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

We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 888 posts

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#631

Post by gurkendoktor »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #515
Puer wrote: post #38

I considered working at Google last year after a recruiter reached out to me, but their decision to backtrack on their promise in China changed my mind. I do not morally condemn anyone who works at Google. I have many good friends that are both bright engineers and undeniably good people that work there. I just feel that as someone who's family is Taiwanese, I cannot in good consciousness support the company. I let t…

I'm fairly anti-China and loved Taiwan, can't wait to go back, loved it, loved the Taiwanese people. Good for you on making a decision like that. But... Just so long as you know that someone did take your job there. And they're almost certainly happy to do anything asked. That's something I think many idealistic users here aren't understanding.

> someone did take your job there. And they're almost certainly happy to do anything asked.

If talented engineers were that easy to find, Google wouldn't have participated in illegal wage-fixing; and that's without selecting for engineers that want to support an authoritarian regime. Statistically speaking, every rejection drives up the price. To wield even more power, we'd need to form some kind of industry-wide union.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#632

Post by advisedwang »

kirvyteo wrote: post #628

Has anyone thought about the effects of NOT having google search product and services in China? I read a lot of negativity about how it is ruining the culture and personal beliefs about freedom. Has anyone balanced it with what is the upside to users (not money for Google)?

IMHO there isn't much effect of Google not being in China. Baidu works for Chinese uses. I've seen an argument that Google would be a better, freer experience, but Dragonfly shows that wouldn't really be the case.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#633

Post by sdenton4 »

tomschlick wrote: post #558
sdenton4 wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's exactly the riot cop problem. On the cop side, the more armor you have, the less you see and the more hostile the world /seems/; this increases the chance of using force instead of diplomacy in any given situation. On the civilian side, you get to feel like you live in a goddamned war zone, with the police as combatants. It's not a nice feeling. My own approach is to treat cops as large, gun-wielding wild animal…

> this increases the chance of using force instead of diplomacy in any given situation. I'm not sure diplomacy works when someone is actively shooting at you or other people. If people are rioting (actually rioting, not protesting) then I honestly don't care how the presence of a MRAP makes them feel. It's the police's job to stop the riot and they need tools to do that. > I'm not going to call the cops for anything…

> I'm not sure diplomacy works when someone is actively shooting at you or other people.

Most of the time, police aren't being shot at. And they tend to react to peaceful protest exactly as if it were a riot. This is well documented.

Here's an example I was present for: Peaceful protest at the university. Cops in riot gear show up, fly around in helicopters, etc. One of the cops pushes/bumps a girl who then bounces into another cop, who slams her against the hood of cop car, arrests her, charges her with assault, and tries to get her expelled from the university. (The same department, six months later, gave us this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AdDLhPwpp4 )

> I'm glad you're not the majority. Because the world would be pretty shitty if all the police responded to was physical assaults and above.

If that's not the world you like, let's fix the police!

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#634

Post by vowelless »

partiallypro wrote: post #453

I find the Google/Chinese search engine troubling, but I do think people are playing this up to be a lot more than it should be. I think one fact is that Google is in an area and recruits people that are hyper liberal individuals. For example: not wanting to work with the U.S. military on projects, having AI use gender neutral writing, random PC things, little diversity in political thought etc. I don't think Google…

> I don't think Google has so much changed as their employees have changed.

This is exactly it. A lot of people who genuinely loved technology, programming, were nerdy, etc long left the company. Could just be an arrogant of becoming big, and selecting for physical attribute diversity.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#635

Post by dcposch »

I'm glad this exists, but a bit disappointed that I don't see a single name I recognize.

Brad Fitzpatrick, Rob Pike, Ken Thompson, Jeff Dean, Sanjay, etc etc plus a lot of less famous people I know who work there. None of them have signed this open letter.

--

I recommend the author org add a call to action. There should be an easy way for other Google employees to add their name to the list!

