That's like saying to Bill Gates "you're rich, forget about the Gates foundation, just focus on making money for yourself and creating jobs." Warren Buffet, or how bout the Carnegies, Mellons, and Rockefellers.
This has got to be the least coherent analysis I've read on HN in a while. Google is an organization, yes, but one composed of people, and those people are affected by the decisions of invididuals or groups who could incrementally change the world for better or for worse.
You don't think the engineers writing JS to improve that "cloud computing model" (let's use Google Docs as an example) wouldn't benefit either directly or indirectly from some of the ideas that will come out of this project?
How are innovation and this project mutually exclusive? Google is (and has been via Google.org) trying to spearhead innovation outside of its known core competencies (i.e. search, ads, and apps) and does this project not contribute to that?
This has got to be the least coherent analysis I've read on HN in a while. Google is an organization, yes, but one composed of people, and those people are affected by the decisions of invididuals or groups who could incrementally change the world for better or for worse.
You don't think the engineers writing JS to improve that "cloud computing model" (let's use Google Docs as an example) wouldn't benefit either directly or indirectly from some of the ideas that will come out of this project?
How are innovation and this project mutually exclusive? Google is (and has been via Google.org) trying to spearhead innovation outside of its known core competencies (i.e. search, ads, and apps) and does this project not contribute to that?