Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#101

Post by carapace » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:17 AM UTC

nodesocket wrote: post #84

I find it a bit absurd when I hear pundits and media types claim that liberal bias doesn't exists in silicon valley tech companies (top to bottom). As somebody who lived in San Francisco for five plus years, I can firmly attest it is more than bias. It's utter disdain, hatred, and prejudice. Just look at how James Damore was handled it should be clear that diversity of thought and individualism is not accepted. It's…

I live in the Bay Area, I grew up in San Francisco, I'm firmly left-leaning in much of my political views.

I upvoted your comment because in my opinion you are right, although overstating it a bit.

The "Left Coast" is biased. There is a lot of tribal knee-jerk reactivity, and there are rabid haters. (Yeah yeah the right has 'em too. There's a reason Tim Chevlier and David Gudeman were both fired. Not my point.)

"Not all lefties" though, okay?

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#102

Post by jayd16 » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:17 AM UTC

davemp wrote: post #90

panarky wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I value political neutrality in the workplace If you're doing meaningful work, you're changing things in the world. Changing things in the world is necessarily and inevitably political. If the workplace appears politically neutral, then one of two things must be true. Either what you're doing doesn't affect the outside world, or there are hidden, unstated political motives at work. I would much prefer my company's…

This is a blatant false dichotomy. You can do meaningful work that will generate value/change that is largely unaffected by the political landscape (within reason). Sure every company would love tax breaks and subsidies but let's be realistic here. > I would much prefer my company's leadership to acknowledge the politics inherent in our work and openly state their motives and point of view. Most do. Companies just te…

Choosing to ignore politics and your ability to change it is itself a political stance.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#103

Post by jidjjejdjd » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:17 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #44

lanestp wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to ask, why a site like Breitbart which has broken a lot of substantive stories would be banned? I’ve seen less credible left leaning sites on HN. I’m hoping there is a really good reason because right now I am concerned.

Because most submissions have been off-topic or otherwise against the site guidelines. Same reason why we'd ban any site.

Utterly bullshit.

HN is part of the liberal groupthink.

Fuck your lies you loser.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#104

Post by nkurz » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:22 AM UTC

zawerf wrote: post #78

dang wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've repeatedly created accounts with a propaganda agenda for Google. You've been doing it for years. We've banned you before, and I've banned this account. Doing this is abusive regardless of what company you're promoting or what your motive is. Would you please stop? HN is for curious humans to exchange thoughts in community. Few things undermine curiosity or community more. We frequently ask users not to accuse…

Off-topic: You're implying that you have an admin UI that lets you see all our other logins? (matched on IP or cookies I guess?) Or did you do a one-off query just for that guy? Since YC applications are attached to HN accounts, do you guys check comments made on alt accounts too? Tracking is useful for moderating but I want to confirm that I can treat my throwaways as throwaways.

I don't know what dang's answer will be, but why would you assume that you are allowed or encouraged to treat your "throwaways as throwaways"?

The written FAQ doesn't exactly encourage them: "Throwaway accounts are ok for sensitive information, but please don't create them routinely. On HN, users should have an identity that others can relate to. "

Separate from dang's moderator tools, you might also note that there are strong claims that textual analysis can reliably associate related accounts even without inside information: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17944348

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#105

Post by jayd16 » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:23 AM UTC

randomposter44 wrote: post #89

Part of my decision for leaving Google was the insane left leaning bias within the company. I never outed myself as a conservative person because I've heard coworkers equate republicans to monsters.

You should separate what Californians think of conservatives from what they think about Republicans. California has a lot of liberterian leaning views but not a lot of respect for the GOP.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#106

Post by fallingfrog » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:23 AM UTC

hotpockets wrote: post #100

tzs wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What media are you talking about? I Googled in Google News for Alexandria ocasio Cortes, and almost all of the coverage I found from mainstream publications was positive.

I checked and results are very different if you spell her name with a z, as she does.

