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

I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

write.as

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 188 posts

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#141

Post by president »

suddenexample wrote: post #24
nickv wrote: post #5

Google, in my mind, is the quintessential "You Either Die A Hero, Or You Live Long Enough To See Yourself Become The Villain" story. (To be fair, since this all is subjective, I do believe Google 2009 would consider this behavior counter to it's values and the values of the people it attracted.) The question I have is are there ways to stay true to values (which in some cases might be in direct opposition to growth a…

I'm always a bit taken aback by the heat that Google gets for even thinking about breaking into the Chinese market. Microsoft is in China and has active US military contracts. Apple is in China. Yet it's Google that gets the bad rap for trying to get into China and then ultimately turning down billions of dollars in revenue and data.

Microsoft never had a good rep to begin with. They were always seen as an evil corp. I remember when most of the mentions of Microsoft on the forums used to be spelled as "Micro$hit", "Micro$haft", or something similar. Google didn't have this image problem until later in the game.

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#142

Post by CPLX »

This guy has actually been a senior member of the organization that he's complaining has done bad things. He didn't prevent those things nor does he have a compelling narrative of working within the organization to change its path.

Mostly he just collected his cash, and is now writing a transparently self serving piece as he begins his run for elected office.

No thanks.

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#143

Post by gowld »

kevingadd wrote: post #36
travmatt wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also called social benefit corporations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_corporation If the company doesn’t have their values and goals listed in the articles of incorporation, then they have no legal obligation to follow them.

One common criticism I've heard of benefit corporations is that a hostile takeover or series of leadership changes can result in a situation where the values/goals are just stripped out intentionally, rendering it a normal corporation. Alternately, strip the assets and rights to leave the benefit corporation a husk and transfer everything to a non-benefit corp. It definitely makes me wonder how robust a setup like a…

It's not robust, B Corp is mildly a defense against activist minority shareholders, and largely PR sham.

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#144

Post by gowld »

jedberg wrote: post #53
nickv wrote: post #5

Google, in my mind, is the quintessential "You Either Die A Hero, Or You Live Long Enough To See Yourself Become The Villain" story. (To be fair, since this all is subjective, I do believe Google 2009 would consider this behavior counter to it's values and the values of the people it attracted.) The question I have is are there ways to stay true to values (which in some cases might be in direct opposition to growth a…

I know I'm biased because I worked there, but I think Netflix is still true to its values. It's always been about sharing stories with as many people as possible. They green light stuff that no one else will, some bad, some good, but they give a lot of storytellers a voice when no one else will. I remember that the legal department was surprisingly small, mainly because they don't go around suing everyone all the tim…

I thought Netflix was about super annoying auto-play video ads, and funneling users into cheaper IP regardless of their expressed desires.

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#145

Post by gowld »

mkolodny wrote: post #41
nickv wrote: post #5

Google, in my mind, is the quintessential "You Either Die A Hero, Or You Live Long Enough To See Yourself Become The Villain" story. (To be fair, since this all is subjective, I do believe Google 2009 would consider this behavior counter to it's values and the values of the people it attracted.) The question I have is are there ways to stay true to values (which in some cases might be in direct opposition to growth a…

The only way I've thought of so far is to create a not-for-profit. Your not-for-profit can still make money. But since no one owns equity, no one has incentive to optimize for profit over values.

The managers paying themselves salary have an incentive. This is how most "charities" work. But that is naturally a lower ceiling than a for-profit corp.

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#146

Post by virtuous_signal »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #102
virtuous_signal wrote: post #10

I don't have firsthand knowledge, but my conjecture is that the old Google probably had a significant % of employees who held the belief "We shouldn't censor for China, even if that makes us lose money". But over a period of years, whatever they selected for in hiring led to enough people joining, who don't give a damn about human rights in China, so the censorship went ahead. The only thing that stopped it was bad p…

> whatever they selected for in hiring Status seeking. Google has become the safe, secure job for people with low risk tolerance. That personality has predictable effects in any bureaucracy.

To be more generous, they hire fantastically bright people, but they do not give candidates an ethics quiz, nor would it even be possible to construct a non-gameable filter.

This likely goes for any company that grows from small to giant: early on, you hire people you know and trust, or that your (trustworthy) employees know and trust. But when you're deluged with applicants, you hire people who can solve leetcode hards in 30 minutes.

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#147

Post by apeace »

warpdrive wrote: post #134

"I saw them(Don’t be evil) used to guide product designs that put the company’s success above a user’s privacy, such as during the development of Google’s ill-fated social network, Buzz" Isn't it ironic that Buzz had major privacy issues - https://www.cnet.com/news/google-buzz-privacy-nightmare/

Was that a typo? Did he mean to say "put the user's privacy above the company's success"?

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#148

Post by ethbro »

sneak wrote: post #126
awb wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do the majority of people living in China know about / care about censorship? Curious if information was being censored how you'd even know.

Also: how much of that opinion is an actually informed one, versus an opinion shaped by censorship itself?

That was the moral of The Man in the High Castle when it was written -- that every totalitarian state's wet dream is that a new generation can be enculturated to not believe alternatives are possible.

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#149

Post by imw »

These sections really stood out to me:

"there is a significant difference between serving ads based on a Google search and working with the Chinese government on artificial intelligence or hosting the applications of the Saudi government, including Absher, an application that allows men to track and control the movement of their female family members."

This is a stark and honest way to put what Google is doing. These are actually fundamental values at stake. Not just 'privacy'.

"Although the causes and the implications are worth debating, I am certain of the appropriate response. No longer can massive tech companies like Google be permitted to operate relatively free from government oversight."

So FMAGAN companies are weaponzied in the geopolitics. This sounds good when dropped over the wall, but when you try to play this out against the current state of the USA, it seems near certain to me to go horribly wrong.

I would much rather break them up - all the way. Whatever that means.

Re: I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left

#150

Post by mpiedrav »

ehsankia wrote: post #128
mpiedrav wrote: post #115

Never trust a large company. Big money always trumps ethics in the long run, as "ethics" is just a PR stunt at FAANG scale. The big concern here is how Google, etc. are becoming an oligopoly with a very effective lobbying arm in any form of actual regulation. While the Western world holds democratic-ish values in public institutions, its large private companies are indeed totalitarian regimes.

But trust the person who's writing a medium post just as they're about to run for senate and need to boost their name id?

That post is just one of many anecdata (to some degree of truth) out there about Google and other FAANG companies being "ethically challenged".

I remember having done a "computer and society" assignment about 14 years ago on Google and China. I also remember Microsoft's "Halloween Documents" (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish) from early 2000s. And many other scenarios of Big Tech ignoring ethics.

In general, trust (like attention) is a limited resource to be used wisely.

Post reply on HN