Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’ • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#61

Post by renewiltord » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:34 PM UTC

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #30

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #6

I don't believe it's only Google, and I don't think it's particularly secret.

The New York Times has had an anti-tech vendetta for a while now. Most likely, in my cynical worldview, because tech has hurt their subscription numbers immensely, not because they want to do the world a service. An example of this is when they published a whole story about a guy who became radicalized from YouTube... and then became unradicalized a few months later without doing anything radical. But someone could h…

The NYT, despite their brand, is not that much different from BuzzFeed. I was a subscriber for a long time and it was quite clear that they were writing the money makers (stories like this which have people riled up and pay attention) to make money for the centerfold pieces (which were fascinating hard-nosed journalism that was very interesting).

I also subscribed (and still do) to the WSJ who are much better about keeping the looniness to the OpEds. They don't exclusively keep it to the OpEds, but they mostly do.

Unionized workers vs Ionized workers is an eternally charged discussion. It's the vim v emacs of the world. There's very little point rehashing things but for some reason, the outrage and hunger takes us and we must participate. The best thing to do is to not play.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#62

Post by klyrs » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:34 PM UTC

Wiseacre wrote: post #50

BuckRogers wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You nailed something that I've noticed. Highly competent and intelligent people tend to lean libertarian in my experience. It's only when they get cancer, or finally meet some form of humility that they see the inherent advantages they had over others for what it is. Simply a roll of the dice. Competent, capable, hardworking people often fail to see the bigger picture, and dismiss others that aren't like them. If you…

You are describing privilege, although it's a bit of a tainted word now.

That word, whatever its meaning, is triggering to a lot of people here.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#63

Post by BuckRogers » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:35 PM UTC

na85 wrote: post #25

mrits wrote: post #5

Yeah, let's focus on the company that pays their employees 15x minimum wage and has top tier vacation, healthcare, and maternity/paternity leave.

Yeah it's all okay because you got yours.

For some people, holding others down is the fun of it all.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#64

Post by spaetzleesser » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:35 PM UTC

BuckRogers wrote: post #32

mhoad wrote: post #3

Seems to have worked amazingly well based on all the times I recall reading the comments of stories posted here involving unions.

I believe unions are actually necessary. Necessary evil at times or not, it's a human right to have a union. I've never been in a union, but my wife is. And I've worked as management with unions in a factory setting. It was fine, actually. The company I worked for that was unionized was the best, most efficient corporation that I've ever seen. In fact it was a superior there that told me, when I was more anti-union,…

“All that said, unions should also be sector-wide not worksite based.”

That’s how it works in Germany and it’s much better than the per company unions in the US. Workers also have a seat on the board of directors by law which also helps balancing things a little. The capitalists and CEOs still make plenty of money within that arrangement, companies are competitive on the world market so it seems to work.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#65

Post by brightstep » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:35 PM UTC

3pt14159 wrote: post #38

queuebert wrote: post #23

Imputing altruistic morals to profit-seeking entities and then continually being surprised and offended when companies act shady puts employees in a pointlessly weak position. Instead, treat the relationship as adversarial and come ready for battle every day against the legal structure designed to exploit you for the benefit of distant shareholders. There is no shame in fighting for yourself. You are worth it.

What if adversarial systems result in asymmetric arms races and the game theoretic best move is to work for a corporation that is so short sighted as to go to battle against their own employees and to work for them diligently and intelligently? Because I see a whole lot happier employees at Tesla than I do at General Motors. I'm not saying this is an all-or-nothing thing. I'd join a union if I was working for a certa…

I'd rather an arms race than one side having all the arms.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#66

Post by ralusek » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:35 PM UTC

mhoad wrote: post #3

Seems to have worked amazingly well based on all the times I recall reading the comments of stories posted here involving unions.

Yes, because the only valid arguments against unions are formulated as a result of a psyop by Google.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#67

Post by Fordec » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:36 PM UTC

BuckRogers wrote: post #40

noah_buddy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wonder how much of HN culture is affected by very smart people (in one domain) being subconsciously led to believe things by the machinations of tech. As smart people, they take very passionate positions on issues they believe strongly. Perhaps they wouldn't have believed them so strongly in a vacuum though?

