One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions • Hacker News Board

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#131

Post by akhilcacharya » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 5:54 AM UTC

mav3rick wrote: post #128

akhilcacharya wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t possibly know that to a high degree of certainty, especially since you haven’t explained why you think so. I sure hope this isn’t what happens inside of Google - doesn’t sound like an inclusive atmosphere to look down on others!

Your post also exaggerated and extrapolated everyone working there as "slackers". Not too mention the combative attitude HN has toward Googlers anyway. "How can they work their morally" etc . Anyway I won't engage further. And I won't get personal. I still think it's a great company to grow as an engineer. You should definitely explore if you ever want to move on.

I said Google “isn’t special” in this regard. That can only mean “slackers” if you think literally every company in the world is composed of slackers, something that is contradicted by the fact that capitalism indeed still exists.

> Not too mention the combative attitude HN has toward Googlers anyway.

This feels like projection of some sort

> I still think it's a great company to grow as an engineer.

I don’t even know which company you’re talking about anymore

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#132

Post by jancsika » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 5:58 AM UTC

nashashmi wrote: post #37

OkGoDoIt wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I generally agree. Just like a cashier at Chick-fil-a doesn’t necessarily condone the company’s religious and political beliefs. From personal experience, I work for a big tech company which very publicly says it stands for certain things and the CEO recently has been going around saying a lot of political things. It’s unrelated to the job although it feels like an explicit part of the “company culture”. It doesn’t r…

People have become militarized with activist results like the departure of Brendan Eich. Lines have been blurred. People are making demands sometimes that are unreasonable. Metoo movement in tech caused expulsions of many heads. Even if unrelated to the job. Connections to Jeff Epstein is causing people to lose positions. Political positions of support for Trump is causing customers to take stand against heads. Where…

> Where do we draw the line between association and belief and job?

Line: one's university has constraints in place to prevent donations from Epstein, and one does an end run around them in order to take donations from Epstein.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#133

Post by mav3rick » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 6:01 AM UTC

pheug wrote: post #30

spaceribs wrote: post #7

As an engineer, I revel in avoiding these monolithic supercorps. I don't know why anyone would want to work in centralizing innovation and creativity into the hands of a few greedy people.

The greed as well? Normal jobs aren't paying anything close to 200-300k+ that you'd be pulling at FAANG/HFT.

There is no greed in demanding to get paid market rates. Please stop peddling that as a negative trait.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#134

Post by dmix » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 6:01 AM UTC

beerandt wrote: post #82

thephyber wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just weird that people demand that their job adheres to whatever weird thing they like. This was literally a selling point at Google: > Larry Page and Sergey Brin ... had designed their company's famously open culture to facilitate free thinking. Employees were “obligated to dissent” if they saw something they disagreed with, and they were encouraged to “bring their whole selves” to work rather than check their pol…

It's been years now since "don't be evil" got deleted.

The cultures of companies change as they grow and as outside cultures change. Especially one closely connected to internet culture, which is way more uncivil and uncompromising against dissenting opinions.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#135

Post by RangerScience » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 6:02 AM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #126

RangerScience wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, there is an available objective definition of "tolerate": as a peace treaty. You are tolerated as long as you tolerate. If you don't (as in, say, the case of the KKK), well, by non-participation in the "treaty", you no longer have to be tolerated by anyone adhering to it. OFC, this doesn't work in all circumstances, but, perhaps, it should be applied in all circumstances in which it _could_.

> you no longer have to be tolerated by anyone adhering to it. The point of tolerance is to tolerate . Just because you have managed to find an intolerant viewpoint that survives our current memetic filter, does not change the reality that you're the one preaching intolerance, right here . Hate movements throughout history have been supported by logical-sounding arguments for marginalizing some outgroup. I don't thin…

> The point of tolerance is to tolerate.

I... don't think I agree? I would count un-inhibited self-expression if I were looking for a success metric of tolerance, not tolerance itself. (note: you'd need some other metrics lest THAT go off the rails, to be clear)

The idea that you have to tolerate the intelorant makes the original concept self-defeating; if you instead treat tolerance as a treaty, it's self-reinforcing.

You can interpret "tolerance" differently. I will continue to practice the version where I tolerate you until you are intolerant, at which point we'll have a conversation, and at which point I am morally allowed to no longer tolerate you.

This is rescinding a "right", not requiring action.

