch approvals and processes are there for a reason.
-
There are literally hundreds of projects on googles github with the standard “this is not an official Google project” in the readme.
-
It sounds like a big part of why he was let go is that he created a work-related product, possibly using his '20% time' meaning he created it while at work, and then released it with Google branding and logos, all of which without clearing it with anyone at the company, while his name is attached to the company. In other words, he created an extrem
-
The branding and logo on the embed comes from the org it is attached to, which is an official GitHub organisation owned by Google and contains many other open source repositories. I think there is probably way more to this story - maybe he was told about the upcoming official use/variant and was asked to not preempt it before the cloud next conference w
-
Struggling to see how google was harmed by this but yea it's true he didn't dot the i's and cross the ts. I actually thought when it was released that it was a pretty clever move by google in a sea of bad decisions but they've cleared that misapprehension right up.
-
> but yea it's true he didn't dot the i's and cross the ts. How do you know that's true? Do you have information the rest of us don't?
-
He probably read the twitter thread, it's all in there
-
As a customer and dev, it's confusing to me when I look at Google's stuff and see official-looking unofficial CLIs.
-
* when it's also alongside an official CLI for the same product
-
As a customer who uses open source I care more about whether it works well than whether it's officially sanctioned but I can see how some of google management and its employees would take a diametrically opposite view to the i dotting and t crossing. There are a couple of unsanctioned clients in particular where I'd take a dim view of the company t
-
Google could definitely be harmed by an unofficial product release that gets lots of users but doesn't have any kind of official support behind it, and hence could make those users pissed off in the future.
-
Usable link for anyone else without a twitter account: https://xcancel.com/JPoehnelt/status/2069482265953087602
-
Auto-redirect for FF: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/toxcancel/
-
This is what happens when companies are run by boomers who care more about building their orgs, instead of doing hard cutting edge engineering work. Sucks for the author. Hope they land a good gig at a frontier lab.
-
Wow...one of the comments on there says "now I know you were fired for being a pussy." Some days I think it would be nice to be able to punch someone in the face through the screen.
-
It's twitter right? Ever since a billionaire bought it it went downhill.
-
HN is slowly starting to feel this way also, sadly
-
HN still has the best mods (official and community) Also, see the last rule in the Guidelines
-
The one that says don’t compare HN to Reddit? Said the HN community has become over time (sadly) more toxic like Twitter/X. The moderation here is fine, though it can be questionable at times why there’s some post suppression on certain topics.
-
This is host most of the internet is in general.
-
I think the full text of that is even worse: > You had my sympathy until you mentioned your healing. Now I know you were fired for being a pussy. I was expecting some more substantial motivation for that but it's not even motivated by some weird disagreement about acceptable behavior at work, it's just this weird insanely toxic belief that takin
-
Can we please focus on thoughtful conversation instead of importing the worst comments from other forums*? Not to judge the feeling you express - I'm sure we can all relate. But as an HN comment it's pretty well guaranteed to turn the thread away from good places. (* I suppose I'm more sensitive about this since the episode I wrote about here:
-
Agreed. You've probably noticed this too, but I think 90% of the very dumb, mean spirited, and inflammatory things I see are from someone purporting to dunk on it, or refute it, or tell us how it made them mad. Its probably the main mechanism by which is spreads. I think a lot of people do it organically, but I also think coordinated marketing campaigns
-
It's the way the human psyche works, which is why the second-order versions from marketers, media, etc., exist in the first place. Trying to change that globally would amount to modifying human evolution. That kind of task you can't even call biting off more than you can chew; it's more the kind that bites you off, and then chews you in your e
-
You bet. I got triggered.
-
Appreciated!
-
I reported it to Twitter as violation of it terms with relevant category. Twitter said naming people Pussy is fine.
-
> getting grilled by legal about why the Google logo and brand colors are on the Google Workspace GitHub code repositories. > I think the cause was that Workspace and certain leaders (and projects) were afraid of being disrupted. I normally don't defend Google - this pure Evil should not exist. Degoogling is a holy act. But it is also kind of sill
-
> But it is also kind of silly to create a project, attach Google logo etc... to it while working at Google. Nah. Fuck Google. Reasonable humans would talk to him, fix it, and move on. They don't need you carrying an ounce of water.
-
Yeah, the reasonable thing here is a stern talking-to about company policies, and then leveraging this thing to get more goodwill in the community about AI, which is an area Google is currently lacking in.
-
He probably got that talking to, and continued to be stubborn and unapologetic. Getting fired is quite difficult, as there will be multiple attempts at resolving any issue.