Thanks, corrected

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#107

Post by quotemstr » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:24 AM UTC

panarky wrote: post #55

roenxi wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I value political neutrality in the workplace, so I have a lot of in-principle issues with what is being shown here right from the get-go. I didn't wind the video back to find the exact quote, but we now have publicised evidence of senior leadership at Google who stood up and said 'obviously our values are not the same as a big chunk of Americans'. Clearly a lot of them are specific Hillary supporters, a candidate so…

> I value political neutrality in the workplace If you're doing meaningful work, you're changing things in the world. Changing things in the world is necessarily and inevitably political. If the workplace appears politically neutral, then one of two things must be true. Either what you're doing doesn't affect the outside world, or there are hidden, unstated political motives at work. I would much prefer my company's…

You are part of the problem.

Is antibiotics development changing the world? I should hope so. Do bacteria care about which presidential candidate won? Absolutely not. Most fields, in fact, do not involve the acrimonious political issues of the day.

The idea that "everything is political" is a lame excuse that activists use to hack politics into spaces where it doesn't belong. Even if a field has some tenuous connection to some political principle somewhere, bringing the political aspect to the fore only creates distractions and sows division.

Workplaces can and should be non-political and denying that political neutrality is possible is a particularly annoying strain of political activism.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#108

Post by supernovae » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:25 AM UTC

jiojfdsal3 wrote: post #20

"(00:54:33) An employee asks what Google is going to do about “misinformation” and “fake news” shared by “low-information voters.” Pichai responds by stating that “investments in machine learning and AI” are a “big opportunity” to fix the problem." Anyone find this disturbing? They're trying to use AI to manipulate what users 'should' see?

People need to understand that fake news is an algorithm used against people - whether or not there is tech or AI pushing it. Those who push fake news know how it programs humans.

Having humans interpret what is real/fake is hard to do without bias, cheating, manipulation, favoritism and so much more.

Google knows social signal processing, it could implement ranking/scoring based on sites like PolitiFact and how many major news outlets are covering it, how the bios of the writers/contributors are - what the social graph of their reach is yaddy yaddy yadda.

We have signals for so much - that even humans use to sort/score what is real/what isn't. An AI would be able to do much of this based on social graphs and understanding of sources, targets, links, attributions and so much more.

For me, the scary thing isn't using AI to filter known lies, the scary thing is that we have AI that can do this but don't do anything because we have let the value of fake news be worth more than the value of standing for truth.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#109

Post by codeonfire » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:26 AM UTC

jayd16 wrote: post #95

codeonfire wrote: post #66

Google has definitely jumped the shark with their political leanings. They have been sued for implementing hiring quotas and discriminating on race, sex, and age. You can read the complaint here https://www.scribd.com/embeds/372792998/content While Sergey seems to care about immigrants like himself, lgbtq, and women, he does not give a flying fuck about age discrimination, which is a legally protected class in Americ…

Your argument only makes sense if you think immigrants, lgbtq and women are not every day people.

Once you accept and identify as a label then you are no longer part of the middle. That is one of the main arguments against race quotas and affirmative action. It taints the whole idea of equality and neutrality.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#110

Post by paulddraper » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 3:26 AM UTC

shams93 wrote: post #26

jiojfdsal3 wrote: post #20

"(00:54:33) An employee asks what Google is going to do about “misinformation” and “fake news” shared by “low-information voters.” Pichai responds by stating that “investments in machine learning and AI” are a “big opportunity” to fix the problem." Anyone find this disturbing? They're trying to use AI to manipulate what users 'should' see?

The solution is actually free college education for everyone who wants it, even if not everyone will be able to use it on their job the only solution is massively easier access to quality education that teaches you how to think, not what to think. The lack of critical thinking skills is a real problem but its largely by designs, some in DC think having an economic draft is a good thing and an educated population is n…

Wait...how many years of free education do you need to learn "how to think"?