You nailed something that I've noticed. Highly competent and intelligent people tend to lean libertarian in my experience. It's only when they get cancer, or finally meet some form of humility that they see the inherent advantages they had over others for what it is. Simply a roll of the dice. Competent, capable, hardworking people often fail to see the bigger picture, and dismiss others that aren't like them. If you…

From my experience, I find this is true only in the very core of core tech hubs that you can count on one hand. And also with a bias towards finance, adtech, crypto, fintech and other industries that rely on extracting wealth than creating it.

Core R&D, hardware, B2B services, networking companies, etc. and then also the factor of geographic places that aren't considered "sexy" in the HN crowd revert to the mean for that geographic area in regards to the mix of political leanings.

I disagree it's about hard work, but about ego about how society deserves to value them. That correlates only really under the age of 35 before their first health scare when suddenly society owes something to them that they never previously wanted to feed a cent into.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#68

Post by renewiltord » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:37 PM UTC

giraffe_lady wrote: post #59

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The New York Times has had an anti-tech vendetta for a while now. Most likely, in my cynical worldview, because tech has hurt their subscription numbers immensely, not because they want to do the world a service. An example of this is when they published a whole story about a guy who became radicalized from YouTube... and then became unradicalized a few months later without doing anything radical. But someone could h…

I am by no means a NYT-liker but I don't think they're particularly anti-tech. We had been riding on a couple decades of public good will and consistent credulity and optimism from media and the public. Compared to that it probably does feel hostile. But it's just them being part of the general and widespread shift of more skepticism towards tech's promises and more awareness of its downsides.

The public adores the big tech brands. It's less "riding on" and more just the fact that outside of folks in tech, people really really like these companies. They are well trusted, people have positive views of the people working there, and people believe that the companies are generally well run.

Almost all brand surveys will have most of the top 5 be the tech companies you know and which HN loves to hate. That's not trending downward. It's trending upward.

The upward trend indicates that it isn't "riding on" but simply being considered good because they are.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#69

Post by gjsman-1000 » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:37 PM UTC

giraffe_lady wrote: post #59

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The New York Times has had an anti-tech vendetta for a while now. Most likely, in my cynical worldview, because tech has hurt their subscription numbers immensely, not because they want to do the world a service. An example of this is when they published a whole story about a guy who became radicalized from YouTube... and then became unradicalized a few months later without doing anything radical. But someone could h…

I am by no means a NYT-liker but I don't think they're particularly anti-tech. We had been riding on a couple decades of public good will and consistent credulity and optimism from media and the public. Compared to that it probably does feel hostile. But it's just them being part of the general and widespread shift of more skepticism towards tech's promises and more awareness of its downsides.

I might agree, but consider my dark patterns example.

The author of the article was super mad, lambasting tech companies left and right for dark patterns, called it a bunch of different synonyms of immoral, etc.

His own paper, The New York Times, has a dark pattern system so pervasive that people here, on Hacker News, had to tell their bank to block payments because they couldn't get to the end of it. I've seen this story repeatedly here.

There's no way that didn't come up during the author's research. The author chose to completely ignore that and publish anyway. And The New York Times chose to make a huge deal out of it. What does that say about their ethics?

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#70

Post by vorpalhex » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 4:37 PM UTC

BuckRogers wrote: post #40

noah_buddy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wonder how much of HN culture is affected by very smart people (in one domain) being subconsciously led to believe things by the machinations of tech. As smart people, they take very passionate positions on issues they believe strongly. Perhaps they wouldn't have believed them so strongly in a vacuum though?

You nailed something that I've noticed. Highly competent and intelligent people tend to lean libertarian in my experience. It's only when they get cancer, or finally meet some form of humility that they see the inherent advantages they had over others for what it is. Simply a roll of the dice. Competent, capable, hardworking people often fail to see the bigger picture, and dismiss others that aren't like them. If you…

> It's only when they get cancer, or finally meet some form of humility that they see the inherent advantages they had over others for what it is.

People with terminal diseases also usually become religious. Perhaps atheists are faking it too.

> the world looks like a meritocracy, and it isn't.

Tomorrow an asteroid may, very unluckily, fall and strike me so as to kill me. It would not be due to my merits or lack thereof.

Yet if you want to get ahead, you should generally work hard and do the right things while being sufficiently savvy.