121–130 of 708 posts
Whoop-de-do. If you don't like the company, leave.
Trying to understand the opinion being communicated here. People shouldn't protest things they disagree with? People have a duty to be loyal to their employer's every decision?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends. At a small company? Sure. But no individual employee, or even small collective of employees that aren't VP or key contributor in an irreplaceable knowledge-base, have the clout to turn a Microsoft or a Google. At a major company? The only thing you can do as an individual is take the wind out of their sales or refrain from working for them. Which these companies do notice; Google hiring keeps tabs on cand…
> It depends. At a small company? Sure. But no individual employee, or even small collective of employees that aren't VP or key contributor in an irreplaceable knowledge-base, have the clout to turn a Microsoft or a Google. I see this claim thrown around a lot with no evidence for it.
That second half is purely subjective, and we won't really have a good idea on how much of a difference it made until historians can look back on this era with a quarter-century of hindsight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But not to receiving their services, apparently.
According to the Washington Times (a right-wing news organization), 49% of Americans live in sanctuary jurisdictions, based on data from FAIR (a right-wing pro-ICE advocacy group). https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/may/10/half-of-ame... I think that makes it clear that a sizable number of Americans are opposed to receiving ICE's services, only receive them because there isn't actually a way to opt out of them…
I have nearly the same power to determine where my taxes go as I do to stop the people in local council making non-binding declarations that don't carry any legal consequences or obligations. If I happen to live in an area with a HOA, does that mean I support HOAs too? If I live next to a Mosque does that mean I support Islam?
My point is that geography is not a good determinant for agreement or disagreement with the politics and beliefs that take place in that geography.
I'd like to get a feel about what volume of employees have an issue with these things. From issue to issue I hear about various forms of employees making themselves heard but it is REALLY hard to jive with what that means. We've seen Google employees post about some ideas that seemed to be genuinely popular (measure that how you will...) but later ideas or advocacy were reportedly far less supported by the general em…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unions are majority rule democratic. When I worked at a plant for one of the big 3, the candidates the union submitted for trades promotions were universally white men. The union didn’t look out for women or minorities particularly well because the majority rules. People assume a tech union will lead to things being somehow more just, but be careful for what you wish for. James Damore might just have the votes.
Did they do secret ballots, or did they do public votes like voice or card check?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If all the employees with morals leave, GitHub will be left with no employees with morals. That is probably a worse situation.
Or some people don't feel that border control is incompatible with morality. Both opinions are valid.
The US has a long history of implementation pessimizing desired outcome at the Southern border. For example, the number of undocumented permanent residents in the US went up when border control was tightened in previous administrations. Under lax border control, people could border-hop for a day or a week, take care of some business (mostly quite legal with the one exception of the failure to go through the entire process of a temporary visa), and go back. But when inspection constraints were tightened and checkpoints and fences went up, lots of hoppers decided that if they had to choose, they'd rather be trapped in the US than in Mexico. The intended effect of lowering undocumented residency boosted the numbers on undocumented residency. Oops. :-p
> With the issue refusing to go away, GitHub executives have changed their internal messaging, including a memo to employees saying barring ICE from “access to GitHub could actually hurt the very people we all want to help,” in the words of Chief Operating Officer Erica Brescia. > “We have learned from a number of nonprofits and refugee advocates that one of the greatest challenges facing immigrants is a lack of tech…
I cannot find in your quotes or the article where it says they are giving them the product for free. One of your quotes mentions a $56k payment.
> We will donate $500,000—in excess of the value of the purchase by ICE—to nonprofit organizations working to support immigrant communities targeted by the current administration. The Social Impact team will get Hubber input on which nonprofits can provide the most impact for migrants, to be supported via this donation. In the past, we’ve supported organizations like Border Angels, Families for Freedom, and Movement on the Ground.
The charitable view is that they genuinely care about these causes. The uncharitable one (which I'm espousing) is that they're just buying indulgences and that giving $500K of value to ICE and $500K of donations to anti-ICE groups doesn't actually cancel out and ICE gets significantly more benefit from it - and more relevantly, that if GitHub is keeping the contract and donating the revenue, they're clearly not in it for money anymore, they're in it because they want ICE to have their product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trying to understand the opinion being communicated here. People shouldn't protest things they disagree with? People have a duty to be loyal to their employer's every decision?
No, people should leave situations they're uncomfortable with. Vote with your feet.
Fight's the other one. It really depends on whether you have more power to enact change by taking blood out of the system or diverting where it's pumped.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are pro-American and are Latino, African, Asian... etc, does that make you a White Nationalist? If not, then why can we just call it Nationalism?
White Nationalism is an entirely different thing than nationalism. But both are objectionable.