-
Google is sorely lacking in goodwill, period. I don't know why this guy got fired, and I don't expect we ever will know the whole truth. But even so this seems like a very foolish PR move for Google. Rightly or wrongly people are going to take his side, and they can't really afford to burn goodwill with their customers.
-
Doesn't seem like many are taking his side based on this thread.
-
I don't get it – you called the GitHub org 'googleworkspace' and used the Google logo? Presumably without permission? Don't Googlers regularly open-source side projects under the official org(s)? Did you really think this was going to be fine, or was it 'growth hacking' with tougher consequences than expected?
-
I believe it's an official or semi-official Google github org. Typically at Google there is some process you are supposed to follow when opensourcing your code, and a repo like this exists specifically to get more people to use the API. The CLI still exists at the repo and the repo still has the Google branding, so it's 99% certain this is a Google
-
Yes, berating a coworker for being a fucking moron is unacceptable in corporate America.
-
The truth is that in decent workplaces we've figured out attacking people doesn't generally get what you want, unless what you want is to have a tantrum. Calling an idea nonsense is fine, calling it not profitable is great, and saying its a waste of time is a Monday. Attacking someone as a fucking moron is pointless, just fire them, deprioritize th
-
It's a reframe for > you can get punished at google (up to and including termination) for raising your voice in a meeting. That makes it sound like Google is really weird for firing people for merely "raising your voice in a meeting", but the reality is that toxic assholes who can't control their emotions and yell racist slurs at peopl
-
Ah ok, that makes a lot more sense. Makes it a lot less clear why he was fired, but his side as told makes more sense at least!
-
How come it's not under "google" organization, which is where almost every other Google open source project lives (with the exception of a few notable ones)? That's just weird. And if you look at the history, the main maintainer for the project was really just one person. Even today, the repo clearly says "This is not an officially s
-
Google has multiple orgs on github: google, google-cloud-platform, chromium, android, flutter, angular, tensorflow all have their own top-level orgs because google ships its org chart ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law ). Some orgs have been created by google and then released to the wild (kubernetes). I think but I'm not
-
Also, the one person listed in the Organization Members works at Google as a Developer Advocate.
-
Google has quite a few of those. It's hard to figure out if they're really official. https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis/discussions/865 / https://github.com/google-research/big_vision / https://github.com/googleapis
-
Very lame of Google. I guess we all get to continue trusting GAM ( https://github.com/GAM-team/GAM ) with an entire companies most precious data, instead of, I don’t know…Google?
-
The concerns seem to be primarily around trademark and logos? Unless there's more to it, those seem trivial to remedy by requiring removal of logos and renaming in the style of Clawdbot -> Moltbot -> OpenClaw. Google is well-known to be pretty sparing with firing people even for performance, so either this is a change in stance (entirely possible)
-
For over the last >1 year, Google has been dismissing people without warning or cause. The days where it was nearly impossible to be fired are over; now you might be severed by surprise for no given reason at all.
-
Anecdotally speaking, I have seen a change in behavior even from early 2024. I was in a meeting (online) with a few people from Google shortly before Google IO about something fairly small. The technical engineer actually spoke(!) and he talked about revenue and stuff. I was dumbfounded that technical engineers at Google would ever care about "moving th
-
Are you sure it wasn’t a “customer engineer” role?
-
No, it was not a sales call.
-
I know many people at Google who have been waiting to get laid off to get better terms than they would from just quitting. Now they know what to do.
-
People don't typically get a nice severance package if they're fired for violating company policy. (edit: not saying that was the case here, working on devrel usually makes it part of your job to publish code)
-
Firings like this often include a technically voluntary separation agreement that gives you a few extra weeks' pay or some additional months of health benefits etc. precisely to avoid that problem. (Also gets them out of paying unemployment, and means they can get a fresh set of NDAs/nondisparagement etc. signed with the employee.) I would never fi
-
It's both. They're usually more lenient than other companies when it comes to performance, but then there are random waves of layoffs that have more to do with what org you're in than anything else.
-
I think that’s a good instinct but this line… “I think the cause was that Workspace and certain leaders (and projects) were afraid of being disrupted.” Suggests that there is much more to it. I suspect it’s actually about disregarding Google’s internal processes (which is forgivable) and then demanding to work unilaterally (unforgivable). The amount of posit
-
So... they fired him for doing a 20% time project? I'm glad I don't have any of their stock to sell, what terrible management.
