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

On Resigning from Google

alphabetworkers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 295 posts

Re: On Resigning from Google

#141

Post by yew »

aaomidi wrote: post #61
JimboOmega wrote: post #21

The post talks about Google supposedly persecuting LGBTQ employees for speaking up. But the linked articles only talk about them (possibly) getting retaliated against for protesting other issues, like border security or sexual harassment. As an LGBT person (who does her fair share of activism), I'm not clear what the LGBTQ angle is here other than if the people involved happened to be LGBTQ. It seems like even if the…

LGBTQ+ activism doesn't just involve fighting for rights for people who fall within those labels. It has evolved onto fighting for rights of EVERYONE who is currently being harrassed, targetted, and discriminate against. It's activism for human rights for everyone. Not every LGBTQ+ activist agrees with this evolution, but a large group do. I'm personally in that group.

Meh. Tell that to the "cis gays" getting hate on Twitter. I had enough "it's for your own good" before I was old enough to stop going to church.

Re: On Resigning from Google

#142

Post by jeffrogers »

It's hard to hear people object to Google on moral or ethical grounds when they don't mention the fallout from programmatic advertising. Google pioneered this technology, which has had an impact on both our security and privacy, and the company has been caught exceeding the public's data collection expectations repeatedly. Now, after looking at the company's most recent financials and noting the CPC declines, I wonder less about the fallout of programmatic advertising and whether it was all worth it. I'm now left thinking more about whether we've got the right measure of human smarts or intelligence. I mean, these were the smart people, right?

Re: On Resigning from Google

#143

Post by g42gregory »

gnicholas wrote: post #35

> Well, it didn’t work in the PCUSA, where activists eventually won the fight to remove homophobia from the church constitution, and won the fight for marriage equality; and it’s unlikely to work at Google. I go to a PCUSA church and have a different view of this. Churches that did not agree with the changes to PCUSA's position split from the denomination and created the ECO denomination, which retains the prior posi…

I think that's right. Our ECO church, which split from PCUSA, is a very large one, with 6 locations. The services are always full. The reason for departure, though, was the building/land ownership, not the same-sex issues. I don't think there was much (or any?) discussions of same-sex issues during the split process.

Re: On Resigning from Google

#144

Post by wrs »

“Oil and gas companies use cloud computing so I’m not going to work on cloud computing” doesn’t seem much more valid to me than “child pornographers use encryption so I’m not going to work on encryption”. It’s a technology that exists, and people will use it to further their goals no matter what you personally do.

There is a simple, well-established way for society to discourage certain activities without damaging the shared infrastructure for other activities. It’s called a tax. If the externalities you (we) are concerned about were reflected in a carbon tax, it would not be up to individual employees to disproportionately risk their livelihoods and families like this. The project spreadsheet would come out differently for a reason that directly corresponds to the societal problem.

So to me the moral imperative is to make sure that tax comes into existence, rather than making a not-very-impactful personal sacrifice that you may or not be able to afford.

Re: On Resigning from Google

#145

Post by Xavdidtheshadow »

ardit33 wrote: post #88
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the claim is that Google is more willing to dismiss LGBTQ employees for these issues than others. However, it's also plausible that LGBTQ employees are more accustomed to having to fight for their rights and hence have trended to be amongst the "loudest" complainants?

I don't know about google, and can't say about direct experience, but almost every tech company I have worked, LGBTQ people were treated well, and in no way discriminated against, or at least in a visible way at least.... even amazon, was pretty equal about minorities and LGBTQ folks as they treated everyone equally crap....

> LGBTQ people were treated well, and in no way discriminated against

I know don't know where you've worked, but I would maybe reach out to some current or former LGBTQ coworkers and ask them if that's in line with their evaluation. In my experience, that discrimination _isn't_ very visible

Re: On Resigning from Google

#146

Post by hnewsshadowbans »

JimboOmega wrote: post #21

The post talks about Google supposedly persecuting LGBTQ employees for speaking up. But the linked articles only talk about them (possibly) getting retaliated against for protesting other issues, like border security or sexual harassment. As an LGBT person (who does her fair share of activism), I'm not clear what the LGBTQ angle is here other than if the people involved happened to be LGBTQ. It seems like even if the…

The angle is virtue signaling and potstirring. Its low hanging fruit to earn plaudits and make it seem like you're doing something. In reality like you said there is nothing to indicate the employees were fired for being gay or trans or whatever. The later reference to 'concentration camps' drives home the kind of person this guy is. Gay and trans people should be disgusted this person is using them in such a dishonest way to score points.

Re: On Resigning from Google

#147

Post by philwelch »

shadowgovt wrote: post #70
shaan1 wrote: post #41

He has made enough money to retire. For engineers still looking for work, GOOGLE is the best place to work. If you don't want to work at google, don't work there. Why do people keep blaming the company. This is not a dictatorship.

That depends on what one wants to do with one's labor. They'll certainly compensate you well, and they have flexible hours and treat software engineers and SREs like royalty. But Googlers who joined up 10 years ago really didn't have to also ask the question of whether their work was directly benefiting military AI projects (or merely providing an agnostic service that everyone was using; search is certainly somethin…

It's also a moderately different can of worms to work on projects like breaking enemy encryption during a war (Turing), building and programming more and more powerful computers to help design nuclear weapons (von Neumann), developing a network protocol for DARPA's national computer network (Cerf and Kahn), building microchips for bombers and missiles (Fairchild Semiconductor), and it goes on from there.

Clearly, optimizing targeted advertising on the internet is a higher moral calling.

Re: On Resigning from Google

#149

Post by smkellat »

Alphabet is 70% held by institutional investors so those investors might ignore something like this. Insiders are reported to hold just under 6% of the shares and the remainders are out on the market. The holders of the 30% of shares not held by institutional investors may have a good question as to who exactly owns Alphabet and who gets to set its direction.

There are employee-owned companies and worker cooperatives out there. Alphabet isn't one of them. The cost of buying up all the shares to turn it into such a thing looks fairly large at the current market rate.

Re: On Resigning from Google

#150

Post by jaydouken »

scardycat wrote: post #42

I currently work at Google, but I am a newbie, i.e less than 5 years at Google. I frequently run in to people who are: 1) always been at Google and enjoyed the fruits of its rise or at another similar environment 2) never had to deal with frugality or lack of funding for anything 3) see themselves are superior to everyone else - in terms of how enlightened they are, how they know whats best for everyone 4) feel that…

That same argument justifies slavery because it was legal, since slavery makes profits. Your argument is also subject to the ad-hominem logical fallacy [1], and does not actually counter the idea that Google is harming society and that employees should contribute their efforts elsewhere. Additionally, this appears to be the author's attempt to change society, to the greatest extent they can do that is unique to them. They do however, volunteer extensively, in their "Beyond Google" section, weakening a significant part of your ad-hominem argument.

Overall, the author is right in trying to promote people to leave Google, as remaining quiet weakens the whole point of them leaving.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Post reply on HN