I admire (and in some ways totally agree with/follow) the message.
Having said that, I don't really think that you can say that with his "100% time" he can still achieve what Google employees once did during 20% time. My understanding is that Google now (and for a while) has not actually continued to uphold the 20% tradition - and that was expected with company growth - but back when it did, the idea was that you could spend 20% of your time to build your own side project using Google resources and while getting paid by Google. Maybe it would become super popular and be a 'real product' some day.
With "100% time" you certainly cannot legally do this. I can't go to work and devote some time to some side project using my company's resources and while getting paid to be doing other work. Sure, I could put in "100% time" into doing it, but it would be illegal.
Like I said, I like the message, but mentioning 20% time seems wrong since you can't compare the two. In my opinion, anyways.
If you quit your job and have a profitable, self-sustaining business there's nothing illegal about spending your time in the pursuit of any lawful activity.
In terms of legality, it really depends on what kind of covenants you went into.
The 20% thing at Google is currently a marketing lie, and now Google is very much so a "team dependent" environment. That is, 20% is only allowed based on your team and the politics around your group. (based on several current/former google employers that I've talked to...)
> The 20% thing at Google is currently a marketing lie
There was a thread recently where some googlers said the opposite. The main thing I've heard is that you have to actually assert yourself and take the 20% time, it's not going to be set aside for you.
Sadly, I think mostly in the BigCorp world, you always have to take time aside to learn new stuff (or read HN etc). Everybody knows that no one works 8h/day doing real work. Sometimes taking time for learning is frowned upon (the "bad companies" out there) but mostly it is up to you to take the time.
I've never heard any of my (ex) bosses in BigCorp say that taking time from daily work to learn is not permitted. Of course it would be cool to have the 20% stated by the management, but I don't see that happening. Mostly they leave it up to you to take the 20% from the daily work.
this makes it a team dependent thing. The other thing is politics, "oh, we are behind schedule, yet that one guy doing his 20%..." combined with stack rankings is a downward spiral.
Now, if you can assert yourself and back up your assertions, then many other places will enable you to do what you want if it's directly related to the success of the business.
With "100% time" you certainly cannot legally do this. I can't go to work and devote some time to some side project using my company's resources and while getting paid to be doing other work. Sure, I could put in "100% time" into doing it, but it would be illegal.
It's worth noting that if every developer believed this, then Python wouldn't exist, because Python was one such project.
Guido van Rossum started working on python in the late 80s while employed by a computer science research center in Europe, then continued working on it while employed by a computer science research in the United States. He didn't start working at Google (working 50% on python) until 2005.
How many employers at universities have any idea about what their employees are doing beyond 'something with computers' or 'something with microbes' ? (exaggeration - but not a whole lot, in academia by definition most people are not in a position to understand what others are doing because what they are doing is supposed to be cutting edge)
>With "100% time" you certainly cannot legally do this. I can't go to work and devote some time to some side project using my company's resources and while getting paid to be doing other work. Sure, I could put in "100% time" into doing it, but it would be illegal.
You missed his point.
His 100% time is not like the 80% expanded. It's like the 20% expanded.
I.e instead of something like Google paying him to devote 20% to extra stuff he likes, he choose to work 100% of his time in stuff he likes, and pay himself with that.
Having said that, I don't really think that you can say that with his "100% time" he can still achieve what Google employees once did during 20% time. My understanding is that Google now (and for a while) has not actually continued to uphold the 20% tradition - and that was expected with company growth - but back when it did, the idea was that you could spend 20% of your time to build your own side project using Google resources and while getting paid by Google. Maybe it would become super popular and be a 'real product' some day.
With "100% time" you certainly cannot legally do this. I can't go to work and devote some time to some side project using my company's resources and while getting paid to be doing other work. Sure, I could put in "100% time" into doing it, but it would be illegal.
Like I said, I like the message, but mentioning 20% time seems wrong since you can't compare the two. In my opinion, anyways.