-
20% time project != able to just launch it YOLO style I suspect the core issue here is that he launched it with Google logos without following any sort of process
-
That would be dumb but I don’t think it should result in firing still
-
2 months later, I think we can assume some kind of process behind that didnt go well for our friend here.
-
It looks like he wants his former manager to be fired too. This only gives bad signals to hiring teams.
-
His manager would the first line manager, and really not a decision maker at G. it possible that his manager would put him under a bus after getting called out by legal. Dunno. But regardless once escalated by legal there have been a process to mitigate this, so either the director fired the OP or someone higher. The direct manger would be not really in the
-
His former manager left Google last week
-
Yeah there is always more to these stories
-
I'd guess he was fired for refusing to comply after legal talked with him
-
Maybe it should not, but when I worked there, I certainly knew something like this probably would . At least, if it blew up and drew a lot of eyeballs.
-
Yeah, endorsement matters. It can represent the whole. You have to be careful with it.
-
Not for doing it, for releasing it publicly, presumably without permission. (If he did have permission, he probably has a pretty good case to bring.)
-
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 t
-
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.
-
the Antigravity AI suite is hugely popular among non-developers
-
So is every other AI tool
-
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.
-
The other day I learned that the command line interface (or whatever) to Antigravity goes by the abbreviated name "agy", which is awfully close to "agi" as in "artificial general intelligence." I strongly suspect they did that on purpose.
-
I wonder if it's because non-developers are not exposed to Codex and Claude Code? I try to use Antigravity every now and then, and each time I drop it because of the sheer number of bugs and general brokenness.
-
antigravity is one of the worst tools i have ever encountered with
-
Every other AI suite provider claims the same.
-
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.
-
Unlikely that the bureaucracy is what will keep them valuable in the long-term.
-
Yes, very true But in the long term, we are all dead
-
How long is has a different answer for everyone.
-
Google will likely outlast everyone walking the earth at this moment.
-
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 t
-
Sounds like exactly why they're now a lumbering ineffectual beast, rather than the center for innovation that they used to be.
-
It depends on what you consider ineffectual to mean. Ineffectual at making new products and innovating? Yes, definitely. Ineffectual at preserving business momentum and continuing to grow profits? Well, the latest numbers speak for themselves.
-
Can't argue with that. You'll never go broke appealing to the lowest common denominator.
-
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.
-
I think your first take still stands.
-
i think your edit is asinine. google could have requested the removal of the trademark and made everything kosher, but they didn't. They decided to make an example of a guy who built something useful that people liked and now every other engineer at google will think twice before adding any not previously approved value to the business. You were right a
-
EDIT #2: Former Googlers here say that for a long time it was common at Google to let employees publish code with Google branding on github, in which case the firing was not justifiable. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48652851 Yes, I changed my mind again. I have no qualms about changing my mind if the facts justify it :-)
-
Yikes. The lack of judgement involved in personally releasing something that could be confused for an official release (I was confused) by your employer is someone who has huge wildcard risk in the future. I would expect significant disciplinary action if they didn't follow procedure, and termination if they were directly warned at any point.
-
Your ships would have been sunk during the 2002 Millennial challenge and an entire bureaucracy would defend you for the next 20 years.
-
Yeah that's kind of the impression that I had.. should have ran it past his superiors. Hope he learns something from this instead of deflecting like he seems to be doing.
-
Particularly for a company that possibly has to navigate high-volume, often frivolous litigation and brand attacks from trolls. I have been in similar situations having to partner with legal defending the most frivolous things on products released. You literally sign docs to not do such things when u onboard. Not sure what the point of broadcasting this is t
-
Not only that but not clearing with your management that you're not working on something that is actually being worked on as a product. Definitely they put some manager and/or team in a very uncomfortable position releasing this.
-
Management literally announced it for him.
-
Yeah this is super weird to me, because the processes at Google for employees to release and attribute ownership of open source projects are extremely clear and well established. It's genuinely hard for me to imagine this happening in a way that confused or caught the author off guard. It's totally fair to question the wisdom of those processes and
-
Clueness sometimes goes hand-in-hand with perceived freedom. I think it's that cause and effect are not as often connected (consequences). I remember a Google employee updating a Google font that broke thousands of websites. Community members explained that Google recommended (at that time) letting Google host the font, and that they could fork it inste
-
We take annual training that warns us against doing what this engineer did.
-
yes we all pay attention to 'the training'
-
Again, I'm pretty skeptical that this person completely missed this part of the training for seven years.
-
You are assuming that it was "personally" releasing something and that the process wasn't followed.
