Google Protest Leader Leaves • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#121

Post by dna_polymerase » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 2:58 PM UTC

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #13

I thought this story had already been reported a month ago. But no, I was wrong, that was the other organizer of the Google Protests, Claire Stapleton: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jun/07/google-wa... So to clarify, both of the female Google employees who lead/organized the protests have now left because they say they faced retaliation. That looks very bad for Google.

Nobody needed the explicit mentioning of their gender, nobody did with Damore.

She probably was given a nice comp package just so she would leave and STFU about internals.

Unions. SV needs unionizing to give employees stronger voices.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#122

Post by darkwater » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 2:58 PM UTC

charliesharding wrote: post #66

Jasper_ wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like she did step 1 (try to change from the inside, first privately, then through employee protest), and now she's doing step 2 in your program. What would you do differently?

I wouldn't have led highly publicized protests against a company that I was accepting paychecks from

So if the company were you are working at, treats you badly, you would resign over going on strike to force a change and then stay at the company, for example?

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#123

Post by dmix » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 2:58 PM UTC

damnyou wrote: post #104

dmix wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just said the company should be open to external critique. Which the employees should be free to engage in their spare time...

Why only in their spare time?

Because you're paid by Google...to work at Google? And other employees shouldn't have to be fed your politics constantly just because they have to show up at work every day just like you do.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#124

Post by wastedhours » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 2:58 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #95

wastedhours wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> until the first competition shows up Their worry is that competition will be started by the people they've not hired and kept on the bench. I'd imagine a large amount of their top-level hiring is driven by taking minds off of the market, more than optimising their output.

This couldn't ever work. Folks that smart want to do things that are real.

It has worked, perhaps not for long, but outweighted sums of cash to play with a nice side project or work on an actual "at scale" thing whilst you vest some shares probably appeals to a lot more smart people than we might imagine.

Salaries are also deductible, so they get the talent in their pool, off the market, adding a small % of value, whilst also being able to offset taxes on record profits.

It's a pretty nice win-win for them.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#125

Post by artificial » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 2:59 PM UTC

damnyou wrote: post #56

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #45

>Whittaker also publicly denounced some Google decisions, including the appointment of Kay Coles James, a conservative think tank leader, to an AI ethics board. Google soon nixed the board. I wonder how much that contributed. No matter the personal political leanings of the employees, most companies try to stay on the good side of both sides of the political aisle. When the president of Heritage Foundation (which is…

[flagged]

This is an amazing comment.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#126

Post by user17843 » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 2:59 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #70

anonuser123456 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not clear why you needed to put 'female' in your statement. Are you implying Google's actions are a result of their gender?

They organized the woman's walkout, so it seems relevant to mention that they were women facing retaliation for protesting the treatment of women.

Imho it isn't relevant. The implication of OP is that the fact that they are female paints Google in a bad light, not that they were protest leaders.

Corporations do not care about gender, it's all about power and control, and they do not care about the gender of those who they have to dismantle to keep it.

The Canadian Documentary "The Corporation" is a good example of how corporations behave: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y888wVY5hzw

Dividing Media narratives help to keep people from realizing who's their common enemy.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#127

Post by SiempreViernes » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 2:59 PM UTC

peteey wrote: post #99

charliesharding wrote: post #47

I don't really understand why it's surprising to anyone that they would face "internal retaliation" after exposing their employer as evil and boycott worthy to the entire world. By publicizing it to the degree that they did and attaching their name to it, they were putting their interests over the company. If my company started doing business practices that I didn't approve of, I would try my hardest to change the di…

I believe the strong term "evil" is only used because Google's motto is "don't be evil". Not everyone has the freedom to instantly change jobs. The world might be a better place if employees had the right to whistle blow without being threatened with homelessness or fleeing to Russia. Unions striking and protesting against their companies for better wages seems acceptable. Why is protesting for ethical reasons withou…

Didn't they drop that motto like 3 years ago?

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#128

Post by stonogo » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 3:00 PM UTC

gtfratteus wrote: post #12

As a googler, I say good. People like her have made going to work exhausting. Leave your politics at home and let me do my job in peace.

I'd agree with you, if your employer wasn't spending literally the most money in tech on lobbying in DC. How much money has to be involved before it's ok for your job to get political?

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#129

Post by Merrill » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 3:00 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #93

charliesharding wrote: post #47

I don't really understand why it's surprising to anyone that they would face "internal retaliation" after exposing their employer as evil and boycott worthy to the entire world. By publicizing it to the degree that they did and attaching their name to it, they were putting their interests over the company. If my company started doing business practices that I didn't approve of, I would try my hardest to change the di…

It's literally illegal. There are laws against retaliation against whistleblowers. That is why it is surprising. > I don't understand the desire to stay with a company and accept paychecks while simultaneously publicly denouncing and leading protests against them. Because you don't want to see the thing you worked so hard to build misused to build killer robots and "war minds"? Seems reasonable to me. Google's got a…

What did she do that is protected under the various whistleblower protection laws? https://www.whistleblowers.gov/sites/wb/files/2019-06/whistl...

I don't think that objecting to your company's AI work for DoD or plans to comply with Chinese internet search regulations fall under any of them.

What did the "Open Research Group" at Google actually build?

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#130

Post by KUcxrAVrtI » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 3:00 PM UTC

peteey wrote: post #99

charliesharding wrote: post #47

I don't really understand why it's surprising to anyone that they would face "internal retaliation" after exposing their employer as evil and boycott worthy to the entire world. By publicizing it to the degree that they did and attaching their name to it, they were putting their interests over the company. If my company started doing business practices that I didn't approve of, I would try my hardest to change the di…

I believe the strong term "evil" is only used because Google's motto is "don't be evil". Not everyone has the freedom to instantly change jobs. The world might be a better place if employees had the right to whistle blow without being threatened with homelessness or fleeing to Russia. Unions striking and protesting against their companies for better wages seems acceptable. Why is protesting for ethical reasons withou…

>Unions striking and protesting against their companies for better wages seems acceptable. Why is protesting for ethical reasons without quitting faux pas?

Because unions embrace the violence inherent in the system, at least the good ones. This is peak wokeness, where stuck up women have found out that 'equality' in the workplace only extends to when you cost your employer money.

That anyone is surprised by this shows a naivete that borders on idiocy.