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

Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 472 posts

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#241

Post by sib »

DANmode wrote: post #238
bonsai_bar wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it so extreme? If you work at Google, there's a very clear policy for doing any outside "work" (volunteering, an open source side project, a business, being on a board, etc.): if it's related to your day-to-day work and/or related to Google's business (which virtually anything software is), you need to fill out a disclosure form and get a go-ahead from legal. Obviously a Google Workspace CLI is related to Google.…

Being an employee of Google doesn’t give them any sway over my board position at an animal rescue, or anywhere else, unless my contract and pay reflects that.

Pretty sure that the agreement that Google employees sign (a "contract") when hired reflects exactly that. At least at did when I joined (I left > 3 years ago, speaking here only for myself...)

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#242

Post by sib »

DANmode wrote: post #236
Arainach wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Build cool shit and follow the proper release procedures for it . There is a huge difference between something unrelated to your employer on a personal repo, youremployerrepo/api-samples, and calling something "Employer Majorproduct CLI" on an official employer repo which is bound to be confused for an official release. I would have been fired from every employer I've ever worked for of any size for doing something l…

> follow the proper release procedures for it What happens when your thing or nothing close to your thing will ever see the light of day?

Is that relevant here,

given that Google was creating an official thing

quite close to his thing

at the same time?

(And why are we writing like this?)

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#243

Post by DANmode »

sib wrote: post #242
DANmode wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> follow the proper release procedures for it What happens when your thing or nothing close to your thing will ever see the light of day?

Is that relevant here, given that Google was creating an official thing quite close to his thing at the same time? (And why are we writing like this?)

> Google was creating an official thing quite close to his thing

Just link to it.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#244

Post by DANmode »

sib wrote: post #241
DANmode wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being an employee of Google doesn’t give them any sway over my board position at an animal rescue, or anywhere else, unless my contract and pay reflects that.

Pretty sure that the agreement that Google employees sign (a "contract") when hired reflects exactly that. At least at did when I joined (I left > 3 years ago, speaking here only for myself...)

Is it legal (or moral) for an employer to keep you from being a board member of a dog rescue or a glove repair company without review?

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#246

Post by nl »

DANmode wrote: post #244
sib wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure that the agreement that Google employees sign (a "contract") when hired reflects exactly that. At least at did when I joined (I left > 3 years ago, speaking here only for myself...)

Is it legal (or moral) for an employer to keep you from being a board member of a dog rescue or a glove repair company without review?

The obvious answer is that "obvious lines" aren't at all obvious at the scale of Google.

Googlers are well paid, and that pay reflects this.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#247

Post by ashdksnndck »

bonsai_bar wrote: post #159
cdata wrote: post #131

I'm noticing a few commenters who work (worked?) at Google (inferred from comment history) who are critical of this person's actions. First: you ought to disclose that information when commenting on a topic that relates in some way to your financial incentives. Second: when I worked at Google under Chrome it was very common for individuals and teams to publish projects to open source repositories under Google-managed…

Is it so extreme? If you work at Google, there's a very clear policy for doing any outside "work" (volunteering, an open source side project, a business, being on a board, etc.): if it's related to your day-to-day work and/or related to Google's business (which virtually anything software is), you need to fill out a disclosure form and get a go-ahead from legal. Obviously a Google Workspace CLI is related to Google.…

It seems like the guy believed he was just doing his job for Google, not moonlighting? He released the project on Google’s own GitHub. It seems more like he misunderstood the necessary steps before making that release.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#249

Post by usea »

DANmode wrote: post #244
sib wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure that the agreement that Google employees sign (a "contract") when hired reflects exactly that. At least at did when I joined (I left > 3 years ago, speaking here only for myself...)

Is it legal (or moral) for an employer to keep you from being a board member of a dog rescue or a glove repair company without review?

Another way to frame that question is: Should we remove the right for people to enter into such contracts?

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#250

Post by DangitBobby »

debo_ wrote: post #189
financltravsty wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a very sad departure from more humanistic values towards "well technically their legal rights take precedence over common good." Especially that he's an "engineer" not a "Googler" or "a person." God what a fall from grace.

I was there in 2005 and we were basically told point-blank that we couldn't open source _anything_ without running it by a manager first. This was at a time where all engineers were basically housed in the main 4 buildings on the north campus, so not yet all that big. Not sure what grace they fell from, but I found it to be a nauseating sanctimonious place even then.

According to the Twitter thread his manager is the one who announced it.
Post reply on HN