-
You continue to dance around this question on this post - did you or did you not follow Google's open source approval process[1]? Did you have an approved Ariane/Launcher2 entry? 1: https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/releasing/...
-
Yes
-
Did you have your launch approved? So did you follow the process?
-
Why isn't it under google's username on github? Why does the repo say "This is not an officially supported Google product."? Is it actually approved by Google or not? You need to actually answer these questions instead of dodging them.
-
Are you the "serious consequences for ____" guy?
-
The reason you think he's "dodging" the questions is because you clearly don't know anything about the situation, like the fact that it was published under the github organization used by the workgroup he was in, same as a lot of other software the group authored.
-
The real problem is that OP is or wants to be an old school disruptor working at what used to be an exciting and disruptive employer (but isn't any more - its just a boring old money maker). OP crank out a pretty decent and well received, by the community, product and get absolutely canned because they are well out of touch of how Google now works. You
-
> what used to be an exciting and disruptive employer (but isn't any more - its just a boring old money maker). I feel sorry for this person, but I would be surprised if this would have been okay at Google in the past 20 years. It wouldn't have been okay at any company I've ever worked at, big or small. I think there's a valid argument
-
Dunno about 20, but 7 years ago, they fired a security engineer for forcing in a CL for their internal Chrome extensions to put a disapproving banner on certain anti-union websites. Wasn't a very harmful change, but because she left a clear paper trail of circumvented code/release reviews, she couldn't be trusted anymore.
-
That was a security engineer modifying internal security tooling without proper permissions/reviews. The union piece was probably extra motivation but still you just do not do that to security infra, it should always be a firing offense unless it was a truly exceptional circumstance. Conversely, this guy was in a DevRel role where it sounds like they re
-
I would encourage this sort of thing in my company. I'm not google. I'm not legally beholden to anyone except myself and my business partners ... and my own sense (which is worryingly odd!) Google can never be exciting or interesting evermore by design and intent. They dived on in and went "money" full on. They exist to generate revenue f
-
I think your encouragement is admirable but could be interpreted as naive. For one thing, the author of this tool used Google trademarks (the logo) to represent the project. If you are even slightly larger than a mom and pop small business you pretty much have to defend that trademark or else you risk losing it. But, okay, fine, you can just tell them not to
-
In a modest 25 people company you absolutely can just go and do this of your own initiative and it will be tolerated or encouraged. Any company that size where it's not possible will close in 18 months when it runs out of investor money without having accomplished anything. You should still mention you're doing it beforehand, though.
-
In this case I guess the only other option the person had is to quit to build something of their own or work at another more builder friendly company, but at least in this case they got to release a thing that was valuable to many people and got popular, so they got some good publicity out of that. So ultimately I don't see that their actions were wrong
-
Google seems to be filled with really talented people, technology, and every resource anyone would ever need, but their execution and management seems to be severely lacking. This account is a pretty damning indictment of Google. Look at the entire Bard-to-Gemini launch, and from my experience, Gemini's performance is slipping hard recently. Then you ha
-
Around that time I built a CLI to access and manage monitoring cameras that my company is selling. After giving a demo to my leadership I strongly adviced against releasing it to public. Giving agents access to some stuff is bad for customers.
-
Interesting that people here seem so sympathetic to the fired guy. Wouldn’t you kind of expect to be fired if you release a project under your employers name that’s not even associated with them and hasn’t been cleared? Working for them actually makes it worse because people could look up your name and would see that you actually work for google. It’s kind o
-
I tend to agree with you here. This is the equivalent of that scene in Better Call Saul where Jimmy makes a commercial without getting sign-off from the partners. It doesn't matter whether the thing worked - this is essentially a mutiny from the product roadmap.
-
Love Better Call Saul :) The comparison is not even wrong (in the Pauli sense). Required knowledge seems to be DevRels role within Google culture. The absolute last thing this was was “mutiny” from a “product roadmap”. They’re sort of just around to build things to help devs and evangelize. They’re not tied to roadmaps or recruited to work on them.
-
Ofcourse. This is HN and not LinkedIn. We have a lot more people here who like bending rules as opposed to following them.
-
Yes, fair. I do feel like the twitter post walks this line a bit though, between "yes, I broke the rules, for a good reason!" which I think many of us here can probably respect to various degrees and "I don't understand what I did that was wrong".
-
You’re supposed to bend stupid rules but the one bent here is kind of important. I couldn’t trust an employee that does this, so I wouldn’t want to continue to employ them.
