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

Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

ia601707.us.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 402 posts

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#31

Post by JumpCrisscross »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #20

None of this is particularly surprising, but it's very amusing to see the litigation go this route. It's incredible common for corporate legal to recommend purging data or communications no longer relevant, or to advise avoiding specific means of communication (like email) due to retention challenges. It's incredibly dumb to explicitly discuss avoiding leading a paper trail with respect to subjects where litigation i…

> None of this is particularly surprising

I am not a vengeful type. But people need to be punished to a shocking degree until this is fixed. It should be surprising. And it should have terrible, if not horrific, consequences.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#32

Post by JumpCrisscross »

thakoppno wrote: post #19
tdba wrote: post #3

Then, nine seconds later, Mr. Pichai apparently attempted (unsuccessfully) to delete this incriminating message. lol

It really seems to me that to succeed in business in the US one has to skirt the line of legality with regularity.

> to succeed in business in the US one has to skirt the line of legality with regularity

This is the conclusion of those with short memories. It’s why we consistently see idiotic insider-trading schemes.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#33

Post by Sniffnoy »

nightpool wrote: post #21

Relevant, from Matt Levine's Money stuff (regarding SEC recordkeeping rules, which are similar but not quite the same as litigation holds): > We have talked before about the SEC’s probe into how the employees of big banks discussed their work in text messages and chat apps like WhatsApp on their personal cell phones. The SEC has collected big fines from the biggest banks because, it has said, these chats violated the…

Mind linking the post you're quoting?

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#34

Post by hackernewds »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #20

None of this is particularly surprising, but it's very amusing to see the litigation go this route. It's incredible common for corporate legal to recommend purging data or communications no longer relevant, or to advise avoiding specific means of communication (like email) due to retention challenges. It's incredibly dumb to explicitly discuss avoiding leading a paper trail with respect to subjects where litigation i…

> None of this is particularly surprising I am not a vengeful type. But people need to be punished to a shocking degree until this is fixed. It should be surprising. And it should have terrible, if not horrific, consequences.

I suspect Google will be made an example of, which surprisingly is usually the case.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#35

Post by rawgabbit »

c7DJTLrn wrote: post #16
habitue wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The complaint details the reason it was not allowed in this case, though would be normally: the topics were subject to legal holds. > Like Mr. Pichai, other key Google employees, including those in leadership roles, routinely opted to move from history-on rooms to history-off Chats to hold sensitive conversations, even though they knew they were subject to legal holds. Indeed, they did so even when discussing topics…

Thanks, I'm not familiar with what a legal hold is. Would they be obliged to take audio recordings or minutes of meetings due to this?

Not a lawyer. When a legal hold is issued, the company is instructed not to destroy potential evidence related to the case.

They don’t have to perform additional recordings and minutes. But they exist, they can’t destroy it.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#36

Post by refulgentis »

You should see the aspiring middle managers, they saw managers doing this, insisted you could never turn on history with them, and then tried 10x’ing by claiming…its wrong to ever attribute a statement to anyone personally in meeting notes lmfao. I’m not kidding.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#37

Post by lazyeye »

habitue wrote: post #11
c7DJTLrn wrote: post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

The complaint details the reason it was not allowed in this case, though would be normally: the topics were subject to legal holds. > Like Mr. Pichai, other key Google employees, including those in leadership roles, routinely opted to move from history-on rooms to history-off Chats to hold sensitive conversations, even though they knew they were subject to legal holds. Indeed, they did so even when discussing topics…

Quite ironic...when you consider the lengths Google goes to, to retain everybody else's data.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#38

Post by ip26 »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #30

I moved from an HFT firm to Google. The attitude difference with respect to document holds was hilarious. At the HFT firm, the attitude was, "we're constantly being sued (by the SEC and others), so we treat all of our records like they're under litigation holds, just in case the SEC claims they wanted them, even the off-topic slack channels." At Google, the attitude was, "we're constantly getting sued, so we treat al…

Finance is default not trusted. If documents are missing, fraud is presumed. Tech doesn’t seem to have reached that point just yet.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#39

Post by hackernewds »

c7DJTLrn wrote: post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

> couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

here I present you a case for the perils of remote work

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#40

Post by hackernewds »

dataflow wrote: post #23
c7DJTLrn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. The law is kind of silly. A chat system that doesn't store history is functionally equivalent to an unrecorded call, but I'm guessing they would not consider an unrecorded call destruction of evidence.

It does record "history" - if it didn't, the recipient would see it appear and then immediately vanish in the next refresh of the screen, which is not the case. The thing is, it only keeps the history for a short period of time (hours/days). That's not the same thing as an unrecorded call, which isn't recorded for any period at all.

That is understood. However the medium begets a conversation around how most communication isn't recorded anyways, in this example if it were a phone call.
Post reply on HN