Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't let Google take over Berlin

fuckoffgoogle.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 120 posts

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#111

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

alexryan wrote: post #109
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly doubt that any other CEO would have made any difference. Google's business model is fundamentally based on data mining as much as possible about their users, and what's changed in the past couple years is (a) a much greater awareness of the potential negative consequences of this data collection and (b) the sense that the American internet giants are becoming unstoppable juggernauts. The hate against Googl…

There is truth to this. I would suggest, however, that it is at least theoretically possible to maintain good will and strong relationships with the community, even as your power grows, so long as the bonds of trust are rock solid. The most effective way I know to do that is to refuse to contribute to the polarization and by always choosing to be on the side of the win-win solution. By firing James Damore, by allowin…

Sorry, but I think this is complete BS. Sundar Pichai was put into an absolute no-win situation with the James Damore issue. While I agree a lot of the reaction to Damore's "manifesto" seemed knee-jerk and groupthink, I absolutely think that anyone with half an ounce of emotional intelligence should have anticipated that reaction, and should have known that writing that as he did would have been completely counter-productive and cause a huge shit show for the company.

Do you honestly believe that if Pichai had kept Damore around that it would have engendered good relationships with "the community"? If so I hate to break to you but "the community" is a lot more than people who think like you.

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#112

Post by pas »

steenreem wrote: post #85
pas wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everyone in this area Everyone in this area should have bought the flats they live in, or should have signed long term leases with inflation-pegged rent adjustments. Other than that it's simply people trying to tell someone to not eat their cake, because they want it.

Well, I think I can make a simpler argument. Google will change this neighbourhood. The culture will change, the cost of things, not just rent, will increase. Assuming that the author is very happy with how his neighbourhood currently is, I can see how he doesn't want Google's change. I think that, if the majority of the people in the area side with the author, there is an argument to be made to, through political me…

I'm all for self-determination of individuals and groups. And the delicate quest for the balance between those.

If the majority wants Google out, I want them to be able to do that. Currently, that decision is very likely not up to them.

> The boroughs of Berlin are not independent municipalities; the borough governments' power is limited, and subordinate to the Berlin Senate.

And even if it were up to the district/borough, there are 270+ thousand people there. They should hold a referendum, and let's hope for a high brow campaign.

Also, singling out Google is easy, and important. It's a milestone. It means that gentrification is already - very likely - going to continue to happen with full force there. Google picked the place because it's full of "talent", small startups, "cool places/parties", etc.

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#113

Post by legulere »

partiallypro wrote: post #18
ArmandGrillet wrote: post #7

The rents in Kreuzberg already increased a lot this past decade: https://guthmann-estate.com/marketreport/micro-market-report... Gentrification is a problem, but long time renters in Germany are really having it good. An example of how does the system works here: I pay twice as much as some German friends living in my district because my parents didn't sign me up in a union 20 years ago. I'm OK with that, it's the ga…

I don't understand this new mentality that "Gentrification is a problem," companies and wealthier people moving in makes everyone in the area more wealthy. The problem of affordable housing has less to do with those companies moving in and more to do with local real estate monopolies that lobby against rezoning for residential and expanding building permits. That's basically the bay area in a nutshell. People complai…

> wealthier people moving in makes everyone in the area more wealthy

Wealthier people buy up houses and kick out residents living there since decades.

Wealthier people moving in does not mean that pensioners or factory workers will suddenly earn engineer wages.

Wealthier people usually even lead to a reduction of apartments, as they combine smaller apartments to a bigger one. Increasing density is not always possible and often connected with a reduction of life quality (e.g. less green)

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#115

Post by pas »

tomxor wrote: post #87
pas wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everyone in this area Everyone in this area should have bought the flats they live in, or should have signed long term leases with inflation-pegged rent adjustments. Other than that it's simply people trying to tell someone to not eat their cake, because they want it.

> Everyone in this area should have bought the flats they live in. Don't you think they would have if they could?

I'm aware, that they are at the mercy of the owners.

But that's a general problem, completely orthogonal to Google.

Gentrification is just a big sign, that renting as a means for providing shelter is a very fragile system without proper market controls.

Of course, in general the inequality of the situation leads to exploitation of those who don't have enough money to buy something to hedge against rising rents.

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#116

Post by pdimitar »

jimmaswell wrote: post #62
pdimitar wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are overestimating the IT market's talent abundance right now. There are many people trying to get good programming wages and that doesn't make them good programmers. IMO Google -- and any other corp -- has a lot to lose if they close an office. Real talent doesn't just exist everywhere you go. I am not supporting or attacking the website, just clarifying the above point.