-
My point is a good portion of HN is composed of pirates who don’t like rules and have a higher tolerance for risk. You can dislike that all you want for any given reason both valid and petty. However, what you’re seeing are core values from the people who created this community and the same type of people still run it today so you’re going to keep seeing thi
How it's built
Every comment is ordinary semantic HTML — an <li> carrying its id, its
parent's id, and its tempo as data attributes. Mass is the log-normalized count of replies
it spawned; CSS turns that one number into type heft, ink, and anchor. The binding chain is
a parent-id walk — no SVG, no canvas, no per-element listeners beyond hover and focus. Two
live channels sit on top, engine-written every frame: --d (local density,
gathered by data-hot on hover — the hovered comment's density also charges its
chain's connector ink) and --field-attention (the pattern's eased attention).
They touch only ink; the tree's mass is fixed history. Collapse is the same walk run the
other way: a caret hides a comment's whole subtree (every descendant whose parent chain
crosses it), and the scoped field is destroyed and re-applied over the bodies still
visible — collapsed comments stop participating instead of lingering as zero-size ghosts.
1 — mark each comment as a field body
<!-- each comment is a body. data-feedback: the engine writes
--d (live local density) back every frame. data-hot:
hover/focus a comment and the field gathers toward it.
data-top marks a top-level comment (the glow channel). -->
<li
data-body="attract"
data-strength="1.36"
data-feedback
data-hot
data-top
data-id="41002198" data-parent="41002195"
data-tempo="0.91"
style="--w: 0.60; --cat: hsl(31 74% 64%); --depth: 0;"
>
<!-- your ordinary HTML here -->
</li> data-body="attract"— registers as a field participantdata-strength— mass, from the subtree the comment spawneddata-parent— the binding: which comment this one answersdata-feedback— opt in to--field-*writebacks (--d)data-hot— hover/focus gathers the field toward this comment
2 — CSS reads weight, depth + the live channels
.th-c {
/* --depth = min(depth, 6) — the indent; --d is the
ENGINE's lane: live density, data-hot gathers it */
--live: var(--d, 0);
padding-left: calc(var(--depth) * var(--ind));
}
.th-row {
opacity: calc(0.58 + var(--w) * 0.42);
box-shadow: 0 0 calc(var(--live) * 14px) -6px
color-mix(in srgb,
var(--cat) calc(var(--live) * 50%), transparent);
background: color-mix(in srgb, var(--text)
calc(1.5% + var(--w) * 4% + var(--live) * 4%
+ var(--field-attention, 0) * 4%),
transparent);
}
/* top-level comments with big subtrees burn steadier */
.th-c[data-top] .th-row {
box-shadow: 0 0
calc(var(--w) * 8px + var(--live) * 14px) -6px
color-mix(in srgb, var(--cat)
calc(var(--w) * 30% + var(--live) * 50%),
transparent);
}
One log-normalized subtree count drives weight, ink, and anchor; the indentation
(--depth) supplies the tree geometry for free. --d belongs to
the engine — live local density, written back every frame.
3 — the chain and the collapse are the same walk
// hover or focus a comment:
row.classList.add("lit");
// walk the ancestor ids up to the story
let p = byId.get(row.dataset.parent);
while (p) {
p.classList.add("cited");
p = byId.get(p.dataset.parent);
}
// and light the direct replies
for (const kid of kids.get(row.dataset.id))
kid.classList.add("cited");
// the chain CHARGES: while a comment is lit, mirror its
// live --d (engine-written) onto the list as --chain —
// the connector ink reads it
list.style.setProperty("--chain",
row.style.getPropertyValue("--d") || "0");
// the scoped field runs invisible (renderless) and asks
// for the attention metric lane (--field-attention) —
// applyPattern options, not a hand-spread recipe:
// { renderless: true, extraMetrics: ["attention"] } // collapse = hide the subtree, then RE-BIND
caret.addEventListener("click", () => {
row.toggleAttribute("data-collapsed");
// a comment hides iff ANY ancestor is collapsed
// (the same parent-id walk the chain uses)
for (const r of rows) {
let p = byId.get(r.dataset.parent), hide = false;
while (p && !(hide = p.hasAttribute("data-collapsed")))
p = byId.get(p.dataset.parent);
r.hidden = hide;
}
// and the field re-runs over the VISIBLE bodies —
// collapsed comments leave the field, not just
// the page (destroy + apply, like field on/off)
field?.destroy();
field = applyPattern(list, base, {
bodies: rows.filter((r) => !r.hidden),
annotateBodies: false,
renderless: true,
extraMetrics: ["attention"],
});
});