Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone is replaceable.
Of course but there are significant costs for replacement.
Not significant enough to realistically hurt Google though
We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
521–530 of 888 posts
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate many things about what the US is becoming--or has always been--but it does have some of the strongest free-speech rights in the world (though less so in recent decades as other nations catch up), and the world's highest public support for freedom of speech. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/freedom-of-speech-cou...
The Trump administration has stumbled backwards very publicly with regard to the people that the framers intended for free speech rights to protect: journalists. From overt anti-journalist rhetoric[1], to possible collusion in the murder of US national Jamal Khashoggi[2], a journalist critical of the Saudi regime. "Free speech" has been co-opted so effectively by the far-right movement that the same people who wave i…
> possible collusion in the murder of US national Jamal Khashoggi
Not central to the point, but Kashoggi was not a US national. He was a US-resident Saudi citizen. It's possible to be a US national but not a citizen, but Kashoggi wasn't one: https://www.immihelp.com/immigration/us-national.html
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#523I'm not going to hold my breath.
There's too much money to be made, and too many "journalists" willing to write puff pieces for Google and provide cover for this activity.
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#524Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Besides who are we to decide for the Chinese what is best for them? You do realize that the "people" do not have a voice in China right? It is not a democracy...
The Chinese appear to think, collectively, that authoritarianism is better than democracy. They could revolt. The Chinese military is under funded with failing equipment, though they are trying to improve in areas. The sheer size of their military makes it difficult to have common weapons and gear available. 100 million citizens throwing themselves against that machine, would wear it down quickly. They don't do this.…
I think your notion here is naive. Assuming a majority of people in China is fine with the way the government runs, does not negate the fact that many people are not. In a country of a billion people, we are speaking of millions of people. For this, as a first step, you just need to look at minorities like Uighurs, Tibetians, Mongolians. It does not end there.
Also, you cannot use the word "choice" when no options were ever given. A large chunk of people can be unhappy with how the government operates while still not marching the streets. The world is not binary. People living in China also know that the government went to extreme lengths when it came to ending protests in the past: shooting at their own citizens.
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#525Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good for you, for real. It takes a lot sometimes to stand up against something that a lot of other people would jump for the chance to do. While I think the average developer has a more negative opinion of Google these days, for years they have been considered one of the best places to work in the world. I know if I told my parents, for instance, I had done what you did, they probably would've called me an idiot. :P…
> Good for you, for real. It takes a lot sometimes to stand up against something that a lot of other people would jump for the chance to do. While it is a nice enough gesture, let's not kid ourselves that this was some difficult selfless act on the part of the OP. Apologies to the OP if I have misinterpreted their earlier post but: > I considered working at Google last year after a recruiter reached out to me This st…
>eventually a recruiter for a FAANG style company is going to spam you with an email.
This. I have said 'no, thanks' to FAANG in the last 3 months because my life is in a bit of a flux right now. It was a bit more than a simple 'no, thanks' in case of Facebook, but that's a story for another thread :)
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#526Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I’d like to try and agree... I think you may be missing a sense of scale and the reality of just how replaceable people are... even magically-gifted google employees.
Replacing people might be easy, but it's never cheap - even in industries with an abundance of candidates. The real issue with having your work-force leave is three-fold. First, you lose all the accumulated knowledge of your team. Second, you lose the cohesiveness of your team. Thirdly, you have to _pay to get a new team_. All of these things conspire to make all but the lowliest of jobs (think Target Associate) much…
I don't know man, I see so many companies voluntarily do this aftering being bought by PE -- only to flip the same company for 5 to 6x 3 to 5 years later.
I think it is a engineer's dream to think they can't be replaced. But they can, and the probs created by it simply don't matter.
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#527How google is different to the Chinese government? it also has access to all our information and it does block people they don't like like Alex Jones. So I don't understand what this posturing is all about
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#528Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a buzz word in marketing. In strategy, there are 2 types of innovation Incremental and Disruptive Both types give organizations increased power over territory. People are the blood of an organization. Ethics and people determine culture which determines goals. Innovation is the strategic foothold for keeping an organization alive as it travels into the future. EDIT: I want to add that all organizations (even non…
It's a buzzword in marketing, and it's a buzzword in corporate strategy. Or "soundbite", if you wish. It's not as if the latter was a hard science. > Incremental and Disruptive I'm guessing you're taking this from a particular philosophy, perhaps a particular known book. Even if the word makes sense in there, it's not necessarily how other people are using it. For comparison, if you look at the first paragraph of Wik…
Here's a book to introduce you to the domain
"The Psychology of Innovation in Organizations"
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's something you've overlooked: companies are ultimately run by humans. Humans who make decisions at all levels of the hierarchy, in order to further their own personal priorities, even if it dramatically conflicts with the shareholders' goals of maximizing profits. In some cases, the personal priorities can be personal advancement. We see this all the time when managers hire/promote their friends, sexually hara…
Shareholders can do more than just fire the management team, they can set meaningful objectives and tie management compensation to reaching them.
We need to disempower shareholders.
Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can confirm your confirm is fabricated from thin air. The difference would be: you might not know you are lying while I do. We are doing the same thing, confirm something not conformable. Theoretically that's lying
You don't know he's lying, you just assume it because he didn't cite a source. It's not the first time I've heard people make his claim, so it might not be baseless.
Let's leave the topic of Google issue.
Did you see my 2nd sentence which implied I was lying? Which almost means making a baseless claim?
You assumed that I assume he was lying only because he didn't cite source. That assumption is not correct.
Now I can tell you that I originally had 3rd sentence: the 2nd sentence is a lie. I do have solid evidence that he was lying (unintentionally I believe) but it's too difficult to present the evidence.