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

341–350 of 472 posts

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#341

Post by wisty »

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…

You don't need to work at google to have common sense. An employee who does no real damage isn't getting canned unless they made someone look bad.

Maybe he did some damage? Did it create a security issue, e.g. if someone handed it to a bad llm agent? Maaaaybe.

Or was someone up the food chain doing the same thing, wit2h 20x the budget and a 12 month timeframe and now looks stupid?

Or maybe it's a bit of both, or maybe how he reacted to being told off?

Anyway, I can't believe how many people are commenting how ABSOLUTELY you get fired for any tiny breach of policy, have they ever held down a job?

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#342

Post by imtringued »

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #199
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…

Bottom line, he did something that affected the company without any authority. His action implied the product was Google blessed without the company fully knowing about it. Google has spent billions to protect its reputation and then you have a random guy put out a self create product without the company even knowing. They had a case for suing him for millions. Of Course, they wouldn't have been able to collect but i…

>They had a case for suing him for millions.

No they didn't. Any judge would laugh the big corporation out of the courtroom over this. The amount of evidence in favor of the employee would turn this into a frivolous lawsuit.

>Of Course, they wouldn't have been able to collect but it would have been hell for him.

You're assuming that an improbable event happens and are extrapolating from there. A more realistic case is that this is settled out of court simply to avoid involving the court, which is exactly what happened here: they fired him.

>They also had a case for criminal fraud.

No, they didn't.

I'm not sure in what alternative universe you're living in here.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#343

Post by PurpleRamen »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #288
ashdksnndck wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> It seems more like he misunderstood the necessary steps before making that release. Dude worked there for 7 years . Saying "oh, he just didn't understand the policy for going through legal/management approval" just does absolutely not pass the sniff test.

Policies change or have subtle context-specific details. Even after 7 years, people can lack basic knowledge for certain situations.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#344

Post by echoangle »

etothepii wrote: post #293
stevage wrote: post #272

The text of their "tweet that got me fired" is: > Introducing the Google Workspace CLI: https://github.com/googleworkspac e/cli - built for humans and agents. > Google Drive, Gmail, Calendar, and every Workspace API. 40+ agent skills included. Yeah, that absolutely looks like an official product announcement from Google. Surely it was obvious they'd get in trouble for that.

Is the issue primarily caused by the English language? (Google Workspace) CLI vs Google (Workspace CLI) Because Google has there name in the product for which the CLI was produced it looks like he's using the Google brand when he's only using a descriptor of what his CLI was for. Trademarks are funny, but if I build a thing that only works with Google Workspace wouldn't it be a bit weird to not say that?

If you launched a “google workspace cli”, as a random person not affiliated with google, wouldn’t you expect to get sued too? You could maybe try to get away with “CLI for google workspace” (although clarifying it with “compatible with google workspace” or something like that would be better), but the first one just sounds like it’s an official thing. If you namedrop a copyrighted name, you have to make sure that people won’t think you’re officially affiliated with that.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#345

Post by alexwwang »

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…

The situation has been changed. Google is no longer the one it was.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#346

Post by mapkkk »

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.…

Am I crazy for thinking that an employer should and has no say in whatever the fuck I do outside of work? As long as I'm not messing with company IP, I should be able to do what I want, no?

Like, I should be able to even berate my employer, as long as I'm not doing it from a persona that's directly tied to my employer e.g. my real name or git handle etc. They might not like it, but they sure as shit shouldn't be able to fire me for it. This would include working on extending a company's products, so long as I don't use the proprietary knowledge I'm privy to.

I realize that this guy published his thing under an alias directly tied to his work. My question was sparked from the general sentiment of your reply - and I am being genuine, sometimes I feel like this stance of mine is somehow "too radical"

I understand that this is not reality in most of the world, but I'm genuinely asking. I'm in the EU and I'm not in the software/silicon valley industry; if that helps with context.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#347

Post by saghm »

usea wrote: post #249
DANmode wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

"Right" is a pretty dubious way of framing it when basically every company works this way. You don't really have any choice in the matter. Passing a law about this wouldn't be removing any rights of individuals any more than we "removed" their right to enter a contract for pay lower than minimum wage or with unsafe working conditions.

A more fair way of phrasing it would be to say that we should remove the right of companies to require it.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#348

Post by wildrhythms »

ktm5j wrote: post #65
xnx wrote: post #40

Yikes. The lack of judgement involved in personally releasing something that could be confused for an official release (I was confused) by your employer is someone who has huge wildcard risk in the future. I would expect significant disciplinary action if they didn't follow procedure, and termination if they were directly warned at any point.

Yeah that's kind of the impression that I had.. should have ran it past his superiors. Hope he learns something from this instead of deflecting like he seems to be doing.

His boss is the one that announced the tool.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#349

Post by saghm »

mapkkk wrote: post #346
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.…

Am I crazy for thinking that an employer should and has no say in whatever the fuck I do outside of work? As long as I'm not messing with company IP, I should be able to do what I want, no? Like, I should be able to even berate my employer, as long as I'm not doing it from a persona that's directly tied to my employer e.g. my real name or git handle etc. They might not like it, but they sure as shit shouldn't be able…

I pretty much agree with you in principle. I'm in the US (not in silicon valley but working in software for over a decade).

Given my stance on a lot of things though I don't know how much evidence this is that this view isn't "too radical" but my (biased) take is that a lot of good ideas are radical until they aren't, and usually the ones don't ever become mainstream have better counterarguments than anything I've heard or been able to come up with against this view. I still don't really expect it to change in my lifetime though (in terms of what's legally allowed) just because of how massive a shift it would be.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#350

Post by LoganDark »

neya wrote: post #336
LoganDark wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Throttling is to avoid overloading degraded batteries. Replacing the battery alleviates the slowdowns. Apple didn't want your phone to shut off at 15% when the battery can't supply enough current to sustain full performance. Siri recordings are only ever stored to improve Siri. Apple does not share personal data or recordings with advertisers. There was a lawsuit based on coincidence alone. I am not an Apple sharehol…

> Siri recordings are only ever stored to improve Siri. Apple does not share personal data or recordings with advertisers. There was a lawsuit based on coincidence alone. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/26/apple-con... Apple told the Guardian: “A small portion of Siri requests are analysed to improve Siri and dictation. User requests are not associated with the user’s Apple ID. Siri responses are anal…

How does that disprove anything I said?

> That's what they told you to believe. Every other manufacturer also had smartphones with batteries at the time and they were not doing this FYI. That was just marketing speak by Apple. Please stop citing marketing speak.

So? Apple could just be the only vendor that cares enough about older devices in the wild to ensure they continue to function properly. Keep in mind that this very issue, of shutting off before the battery is actually depleted, plagues all sorts of older Android devices. Also keep in mind that Android devices typically struggle to get updates for 2-3 years as opposed to Apple's norm of 5-7 years. This only changed recently for a few vendors.

> This is not the core issue, though. The core issue is not disclosing financial incentives while commenting something positive / negative.

Having opinions on something you're invested in is a big gray area in general. It tends to cause people to blanket ignore you.

Post reply on HN