We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly • Hacker News Board

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#861

Post by amanaplanacanal » Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 6:02 PM UTC

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.

Picking some minority view and ascribing it to all of your political opponents seems to be a very popular tactic nowadays, on all sides of the political spectrum. All it does is raise the level of hateful rhetoric, and does nothing to actually help people discuss the actual issues. Because of flaws in the way our minds work, it continues to work, and people continue to use it.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#862

Post by _Tev » Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 6:18 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #824

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #808

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Declining to work with paid murderers is not a partisan position. Calling military paid murderers is definitely a partisan thing. What else do you propose? Someone has to do the dirty work to keep the citizens safe. > Opposing sexism is not a partisan position. Are you talking about harassment cases. Have you been to Google or talked about it to a Googler? It generally is swift and works without any proof. What the…

> Calling military paid murderers is definitely a partisan thing. Support your claim, unless you think that using objectively true statements marks one as a non-conservative, which is blatantly silly.

There are many partisan "objectively true" statements, you "silly".

"immigrants are taking away jobs from our people"

"Israelis are murdering Palestine children"

"Palestines are murdering Israeli children"

"Donald Trump is a liar"

"Hillary Clinton is a liar"

Maybe not 100% "partisan", but I hope you get why I don't consider your "argument" persuasive.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#863

Post by slackfan » Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 6:30 PM UTC

You called us paranoid whacos when we blew the whistle on google and other tech companies becoming too big.

You made this bed. Now damn well lie in it, and think of England.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#864

Post by Lkjhmnbv » Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 6:35 PM UTC

shareometry wrote: post #259

alangibson wrote: post #97

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.

> 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.

Corruption is a bottom up process.

It only works if everyone goes along.

Be brave and stand up for yourself, what do you have to lose?

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#865

Post by Consultant32452 » Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 7:28 PM UTC

fouc wrote: post #756

Consultant32452 wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dunbar's Number, I believe, gives some insight. Basically, humans can only maintain about 150 relationships. As organizations grow personal relationships are replaced with rules and structures as a matter of necessity.

Agreed. I suppose sociopaths can get away with more when there's so many people that the relationship/connections between everyone are weaker on average.

I used to think the same way, but then I came to a different understanding of sociopathy as an evolutionary adaptation. Those sociopaths are important and useful. The video below has a little deeper explanation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33Ftipn4fyI

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#866

Post by idontpost » Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 11:59 PM UTC

nimbius wrote: post #33

Pretty bold. A lot of people are saying this wont work, but speaking from my own experience, you'd be surprised what companies are amicable to when it comes to business. Im an engine mechanic by trade, and our shops handle bids for cash strapped local governments that outsource their motor pool maintenance. We do things like fire trucks and police cars, but we were working on a new regional idea as a "service center"…

You are the heroes we need.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#867

Post by idontpost » Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 12:02 AM UTC

choot wrote: post #656

nimbius wrote: post #33

Pretty bold. A lot of people are saying this wont work, but speaking from my own experience, you'd be surprised what companies are amicable to when it comes to business. Im an engine mechanic by trade, and our shops handle bids for cash strapped local governments that outsource their motor pool maintenance. We do things like fire trucks and police cars, but we were working on a new regional idea as a "service center"…

Wow! So basically, someone managed to risk police offier lives with their ill thought out plan and people on HN are applauding them? What should a police crew use against a criminal equipped with high caliber armor piercing guns?

Gun control legislation.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#868

Post by partiallypro » Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 12:16 AM UTC

ionised wrote: post #847

partiallypro wrote: post #846

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone that worked to get someone asylum from Afghanistan, there are many many many citizens in Afghanistan that long to have the US back with a significant presence. It's not easy sleeping when a car bomb just went off outside your house and it was targeted at you for not being a religious hardliner.. The US isn't always about keeping its own citizens safe, it often steps in when there is genocide, etc.

> there are many many many citizens in Afghanistan that long to have the US back with a significant presence Which would be true of any military force that invaded, slaughtered hundreds of thousands and then pulled out leaving a power vacuum. The US didn't go into Afghanistan to save people from car bombs. If the US has somehow done you a favour as a result of its wars of aggression, it's a complete coincidence. > It…

The US went in because it facilitated terrorism and led to the direct death of 3000 Americans. The rise of religious extremism was well before the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. Am I for US intervention as "world police," absolutely not. I don't agree with our presence in Iraq, but there is certainly a point where US presence is warranted and needed. Anything else is just a naive world view. I was like that when I was in my early 20s, then I grew up and realized how complex the world really is.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#869

Post by tomlock » Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 12:56 AM UTC

pravinva wrote: post #827

tomlock wrote: post #823

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm assuming that you don't think risking making no money is enough to entitle a founder to their entire employees wage. How much does it entitle them to?

The successful entrepreneur makes his money by capital gains in the share or venture capital markets and not by extracting it from his employees. Employees compete with each other for salaries. Employer competes with other employers for both a)market share b) hiring employees -bidding up their prices. By comparing gains from entrepreneurship with regular salaries, you are comparing a stock variable with a flow variab…

> The successful entrepreneur makes his money by capital gains in the share or venture capital markets and not by extracting it from his employees.

Incorrect, that value is only sustained and increased by the efforts of company workers.

> Employer competes with other employers for both a)market share b) hiring employees -bidding up their prices.

Incorrect. Companies that don't have significant oversight in the form of government regulation or strong unions tend to collude to keep salaries low - which is exactly what has happened in the valley, and has meant that these companies have gigantic cash reserves that they aren't leveraging to hire the best talent.

> By comparing gains from entrepreneurship with regular salaries, you are comparing a stock variable with a flow variable.

No, I'm merely saying that the differences and risks suffered by investors and founders versus regular salaried employees are not a justification for the sometimes ridiculous difference between the compensation of the two.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#870

Post by ineedasername » Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 2:29 AM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #753

ineedasername wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you get and pay for the infrastructure of this direct democracy without resources paid for by dues? How do you get the minority in any vote to go along with the result when there isn't any common binding agreement such as a contract that enforces majority rule?

> How do you get and pay for the infrastructure of this direct democracy without resources paid for by dues? The technology needed to let people submit proposals and let other people vote on them is on the level what individuals do over a weekend as adjunct to a side project. > How do you get the minority in any vote to go along with the result when there isn't any common binding agreement such as a contract that enf…

The technology to submit and receive votes on proposals is only trivial until you think about the details, especially those required for security and authentication.

And your picture of humam behavior is all too rose-colored glasses if it's having all members of a minority vote just go along out of solidarity when it's non-binding. I've seen unions vote on issues, and it's often contentious with emotions running high on all sides. If the losing side in any of those could have just said "nope" to accepting the result, they would have. Sometimes they try to anyway.