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

Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#271

Post by ntnxw »

ceejayoz wrote: post #265
wtveb wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The politics of $RICH_GUY_WHO_WORKS_AT_TECH_IN_THE_WEST_COAST are not secret, I was just laughing at the prospect of a seemingly neutral "project" which is just a way of denouncing companies that use their advertisement power to show how leftist they are (because in this day and age they have no other choice) while, at the same time, they give money to those eeeevil conservatives.

At what point has anyone said it was neutral?

"Pinboard has been keeping track of political donations from big tech companies" does not seem to imply that it's a completely biased report, but yeah, I should have known better :P

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#272

Post by t0astbread »

magashna wrote: post #167
FussyZeus wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is political, and politics affect everything. If you think there are no politics in something it's likely that the politics involved in it are not close to you, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Identity isn't political, until you have one that isn't an accepted norm. Sexual orientation isn't political, until people want to deny you insurance over yours. Race isn't political, until people refuse to s…

If you demanded the "privilege" of discussing politics at work, I'd promptly not hire/fire you.

The "privilege" here is that banning discussions about politics can be used as a tool to silence the opposition of the current status quo.

* edit: changed "competition" to "opposition"

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#274

Post by Kalium »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #254
josteink wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are we supposed to tolerate his views? His views are his own. He should be free to express them. What we wouldn’t have to tolerate was his actions , because they clearly harmed others.

Does action include hateful speech? Not being facetious just genuinely wanting to know. I've always found it difficult to dissociate views vs actions when it comes to espoousing a hateful view.

Someone, at some point, probably regardes some of your views as hateful. With that in mind, how much would you like to be subject to prior restraint based on someone else's internal emotional understanding of your views?

Generally it's worth dividing hateful words from hateful actions. Saying something racist in hateful, and might have political or social consequences, but wise societies are aware that getting into the game of policing speech is a mess. Attacking someone for being the wrong race is much more clear-cut, and society generally has an interest in discouraging violence to begin with.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#275

Post by nabla9 »

maxaf wrote: post #82
webwielder2 wrote: post #59

It's funny how we pigeonhole "things that actually matter" as "politics" and that those things are somehow taboo. I mean, what's MORE worth talking about than human rights, the environment, history, etc.?

Not every place where groups of people participate in shared activities must become a forum for political battles.

There are times in history and political issues where politics must spread to everywhere, including workplace. Everything must be disrupted until things get fixed. There could be general strikes etc. Like what is happening in HK for example.

Where the limit goes varies. Personally I hate children and don't have them, so concentration camps for children are not the breaking point for me. For many others it may be.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#276

Post by LaGrange »

azffz wrote: post #128
tdb7893 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen people at work defend trans hate as a "conservative value". It's fine if people have different opinions on taxes but to reject people's identity like that, especially one held by some of their colleagues, should cross a line and they shouldn't be able to hide behind "conservative values".

That's the point, you should be able to hold that opinion, but you should not publicly state it openly at work in the first place.

As a trans woman, I’d rather they did. Even if they don’t get fired, at least I know it’s not safe to come out.

“Don’t ask don’t tell” is a tempting policy, but that’s how you end up surrounded by TERFs when something inadvertently outs you.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#277

Post by f00zz »

rollinDyno wrote: post #266
f00zz wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this view that "everything is political". How can can a discussion on e.g. C++20 coroutines be political?

C++20 coroutines are tools to serve a purpose. That purpose is political.

Sometimes that purpose is just to tell if two binary trees have the same fringe

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#279

Post by ntnxw »

tdb7893 wrote: post #267
october_sky wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking the other side, how do you counter the "So some opinions are okay to state publicly, while others are not?" I think this is the rub... For any given X, you'll find groups of people that are pro-X, and someone anti-X.

Some things shouldn't be okay to say. That intolerance actually hurts people, if someone says "the Nazis were right" that really doesn't end up being a victimless crime, America is an example right now where the rhetoric is leading to actual violence towards certain groups. While I think the government regulating it too much is not good I don't see the issue of doing it collectively as individuals. Edit: just as a fi…

[flagged]

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#280

Post by oppositelock »

duxup wrote: post #206
oppositelock wrote: post #187

I worked at Google for quite a while, 2005-2013, and even then, the internal political discussion was pretty toxic, but a lot smaller in scope since there are far fewer people. There were definitely groups meant for discussing politics, and loudmouths like me willingly participated in those - however, it was very uncivil. There was a majority view in the company, and if anyone didn't agree with the majority view, the…

Help me out here. Do you mean "internal political" as "Oh man Jimmy is in charge of gmail now!" (just a made up example of internal politics there) or "Can you belive what the POTUS did!?!?!"? If the latter, I'm a bit surprised ... I can't imagine having that kind of conversation at work. That is absolutely a NO GO zone for me at work.

Definitely the latter - people trying to convince others that their views on war, or abortion, or taxes, or political party are the correct ones.

These are also people who are intelligent, educated, and quite arrogant, so the fireworks were pretty spectacular.

Post reply on HN