Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 600 posts

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#341

Post by ttraub »

ralph84 wrote: post #65

Activists at work used to focus on things that would improve the lives of workers. Now they just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

Is political activism such a widespread phenomenon in S.I. companies? I work in a more traditional company and never see this kind of thing, so I'm curious what it's like, how the management handles it etc. The most "activism" we see is an occasional announcement about volunteers pitching in for some charitable cause around Christmas time.

20-25 years ago, politics was basically off limits in corporate America. Technology people (who were mostly guys) were pro-capitalist libertarians. It was a different time, I guess.

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#342

Post by jeromegv »

cmdshiftf4 wrote: post #266
geofft wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Google and GitHub built fantastic engineering departments with that decision, beating the pants off several companies that followed "common knowledge." It was (and still is) a cliche that you get better results by hiring like Google than by hiring like everyone used to hire. What they're now learning is that this decision is incompatible with certain forms of revenue like military or immigration-enforcement con…

This is historically revisionist. Google was a money-making behemoth with its tentacles in many areas of innovation before it became the politicized entity we know it to be today. Google only really became politicized a couple of years ago when certain media publications started making demands for diversity numbers within the organization and publicly shaming them for not meeting some imaginary bar in the area. Githu…

You seem to be the revisionist. Implying that people of colour that were brought at the company changed the culture for the worse because this is what the media wanted. Implying that politics came in only because they tried to bring diversity in the workplace.

We are talking of the company that was advocating do not evil. This was political from day 1, remember their stand on China?

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#343

Post by anonygler »

nostrademons wrote: post #37
malvosenior wrote: post #5

I wonder if companies like Google and GitHub that actively courted activists are now regretting their decision. For a long time it was common knowledge that you would try to keep stuff like that out of the workplace. The past 10 years have been an about face to that strategy and now we're seeing more or less complete chaos internally at these previously pro-politics (some kinds of politics) workplaces. My guess is th…

I think it's more that they actively courted assertive people with opinions and then created a culture where you can bring your whole self to work. They did this so that they could get the benefits of creativity, which inherently requires emotional engagement, which requires that you not repress your emotions. (It turns out that it's not possible to selectively repress emotions: "I've got to watch what I say about po…

I disagree with this. This is like comedians raging against cancel culture.

It’s possible to both be funny and be conscious :: It’s possible to be creative and not fixated on political activism.

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#345

Post by ttraub »

cletus wrote: post #85

When I first joined Google, I loved this meeting. This was 2010. You got some pretty candid responses and presentations from the executives. Fast forward 2-3 years and it had largely turned into a dry run of a public announcement later that day. All very choreographed, no real answers to anything. So probably around 2013 I stopped even paying attention to it. What I find most interesting is the change that happened i…

You make a couple of good points such as Google's about-face with regard to China, and you bemoan doxxing.

Yet, you bitterly criticize Trump supporters. Trump supporters are the ones getting doxxed and cancelled on social media.

The most famous leaked TGIF was when Pichai announced his opposition to the 2016 election results, and promised to somehow oppose the new President. I have to say, I was appalled to hear such blatant partisanship from the chief executive of such a huge company. Of course, business types have always had political leanings one way or the other, but they were rarely so blatant. That TGIF did irreparable harm to Google's reputation. I've seen hundreds, perhaps thousands, of outraged comments on social media. Google lost a lot of good will that day.

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#346

Post by hgytr »

rainyMammoth wrote: post #328
hgytr wrote: post #305

First. Thanks to HN for not demanding phone numbers: anonymity allows to say things that cannot be said. Second. Many googlers read HN. In some sense, HN is the extension of the internal forums. CNBC made a good summary and I can comment on each bullet point. Larry and Brin probably stopped attending because nothing important is said on TGIFs. More people -> more leaks -> less interesting information -> less attenden…

> Don't get me wrong. Google is still the best workplace with top notch pay, but as it's got big, it's also morphed into a typical big corporation with typical corporate politics. Sorry but I cannot stand that level of internal koolaid. I guess you also think that Google got the "smartest" people? There are literally thousands of companies working on problems way more interesting and with more stakes and upsides for…

If you know names of those better workplaces, I'm all ears.

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#347

Post by alexnewman »

anonygler wrote: post #343
nostrademons wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more that they actively courted assertive people with opinions and then created a culture where you can bring your whole self to work. They did this so that they could get the benefits of creativity, which inherently requires emotional engagement, which requires that you not repress your emotions. (It turns out that it's not possible to selectively repress emotions: "I've got to watch what I say about po…

I disagree with this. This is like comedians raging against cancel culture. It’s possible to both be funny and be conscious :: It’s possible to be creative and not fixated on political activism.

You notice basically everyone funny is raging against outrage culture

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#348

Post by [deleted] »

ChrisCinelli wrote: post #314
daenz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>not that I agree or disagree with his opinion You just outed yourself. I wish I was joking, but anything other than instant condemnation of what he wrote gets you labelled.

On his twitter account I found this: https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesADamore/status/1115631402119... > The two companies with the biggest internal social media platforms for their employees (Google and Facebook) also have massive employee turmoil… Anyone surprised?

[deleted]

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#349

Post by hgytr »

hn82738 wrote: post #327
redblacktree wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> typical big corporation with typical corporate politics I don't know why this would surprise anyone. People are people and politics are politics in any large organization. There is no reason to think Google would be exempt.

> There is no reason to think Google would be exempt. Except that it did seem to be exempt, for much longer and while becoming much larger than I think most people would have imagined.

There is an interesting analogy. Two uranium hemispheres remain peaceful only until they are joined.

Re: Google cancels TGIF weekly all-hands meetings

#350

Post by Spooky23 »

ekianjo wrote: post #324
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are surrounded by functional alcoholics (10% in the US drink most of the booze). They naturally tend toward career paths that support their behavior.

90% of people surrounded by 10% ? The word "surrounded" seems inappropriate.

Maybe a better word could have been chosen. But in perspective, almost every team on average has at least one person with an alcohol problem of some sort.
Post reply on HN