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

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

breitbart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 486 posts

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

#191

Post by gizmo686 »

rdtsc wrote: post #186
dmitrygr wrote: post #93

I have no comment on the content of this, since I don't want to get fired for saying anything remotely close to what I think. I am kind of curious how this video was obtained however.

It is interesting that you've been downvoted (as your post is gray when I saw it), just for questioning that you might face repercussions for adding a comment. Which kind of proves your point I suppose.

All it proves is that comments that contribute nothing get downvoted. Especially when they explicitly draw attention to the fact that they are not contributing.

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

#192

Post by rdtsc »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #161

Wow, they are still using Dory. That is the question collecting software that Taliver Heath wrote. It was a pretty brilliant idea, people submit questions and other people vote the questions up (or down) and top ranked questions get selected automatically. Its interesting to think about Brietbart putting this out there as some 'evil' thing, given what their all hands meeting would have looked like if the election had…

> Its interesting to think about Brietbart putting this out there as some 'evil' thing,

Never worked at Google, but as they say it went about as I would have expected based on my outside perspective. Or at least I wasn't stunned by anything in particular...

Overall I think what people dislike is the disconnect between the PR message of "all opinions are welcome / we are open / neutral" vs the reality of them being fairly uniform in political affiliation. I think they might do better to just own it and stop pretending. Say something like "yeah we are biased and proud of it and we stand firm behind these values etc."

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

#193

Post by fzeroracer »

axlprose wrote: post #188
fzeroracer wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the debate works. We're not talking about two rational individuals forming a debate in good faith where they're able to change each other's opinion. We're talking about people latching themselves to an anti-empirical evidence, anti-scientific approach to things such as climate change or vaccinations. The debate becomes political when there's enough people and pol…

> Yet when we talk about an environment needing to be politically neutral, then their opinion must be treated with equal weight. No, that is absolutely not how science works. There's a reason why scientists undergo a peer review process to publish papers, and why journals have an "impact factor" score: it's because they're not all equal, and it takes an incredibly long time to become established as credible inside of…

This topic had never been about ensuring political neutrality in sciences and the scientific process but rather political neutrality in the layman's workplace. You're attempting to drag this argument to somewhere it's not.

And even then to counter your opinion: Who do you think helps fund and provides resources for said scientific research? This is part of the claims made by laymen that connects politics to the scientific process.

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

#194

Post by pen2l »

aikinai wrote: post #146
skybrian wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add some context: remember that Google has employees who felt personally threatened by election results (immigrants and transgender employees). Nobody knew what Trump would do. The worst fears turned out to be overblown, but it was hard to make the case for not worrying at the time. Telling people they had nothing to worry about would have simply been offensive. There are few election results that employees would…

Seems everyone's down-voting you, but considering the huge number of immigrants and international employees at Google, it'd be crazy to expect a Trump win to be treated neutrally when the foundation of his platform was antagonism of immigrants and other countries. And it wasn't completely overblown, there were many Googlers trapped inside or outside the US immediately after Trump took power; one, for example, had no…

I work in a research hospital, I went through a lot of similar meetings, and a lot of emails talking about where to get help if you're feeling down.

I remember thinking hey this is a bit over-blown... but then I talked to this Iranian guy on my floor: he was extremely shocked and depressed. He had a situation on his hands -- he wanted his wife to come to America, but was afraid that wouldn't be possible and he was entertaining the idea of just quitting and returning to Iran.

Surely at Google, where a lot of immigrants work, they went through similar experiences.

So I totally am okay with what I see in the video -- I think it was the right move by GOOG executives to take that position, if only for the employees.

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

#195

Post by rdtsc »

gizmo686 wrote: post #191
rdtsc wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is interesting that you've been downvoted (as your post is gray when I saw it), just for questioning that you might face repercussions for adding a comment. Which kind of proves your point I suppose.

All it proves is that comments that contribute nothing get downvoted. Especially when they explicitly draw attention to the fact that they are not contributing.

Hmm I thought it nicely contributed a point that then was proved as well. Here is someone who supposedly works at Google which encourages "to bring your whole self to work" and where people are "supporting and sharing in open dialog" (paraphrasing from the video) afraid to make a comment on the video on a "hacker" news forum for fear of retaliation.

This is not even a Google owned platform just some external forum. So they think someone will scour the web, find their comment, take down their name, head over to Google's HR / thought-police dept., report them and they'd face retaliation. Seems on point with discussion at hand to me.

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

#196

Post by mc32 »

geofft wrote: post #189
ChuckMcM wrote: post #161

Wow, they are still using Dory. That is the question collecting software that Taliver Heath wrote. It was a pretty brilliant idea, people submit questions and other people vote the questions up (or down) and top ranked questions get selected automatically. Its interesting to think about Brietbart putting this out there as some 'evil' thing, given what their all hands meeting would have looked like if the election had…

> But from a tech perspective its always destabilizing to endorse a political ideology just like it is destabilizing to endorse a religious ideology in what is a collective for economic output. Is it destabilizing at all? The British Empire, one of the world's most economically successful projects, had its own religious ideology. The US has a "Protestant work ethic." When have we historically seen the adoption of rel…

Didn't catholics in britain have a hard time og it for some period? Didn't that contribute to internal instability? Or am i misrecalling history lessons?

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

#197

Post by java_script »

simula67 wrote: post #77
fallingfrog wrote: post #60

Wait, you mean there's bias in our media? All joking aside- I remember watching ed Snowden go from being a "whistleblower" to a "leaker" in the space of 8 hours. I watched Alexandria ocasio Cortez go from a bold new voice to being portrayed as a know-nothing (in a pretty sexist way) in about 6 hours. I remember how all the media were creaming themselves with excitement over the wmd's they were going to find in Iraq.…

> Alexandria ocasio Cortes go from a bold new voice to being portrayed as a know-nothing (in a pretty sexist way) in about 6 hours Are you kidding ? She said US military was given $700 billion increase that they didn't ask for. She said that US unemployment is low becuase everyone has two jobs. She said ICE has to detain 34,000 people every night by law. http://www.politifact.com/personalities/alexandria-ocasio-co...…

Wow so her ICE quote would've been 100% correct if not for the word "required" (evidenced by what Politifact ends up admitting in the body of the article).

Is there a rating worse than "Pants On Fire" we could brand this liar with?

(I don't know about sexist but the media sure is dumb and pedantic as shit.)

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

#198

Post by smsm42 »

supernovae wrote: post #98
simula67 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Alexandria ocasio Cortes go from a bold new voice to being portrayed as a know-nothing (in a pretty sexist way) in about 6 hours Are you kidding ? She said US military was given $700 billion increase that they didn't ask for. She said that US unemployment is low becuase everyone has two jobs. She said ICE has to detain 34,000 people every night by law. http://www.politifact.com/personalities/alexandria-ocasio-co...…

She was criticized for being female regardless of her misconceptions on military spending and how many jobs people have. A huge chunk of the world doesn't give equal forgiving or demands of females as they do males - they demand more and forgive less. Ever looked at PolitiFact for just about every other politician? Just look at Serena Williams.. she blabbed and it may be the end of her career (or a lingering black ey…

> She was criticized for being female

I've read a lot of critique of O-C but never "for being female". Could you quote some critique like that so that it would be clear what do you mean? I honestly absolutely can't even imagine how such thing would look like: "We know O-C is female and thus unfit to hold an elective office..." or what? Name the most hostile press outlet to O-C outside wacko forums and 4chan and it would never dare to print something like that. Sure, there are sexists here and there, but openly and publicly criticizing a major political figure "for being female"? It's just rhetorical suicide. You must mean something else, but what?

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

#199

Post by Domenic_S »

pen2l wrote: post #194
aikinai wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems everyone's down-voting you, but considering the huge number of immigrants and international employees at Google, it'd be crazy to expect a Trump win to be treated neutrally when the foundation of his platform was antagonism of immigrants and other countries. And it wasn't completely overblown, there were many Googlers trapped inside or outside the US immediately after Trump took power; one, for example, had no…

I work in a research hospital, I went through a lot of similar meetings, and a lot of emails talking about where to get help if you're feeling down. I remember thinking hey this is a bit over-blown... but then I talked to this Iranian guy on my floor: he was extremely shocked and depressed. He had a situation on his hands -- he wanted his wife to come to America, but was afraid that wouldn't be possible and he was en…

What happened with your friend's wife? Did she come over?

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

#200

Post by smsm42 »

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?

Yes. They think they can figure out what we should see (and how we should vote, obviously) and their mission, as good people, is helping us to get there. Kicking and screaming, if needed, it's all for our own good at the end. Yes, it is concerning. That's why there should be many search engines, and that's why everybody should support projects like DuckDuckGo. Having one corporation - with however noblest intentions they see themselves - solely controlling information input of billions is not healthy, no matter what your politics is.
Post reply on HN