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

Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 772 posts

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#431

Post by ByteJockey »

MereInterest wrote: post #381
marricks wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a great time to consider the differences between positive and negative liberty. Negative liberty: no one can get in my way of doing whatever I want! Google has the right to rootkit my life and I have the right to ignore it and work at a bodega because all tech giants eventually agreed this is a good practice for them Positive liberty: corporations can't infringe on my right to a private life and must prot…

I've heard it phrased the other way around. Positive liberty is about things that are guaranteed (e.g. health care, food, human dignity). Negative liberty is about things that may not be done (e.g. no punishment for speech, no limitations on buying guns, no environmental regulations). We are in agreement about which type is better, so this is solely a quibble about the names.

I think you're thinking positive vs negative rights (which are like what you're describing).

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#432

Post by csa »

z6 wrote: post #398
ChuckMcM wrote: post #191

True story, a person I know who was offered a job at Google got the employment agreement (prior to arriving which was pretty standard at the time) and read that bit about "allowing Google to protect it's IP by installing a rootkit" and they red lined it to change it "May only access Google related information and no personal information." When they showed up HR started with "But that isn't how we use it, we would nev…

They have no shortage of people wanting to work for them. Why bother taking on a 'difficult' person?

Rank and file Googlers used to be interesting people.

Now they are mostly mediocre engineers who excel at jumping through hoops -- and much less interesting as people.

Luckily for Google, they just need to keep the juggernaut moving rather than functioning optimally.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#433

Post by leftyted »

black_puppydog wrote: post #262

The whole thread here seems to revolve around whether or not Spiers should have been fired for what she did. And while I have a clear opinion on that and had fun sparring with y'all here about it, can we also talk about how unionization is actually something that we need to think about as a profession / group of professions? The days where "being in IT" made you a rockstar that could command a premium in individual n…

The idea of Google exploiting its programmers is an insult to actual exploited labor. These aren't coal miners. There's no factories.

The programmers where I work have too much power. We're exploiting the company. If I don't feel like writing code, I just do github stuff and answer questions. In fact that's what I did yesterday and the day before. No one notices or cares because, among other things, they couldn't replace me because there aren't thousands of hyper-educated new college grads after my job. I think many of the Google employees who are unhappy at Google due to "exploitation" would be happier working at a smaller, less famous company. Of course there's a pay cut and you lose that special feeling when everyone instantly recognizes you employer and assumes you're a genius.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#434

Post by phendrenad2 »

inetknght wrote: post #85
fishywang wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On Android, the work profile is supposed to solve that problem: you only add your corp account and install corp apps in work profile, and it's (at least supposed to be) isolated from your personal, default profile on your phone. This is even explicitly stated in work profile enabling flow. The spy activities described in the article is not about actual personal activities on the phone. One is looking at other's corp…

> the work profile is supposed to solve that problem: you only add your corp account and install corp apps in work profile Wait until your personal phone, with its work profile, comes into scope of a work-related deposition. You'll find just how paper thin that argument is.

Does this apply to just having Slack on your phone?

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#435

Post by discordance »

gwillen wrote: post #341
cj wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the context of starting a job at Google, I highly doubt you sign your employment contracts the day you show up for work. Typically employment contracts are signed and settled well before you enter the building as an employee. I would be surprised if the OP’s anecdote regarding the Googler pulled on the 1st day is in line with reality. Edit: apparently I’m wrong, the downvotes were deserved! I run hiring at my comp…

I was hired right out of school by Google in 2007. I was absolutely presented with various contract documents on day 1 to sign. In fact, I was not even given paper copies of them; I was supposed to click my agreement in an intranet signing tool. (I couldn't say what fraction of my employment paperwork was handled in this way, but things like IP assignment were definitely included.)

That’s quite reminiscent of the user experience Google’s customers go through with the TOS

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#436

Post by mleonhard »

jefftk wrote: post #286
e40 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this mean you are required to have an Android phone? What if you have an iPhone? Rootkit required there, too?

You aren't required to have any phone. If you have a phone and want it to have access to corp resources, you need to agree to some conditions. I have coworkers who choose to keep their phone personal only, and others who choose to have the company pay for them to have a separate work phone. (Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)

I did that. I had a company laptop and phone. I usually left them at the office.

For extra privacy, I stopped my personal phone from connecting to the company WiFi. Then Google bought my home ISP (WebPass). Now I use a router-based VPN.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#437

Post by koolba »

gowld wrote: post #345
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google already will pay for you to have a separate corporate phone (the hardware and the data plan).

Not universally.

I’m sure they would. Bulk enterprise plans are on the order of $8-$10/month. That’s not even a rounding error compared to an employees compensation.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#438

Post by chii »

sneak wrote: post #269
munk-a wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is helpful information - the next time I'm working on promoting my website I'll remember that it's entirely optional whether my business thrives or I go destitute due to refusing to be indexed by their search index. Your statement is accurate when a healthy market and competitors exist but you are not free to avoid doing business with Google since they have an insane amount of market control.

You can run most types of businesses without Google, or even in being in Google's index at all.

all else being equal, your competitor using google's index will have business perform better than yours. Thus, you will be out-competed.

The benefits of _not_ using google's index does not make up for it. So unless there some other benefit from doing so, not using google's index merely makes your business less competitive.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#439

Post by cupofcoffee »

jedberg wrote: post #196
ChuckMcM wrote: post #191

True story, a person I know who was offered a job at Google got the employment agreement (prior to arriving which was pretty standard at the time) and read that bit about "allowing Google to protect it's IP by installing a rootkit" and they red lined it to change it "May only access Google related information and no personal information." When they showed up HR started with "But that isn't how we use it, we would nev…

I'm not. Legal doesn't want to deal with everyone having a different employment contract. Google has always leaned towards being ok with a ton of false negatives to avoid false positives. They'd rather give up 10 good hires than make one bad one. This is just an extension of that. They don't want any exceptions and they aren't willing to make any.

Google isn't as selective as it's made out to be.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#440

Post by r0p3 »

leftyted wrote: post #433
black_puppydog wrote: post #262

The whole thread here seems to revolve around whether or not Spiers should have been fired for what she did. And while I have a clear opinion on that and had fun sparring with y'all here about it, can we also talk about how unionization is actually something that we need to think about as a profession / group of professions? The days where "being in IT" made you a rockstar that could command a premium in individual n…

The idea of Google exploiting its programmers is an insult to actual exploited labor. These aren't coal miners. There's no factories. The programmers where I work have too much power. We're exploiting the company. If I don't feel like writing code, I just do github stuff and answer questions. In fact that's what I did yesterday and the day before. No one notices or cares because, among other things, they couldn't rep…

Having "lefty" in your name with such a poor understanding of labor exploitation is funny.
Post reply on HN