> Real talent doesn't just exist everywhere you go. Colleges outside cities, like the one I went to, are brimming with compsci students that are then forced to move when they graduate, like I was. I'm sure if companies set up locations in such areas, they'd be able to tap into a decent amount of people like me who'd take a moderate pay cut to be able to live and work in a less dense region - not just the graduates I…

I don't disagree but it seems to be a bit like the chicken and the egg problem: companies would love to tap on that talent but most business developers want hard evidence that the investment will repay itself, and for that to happen somebody has to actually try. It becomes a mutual deadlock.

Furthermore, emphasizing on hiring graduates isn't a very sustainable strategy; many startups prey on the naivete and energy of young people and their hiring strategy usually revolves around draining a wave of young people of their creativity and energy, fire them when they realize what's going and then hire the next wave of naive and energetic youngsters.

Many companies do that, not only startups. But for that model to work they need a big hiring pool. Not sure if rural-like areas have the volume of candidates for that hiring model to be sustainable.

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#117

Post by musage »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #111
alexryan wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is truth to this. I would suggest, however, that it is at least theoretically possible to maintain good will and strong relationships with the community, even as your power grows, so long as the bonds of trust are rock solid. The most effective way I know to do that is to refuse to contribute to the polarization and by always choosing to be on the side of the win-win solution. By firing James Damore, by allowin…

Sorry, but I think this is complete BS. Sundar Pichai was put into an absolute no-win situation with the James Damore issue. While I agree a lot of the reaction to Damore's "manifesto" seemed knee-jerk and groupthink, I absolutely think that anyone with half an ounce of emotional intelligence should have anticipated that reaction, and should have known that writing that as he did would have been completely counter-pr…

> I absolutely think that anyone with half an ounce of emotional intelligence should have anticipated that reaction, and should have known that writing that as he did would have been completely counter-productive and cause a huge shit show for the company.

He wrote it in an internal group dedicated to the very subject he wrote about. It got leaked and distorted, and I can't even count how often the whole context got twisted in the exact same way as you just twisted it.

Who leaked it? Dunno. What's so bad about it? Can't say. But one thing is sure, the person who ended up losing their job is to blame. And of course the people who just can't even be bothered to get fact one of it straight while signing it off aren't spineless in the least. How would that even work, all people have spines.

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#118

Post by musage »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #110
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google's business model is fundamentally based on data mining You see, the point is, it doesn’t have to be.

Not without being a completely different company. Google earns 90 percent of its revenue from advertising, and the amount they would be able to earn would go down significantly if they weren't able to provide highly granular targeting info to their advertisers. Saying "the point is, it doesn't have to be" is like saying "Apple doesn't have to be a designed-focused company." True, they don't have to be, but they are,…

> Not without being a completely different company.

Yeah, like actually being the company they pretended to be to get their feet into all sorts of doors.

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#119

Post by alexryan »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #111
alexryan wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is truth to this. I would suggest, however, that it is at least theoretically possible to maintain good will and strong relationships with the community, even as your power grows, so long as the bonds of trust are rock solid. The most effective way I know to do that is to refuse to contribute to the polarization and by always choosing to be on the side of the win-win solution. By firing James Damore, by allowin…

Sorry, but I think this is complete BS. Sundar Pichai was put into an absolute no-win situation with the James Damore issue. While I agree a lot of the reaction to Damore's "manifesto" seemed knee-jerk and groupthink, I absolutely think that anyone with half an ounce of emotional intelligence should have anticipated that reaction, and should have known that writing that as he did would have been completely counter-pr…

Uncomfortable situations can be perceived as “no-win” situations or as “huge opportunities” depending on what your aim is and how committed you are to achieving it. It could have been used as an opportunity to show the world how to resolve the polarization that plagues us by forcing the 2 sides to talk until a mutually acceptable resolution was achieved and the team could unify in support of a mission of contribution instead of turning against each other. The ability to bring people together is what makes you are leader. Even if you were on the winning side of the zero sum game, you will never rest well if you have weak leader. A man who will easily bend to the will of a handful of radical feminists is unlikely suddenly grow a backbone when facing a much stronger opponent like Donald Trump.

Re: Don't let Google take over Berlin

#120

Post by [deleted] »

alexryan wrote: post #119
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but I think this is complete BS. Sundar Pichai was put into an absolute no-win situation with the James Damore issue. While I agree a lot of the reaction to Damore's "manifesto" seemed knee-jerk and groupthink, I absolutely think that anyone with half an ounce of emotional intelligence should have anticipated that reaction, and should have known that writing that as he did would have been completely counter-pr…

Uncomfortable situations can be perceived as “no-win” situations or as “huge opportunities” depending on what your aim is and how committed you are to achieving it. It could have been used as an opportunity to show the world how to resolve the polarization that plagues us by forcing the 2 sides to talk until a mutually acceptable resolution was achieved and the team could unify in support of a mission of contribution…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN