431–440 of 888 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You deserve massive credit for striking a blow against this madness. A great example of how working people have more power than they think if they're willing to risk dollars and cents for matters of right and wrong. I say that fully realizing that not everyone is in the financial position where they can risk a fight with their employer. You can't expect everyone to be Ghandi.
"You can't expect everyone to be Ghandi.". You meant Gandhi.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OTOH, AMZN and MSFT have never even hesitated to accommodate the Chinese govt's demands. Which other companies do you think would be more ethically conscious than GOOG in these circumstances? (I don't work there.)
Dont forget AAPL! (who hesitated, but ended up capitulating on the iCloud front). I think the moral of the story here is that it's better to sell out from day 1 than to be seen as a hypocrite.
Source? I was not aware there was any hesitation or even disagreement from Apple's side. Is there an Apple statement saying they disagree w/ Chinese government requests similar to the statements saying they disagree w/ US government requests? In their absence, is it safe to assume they agree since they have shown that when they disagree they make public statements?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> People who work at Google are choosing to aid in the suppression of human freedom. The fact that there's a large number of employees who signed this document provides great evidence to contradict this claim. It's kind of a blanket statement - I'm sure a bunch of the folks here on HN work at Google and are trying to do exactly the opposite. Heck, some of the people who signed off on this document could be HN'ers! Y…
I would also like to add that companies encouraging freedom of speech internally to a level that makes such protests possible are exceedingly rare. In most companies employees have no freedom of speech unless unionized and not even then. And protesting against projects based on moral principles publicly is a sure way to get you fired.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. But this many Google employees acting collectively, including some very senior and long-tenured Googlers, meet that additional condition. (Disclosure: having worked at Google I know some names on that list personally, and respect them greatly. I haven't worked at Google since early 2015.)
But this was 139 out of 88K employees [1]. Doesn't seem like that many? How do we interpret the other 87K+? [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/273744/number-of-full-ti...
And if the employees placed thier values over profits, why are they still there? I wonder if they are going to refuse their stock based compensation?
I think, what these employees don't realize is: Even when a company places values over profits, it is still in an attempt to maximize profits over the long term. By placing values above profits, it increases it's goodwill with customers thus increasing it's moat and it's retention, as well as it's employee retention. This strategy made sense in the early days. Not anymore. As Google's position becomes increasingly st…
As a society which (hopefully) would like to have some sort of moral compass, how do we prevent large companies from seeking profit even at the expense of our freedoms/health/planet? It seems to me that if the punishment for unethical behavior is economically "less" than the costs or potential losses associated with acting in a good, ethical way, companies will continue to do what we're seeing them do now. My intuition is that capitalism (in its current Western incarnation) can't function without some strict controls to protect what our societies value most.
Or do we simply value profit over everything else? If so, that's kind of depressing, but I get the sense that most people don't think this way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think the user you are responding intends his comment to be putting forward some watertight argument. It sounds light-hearted to me. It's puzzling to me that you'd pick on this one particular comment to produce a detailed, five-point rebuttal in a thread like this one where there are so many other more important targets to go after.
I think I understand where you're coming from. Here's my motivation - I think there are actually some pretty scary problems out there. However, I think it is possible to talk about an important issue in a way so emotional that it actually backfires and creates a negative impression of those who care about an issue. For example, Alex Jones is right to lament the pesticide atrazine that changes frogs sexes [1], but by…
And if the employees placed thier values over profits, why are they still there? I wonder if they are going to refuse their stock based compensation?
I think, what these employees don't realize is: Even when a company places values over profits, it is still in an attempt to maximize profits over the long term. By placing values above profits, it increases it's goodwill with customers thus increasing it's moat and it's retention, as well as it's employee retention. This strategy made sense in the early days. Not anymore. As Google's position becomes increasingly st…
This might sound weird but some people (and companies) don't subscribe to the notion that money is the only thing that matters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Negotiations like these aren't won by convincing the other side through making more points via logic or evidence. You must help decision makers to realize that their choice is not win-win, that hidden costs, unwanted consequences, or just plain bad publicity await. Almost always, bureaucrat decisions are driven more by fear of failure than prospect of success. As a naysayer, your goal is mostly to spread FUD and take…
>As a naysayer, your goal is mostly to spread FUD and take the shine off their bauble. WOW. Yes, that must be it. I can't possibly have an opinion about the matter that doesn't align with yours because surely you are right! The only logical option here is I am spreading fear uncertainty and doubt - because I'm Google and this directly impacts me. Anyone who disagrees must be silenced because they are wrong! EDIT: Nop…
Not that you are a "naysayer" and are trying to spread fear by commenting on this website.