> Hate movements throughout history have been supported by logical-sounding arguments for dehumanizing some outgroup

This is a good point and I'll watch out for it. Rescinding tolerance does not have to equate with dehumanization... but yeah, I can see how that often leads there. Seems like an easy way to avoid it is, I could just stop tolerating bigotry, but still extend the compassion and tolerance that I am able to to bigots. Judge behavior rather than people. Which is... well, it's just good practice anyway.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#136

Post by Normal_gaussian » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 6:03 AM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #118

ajross wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An extension is the kind of random IT junk companies push all the time. Pushing surveillance into the server side of a core product is rather more heavy an operation.

But Google's core business is surveillance. Implementing it server-side could make it available as a GSuite feature. Bonus points for passing it through an opaque ML step for plausible deniability. "The 'culture fit' 'algorithm' determined that you hurt team cohesion".

Making it a prod ready feature would take weeks, a pile of money, and dozens of staff who may object and are in a position to do something about it.

Making a single use extension takes an hour or three by a contractor who won't object. Its trivial enough that the whole thing could be built using a bottom of the barrel freelancer site with a high success rate.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#137

Post by askafriend » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 6:11 AM UTC

xwdv wrote: post #29

At our company if the HR goes through your social media, and finds any evidence you may be socially activist or virtue signaling or otherwise very loudly proclaiming your disapproval of something some entity is doing, you will not be hired. You will not even get a call back. You will be labeled as a potential troublemaker (not in the good way) and be placed on the blacklist.

All this does is ensure only mediocre people are hired. What you described is how you might hire for McDonald’s, not a high growth company that is building something massive/valuable.

I work with a group of the most talented people in the world at what they do and 0 of them would want to work in an environment you describe. In fact they won’t even consider a company remotely like what you describe.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#138

Post by RangerScience » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 6:13 AM UTC

gwbas1c wrote: post #125

RangerScience wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, there is an available objective definition of "tolerate": as a peace treaty. You are tolerated as long as you tolerate. If you don't (as in, say, the case of the KKK), well, by non-participation in the "treaty", you no longer have to be tolerated by anyone adhering to it. OFC, this doesn't work in all circumstances, but, perhaps, it should be applied in all circumstances in which it _could_.

Perhaps put you biases aside? There are white supremacists who don't think they're racist. (It's kind of like someone claiming they aren't homophobic but also opposing gay marriage.) It's a complicated subject. IMO, I don't see how someone can be a racist / homophobe in secret; thus I don't see a justification for spying on a co-worker just to find out things like this.

> Perhaps put you biases aside?

I don't follow? Maybe try rephrasing?

> can be a racist / homophobe in secret

I can kind of see that, but, the KKK wears hoods?

> I don't see a justification for spying on a co-worker

Hmm. I don't have an examined opinion on this, outside of general hesitation to go looking for problems for reasons such as confirmation bias and whatever the name is for what self-fulfilling-prophecies looks like this in kind of situation. Well, and maybe that if you're looking for justification you've already messed up. Just because you can somehow find a consolation prize doesn't mean you should have done something in the first pace.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#139

Post by oh_sigh » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 6:13 AM UTC

skissane wrote: post #28

> The documents concerned a mandatory tool that was recently installed on the Google Chrome browser on workers’ computers, the employees said. In October, some Google employees raised concerns that the Chrome extension was an internal surveillance tool designed to monitor their attempts to organize protests. It would automatically report staffers who create a calendar event with more than 10 rooms or 100 participants…

Maybe it's to prevent calendar spam, either inadvertently or through abuse?

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#140

Post by manfredo » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 6:16 AM UTC

defen wrote: post #130

ChuckMcM wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like it was a "safety hazard" to have too many people at once in the smoking area behind the textile mill. It is a slippery slope to try to tease apart what is, and what isn't, interference right? Google also has a clause in their employment agreement that says you agree to them putting surveillance software on your devices, company supplied and personal, as a condition of your employment. I asked about that one, got…

> Google also has a clause in their employment agreement that says you agree to them putting surveillance software on your devices, company supplied and personal, as a condition of your employment. How would Google even know about your personal devices? That seems to only make sense if you intend to use your personal device for work.

It's not even an unusual condition. At Dropbox, starting some time in either 2018 or 2019 we had to install a remote administration app on our devices if we wanted to connect to corp vpn or to log into corporate google accounts. Mostly so that the device could be wiped if it was lost, IIRC.