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#636

Post by tracker1 »

kiliantics wrote: post #600
shareometry wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 believe this is key. If more folks at more organizations were brave like this and willing to take the risk, a good chunk of the problems our civilization is facing might be greatly improved.

Worker's unions helped win the majority of our rights in modern democracies. I wish this fact was more widely appreciated.

Unions are rarely formed unless conditions are particularly bad. One upon a time in this country, the national guard with machine guns might have been called out to clear a strike/protest. Most people are very happy being ignorant of their surroundings or influence of.

The most I've ever done is threaten to quit if a project for the RIAA was accepted by my employer when I was invited into the pre-pitch meeting. It just depends on a specific case.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#637

Post by maccam94 »

yholio wrote: post #620
bduerst wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you still work for Amazon? Microsoft? Apple? Facebook? Because they are actually in China and give concessions to the government.

The idea that a foreign corporation has a duty to break Chinese law with regards to web filtering is very problematic, if that's what you mean by "give concessions to the government". How far should such a corporation go with breaking the law, is tax evasion against the Chinese state morally acceptable, since those taxes might be used for oppression? We should recognize here a very thin line between respecting the Ch…

Are there any legal restrictions on what the Chinese government can ask websites to censor? I am not aware of any, so I don't see where there would be an opportunity to protest.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#638

Post by vowelless »

throwawaysea wrote: post #604
beams_of_light wrote: post #490

If you think that denying information to Chinese people because their Orwellian government demands it is the same as the stone you use to grind your obviously conservative axe on, you may need to pause and think a bit more on it.

Labeling someone's thoughtful arguments ('conservative') serves only to invalidate those arguments via an appeal to emotion or an association fallacy.

It’s a slur and I am surprised it wasn’t taken down. Not different from “you liberals” kind of language.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#639

Post by komali2 »

briandear wrote: post #593
komali2 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But, who will be deciding what is considered as ultra-nationalist? Presumably legislatures, that are elected? I'm not sure how it works over there. >Some liberal government that might be overly corrupt and is about to lose the election could just label their political opponents as modern day Nazis and have them be censored on Google search. Well, that's happening in America right now, the executive branch is labelin…

36% of Democrats polled support open borders: http://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Fina... Democrat Rep Eric Swalwell advocates for a complete gun ban: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/this-democratic-c... So, your claim that it’s factually incorrect, is incorrect.

If I said to you, "Americans do not believe in evolution," by your logic, I am correct. This is because 30% of Americans do not believe in evolution: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-ev...

How about I said to you that all men are descendants of Genghis Khan? Well, 1 in 200 are, and Eric Swalwell is 1 of the 198 Democrat representatives (though that percentage gets much lower if we lump in total Democrats in elected office...) http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/08/1-in-200-men-...

My claim that the president's factually incorrect statements, are factually incorrect, remain unchallenged in any rhetorically effective way, though I invite you to try again if you please.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#640

Post by ABCLAW »

tomschlick wrote: post #558
sdenton4 wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's exactly the riot cop problem. On the cop side, the more armor you have, the less you see and the more hostile the world /seems/; this increases the chance of using force instead of diplomacy in any given situation. On the civilian side, you get to feel like you live in a goddamned war zone, with the police as combatants. It's not a nice feeling. My own approach is to treat cops as large, gun-wielding wild animal…

> this increases the chance of using force instead of diplomacy in any given situation. I'm not sure diplomacy works when someone is actively shooting at you or other people. If people are rioting (actually rioting, not protesting) then I honestly don't care how the presence of a MRAP makes them feel. It's the police's job to stop the riot and they need tools to do that. > I'm not going to call the cops for anything…

>I'm not sure diplomacy works when someone is actively shooting at you or other people.

I mean, not only is it required by law, as per Graham v. Connor, but the current trend in national standards for dealing with riots is trending towards implementing de-escalation techniques and other measures designed to protect the sanctity of life rather than using escalating violence to disperse the crowd.

Post reply on HN