It's not obvious to me. I look around and nobody I know is outsourcing anything anymore than they were 5, 10, 20 years ago. Nor is it obvious that outsourced products are inherently shittier than something made domestically.

You can't just make a blanket statement about the entire economy and say "it's obvious". We live in a big world. Your perception is not my perception. That's why data is so important.

Holding people accountable for their choices is sadistic?

Google is probably the most undervalued tech company there is currently, by far:

1.) Has cutting edge in house AI models (Like OpenAI, Anthropic, Grok, etc.)

2.) Has cutting edge in house AI hardware acceleration (Like Nvidia)

3.) Has (likely) cutting edge robotics (Like Boston Dynamics, Tesla, Figure)

4.) Has industry leading self driving taxis (Like Tesla wants)

5.) Has all the other stuff that Google does. (Like insert most tech companies)

The big thing that Google lacks is excitement and hype (Look at the comments for all their development showcases). They've lost their veneer, for totally understandable reasons, but that veneer is just dusty, the fundamentals of it are still top notch. They are still poised to dominate in what the current forecasted future looks like. The things that are tripping Google up are relatively easy fixes compared to something like a true tech disadvantage.

I'm not trying to shill despite how shill like this post objectively is. It's just an observation that Google has all the right players and really just needs better coaching. Something that isn't too difficult fix, and something shareholders will get eventually.

It's a common misconception that tons of users manually install Chrome, but Google just pays PC makers to make Chrome the default browser.

Chrome is the only browser with a business model that makes sense to do this. Microsoft just doesn't make enough money from Bing/Edge to pay PC makers to leave Edge as the default. Firefox makes no money at all, and makes 95% of its revenue from Google's payments to be the default search engine. Safari isn't even available on Windows, and even then, 99% of Safari's revenue is from Google.

(Safari was available on Windows from 2007-2012, but it never captured much market share, because Apple was never willing to pay PC makers to make Safari the default.)

Here's StatCounter's estimates of desktop browser market share. The overwhelming majority of users are using their computer's default browser.

https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worl...

    Chrome: 65.55%
    Edge: 13.9%
    Safari: 8.69%
    Firefox: 6.36%
    Opera: 2.9%

FWIW, I don't think it makes any sense at all to sell off Chrome. Google could probably sell off YouTube, AdSense, and Google Cloud, but not Chrome.

The only viable business model for a web browser, the one that literally all major browsers use, is to accept money from a search engine (Google, specifically) to be make them the default. Even Kagi makes its own Orion web browser, for exactly this reason.

How could Chrome make its owner any money at all if Chrome couldn't accept money from Google to be the default search engine? How could Chrome possibly do what Firefox and Safari can't?

> I do think shipping a product that has real users (and everything it entails, like writing the docs) is 100x more important than having leetcode and common interview tactics fresh on your mind.

It depends on the job! At a small product company, absolutely. Shipping useful features to customers is what you're hired to do. Hardcore CS knowledge is less useful than understanding how to talk to customers and shipping. Interviews should reflect that.

But that isn't all jobs, or all software. For a lot of problems - particularly in systems software or places where performance matters, understanding data structures and algorithms is essential. For example, video game engines, operating systems, databases, LLM inference and training, etc.

I get it - most product engineers don't make use of "leetcode" skills. But absolutely relevant at a place like google. If you don't understand how to reverse a binary tree, I wouldn't hire you to work on Google Chrome or the Go compiler either.

> But a medium+ question risks me not even being able to solve like, like having to use dynamic programming. And that's just humiliating.

What an incredibly entitled thing to say. "Those horrible interviewers asked me to solve a problem that was too hard for me! How humiliating! I failed the interview and its all their fault!"

Bezos is not a part of US government, thankfully.

* What type of jobs? - "The 20,000 additional jobs, Apple said, will focus on research and development, silicon engineering and AI."

* Does the US have the required people, in terms of numbers and skills? - "The company is opening up what it calls a manufacturing academy in Detroit, where it will help smaller companies with manufacturing. It already operates an academy for app developers in the city. It’s also doubling its manufacturing fund in the US to $10 billion." - Sounds like they are upskilling, and will count the employees of companies joining the academy as "jobs created"

* Does this mean moving to US based fabs for the M-series chips? - "[M-Series] chips themselves, however, continue to be produced in Taiwan.

* Is this actually profitable, or is this just a political move? - Define profitable. It is cheaper than paying tariffs.

For readers looking for context, Google tells me it was ~24% of GDP as of 2024