Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#511

Post by krapp » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:23 PM UTC

moresocialism wrote: post #4

The problem is that what constitutes politics? Guns shouldn't be political, who you have sex with shouldn't be political...but in our current climate, they are both considered political. ..and no debating? Most people at Google are shades of left. It sounds like they are just trying to drown out dissenting views once again.

Guns are political (in the US at least) because the Second Amendment gives them special status as being necessary for the defense of a free state, and thanks to the NRA, that status is firmly entrenched as part of right-wing partisan identity. Sex is political because of Christianity and its influence leading to the criminalization of LGBTQ people and behavior. Neither is a symptom of our current political climate, they've both been deeply political for centuries.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#512

Post by Nullabillity » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:24 PM UTC

cameronbrown wrote: post #407

TheGRS wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, every meaningful change in society has come to light because everyone calmed down enough.

How is meaningful change in society related to shipping Google Drive features? Time and a place. Politics has no nuance or filter anymore. It's all the time on full blast, forever. I hate it.

Plenty of Google Drive features are political. For example, allowing people to monitor who has read a document. Or deciding what the default permission set should be for new files. Or whether or not the files should be encrypted at rest. Or whether the Drive client should download and sync everything, or download stuff on demand. Etc, etc.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#513

Post by Consultant32452 » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:24 PM UTC

jshowa3 wrote: post #498

malvosenior wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The discourse around the James Damore memo, as divisive as it was, felt like it still led to a broader understanding of the negative perspectives women in tech had to deal with constantly. Damore was fired for his contributions to this "conversation". Hardly just. > particularly the ones who felt it was worth staying and using their influence internally to push Google toward creating a more just world. How about ju…

Damore was fired for his contributions to this conversation". Hardly just.* According to what you said in this post, It was completely just as Damore basically wrote a dissertation about things that were completely unrelated to any work done for any Google product. All that work would've been tantamount to a complete waste of company time and could be grounds for a firing. Google users don't care at all about the pol…

My understanding is that Damore was asked for his response to a training class he had taken. That would make the dissertation, as you call it, a work assignment. Is that understanding incorrect?

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#514

Post by derefr » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:24 PM UTC

Excel_Wizard wrote: post #486

einhverfr wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the EU, freedom from discrimination on the basis of political opinion is considered a fundamental right, and is mentioned as such in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. Private conversations about politics thus is entirely outside the scope of what the company is allowed to care about. Public comments, for example on global email lists, would be a different topic.

Political opinion is a very strange protected class, and protection of it seems unenforceable to me.

I assume "political opinion" as in "the way you vote", not so much speech about politics (which would just be protected by rights protecting speech.) Even in the US, you have a right to voting in a way that's protected from others' observation.

Or, to put it another way: if you want to hold a political opinion, and then express it by voting, but otherwise keep it completely secret from your community... that's your right.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#515

Post by Causality1 » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:25 PM UTC

Ok, so are senior executives going to follow that rule?

One recalls the transcript from the all-hands meeting after the 2016 election where Sergey Brin said “Most people here are pretty upset and pretty sad, “I find this election deeply offensive, and I know many of you do too. It’s a stressful time, and it conflicts with many of our values. I think it’s a good time to reflect on that. ... So many people apparently don’t share the values that we have.” and in doing so put a target on the back of every centrist and conservative at Google.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#516

Post by walshemj » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:25 PM UTC

doitLP wrote: post #40

arcticbull wrote: post #20

I think they just overestimated the ability of their employees to respect each other when they hold differing world views. That's kinda natural once you reach a certain size and your colleagues may as well be randos on the street. To be fair, that's a learning most businesses stumbled upon decades ago, it's the new generation of "re-invent management" companies that are speedrunning HR policy.

I think they overestimated just how willing certain people are to not do their jobs and sit around arguing while being paid.

But professional jobs are not on the clock like that - salaried jobs aren't paid by the hour.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#517

Post by einhverfr » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:25 PM UTC

Excel_Wizard wrote: post #486

einhverfr wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the EU, freedom from discrimination on the basis of political opinion is considered a fundamental right, and is mentioned as such in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. Private conversations about politics thus is entirely outside the scope of what the company is allowed to care about. Public comments, for example on global email lists, would be a different topic.

Political opinion is a very strange protected class, and protection of it seems unenforceable to me.

A useful way to think about this is that the Supreme Court ruled the state cannot punish someone for advocating genocide in the abstract at a KKK rally, not because advocating genocide is somehow a natural right or that free speech is absolute, but because the government had previously exceeded its authority by going after political dissidents (particularly Communists) using similar logic. So free speech protections in the US for hate speech are a reaction to state abuse in the context of the US.

In Europe the abuses were different so the protections are different.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#518

Post by derefr » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:25 PM UTC

einhverfr wrote: post #503

devy wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debating politics all you want outside of work.

Yeah, it is what my colleagues and I often do over lunch break. Since it is a break, it is outside of work, right?

Try that argument next time you invent something on a lunch break and want the patent assigned to you :)

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#519

Post by einhverfr » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:26 PM UTC

derefr wrote: post #514

Excel_Wizard wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Political opinion is a very strange protected class, and protection of it seems unenforceable to me.

I assume "political opinion" as in "the way you vote", not so much speech about politics (which would just be protected by rights protecting speech.) Even in the US, you have a right to voting in a way that's protected from others' observation. Or, to put it another way: if you want to hold a political opinion, and then express it by voting, but otherwise keep it completely secret from your community... that's your r…

Private conversations are protected. So even in Germany if a report to me confides he admires Hitler I can't fire him for that. If he says so on a public channel, that is different (and depending on what is said might be criminal, but that is a time/manner/place restriction).

But the goal is to hold private political discussions as much as possible above economic retaliation.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#520

Post by krapp » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 7:26 PM UTC

Geeek wrote: post #118

pseudalopex wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Romantic attraction.

What is?

OK. Assuming you're not being purposely obtuse:

"lesbian" is not a "sexual attraction" description, it is an "attraction description" for which one possible dimension of attraction can be sexual. Same-sex attraction is no more exclusively about a desire for intercourse than opposite sex attraction. It's entirely possible to have a romantic attraction of any kind without also feeling a desire to engage in intercourse.