271–280 of 582 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jesus Christ dude, they're led by a man who routinely sexually assaults people. Being permissive about that is pretty damning. Kooky beliefs are one thing, but cults combine those with oppressive social structures. It's not that hard unless you're stuck in the middle of one with all it's filtering.
So, like Tesla and SpaceX.
The author delayed his attempt to do something about the cult and got fired because he planned to do so. It would have been better to be fired after raising concerns to the HR. This would have been both more ethical and would also give a more solid ground for the trial, so that's a bit sad. Yet, that's so much better than the tons of people who knew and did nothing. Good luck to him!
There is also the little tidbit about him joining the Alphabet Union recently..... Surely not related and they could not have fired him for joining a union right.... right?! As far as I know however that would also be highly illegal - interesting story to follow for sure
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they didn’t cover their tracks very well anyways ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I mean they actually told him where they were from (geographically, if not organizationally), so clearly they didn't consider it something that needed to be secret. Which is interesting, because it gives us insight into their way of thinking [1]. They clearly don't consider themselves to be in any way toxic like the author thinks they are. Cults are interes…
Jesus Christ dude, they're led by a man who routinely sexually assaults people. Being permissive about that is pretty damning. Kooky beliefs are one thing, but cults combine those with oppressive social structures. It's not that hard unless you're stuck in the middle of one with all it's filtering.
Yes, the cult's leader sounds like a pretty awful person, but he wasn't working there. What were the cult members doing in their work in the department that was clearly wrong? It's suggested that there was favoritism and unfair promotion going on -- but it's not very well evidenced here. Were they using company money to fund their organization? It's also not clear from the article that the wine outfit is a cult subsidiary.
And if the concern is primarily that the cult itself is a shady organization with some bad people, and that something should be done to stop Google from having a clique of staff that are even _affiliated_ with that organization ... well that seems like a really fraught policy. Are you supposed to then ask everyone in the department about their religious affiliations, or whether they've given money to a fringe religious organization? That also seems like a really unhealthy road for a company to go down.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellowship_of_Friends
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/16/technology/google-fellows...
https://nypost.com/2021/11/09/sex-rituals-and-fine-wines-ins...
https://www.culteducation.com/group/927-fellowship-of-friend...
https://robertearlburton.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-fellowship...
https://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?12,3315
It makes sense that these are the type of people Google is forced to hire, or motivated to hire, what with the company's track record of ridiculously expensive unethical behaviour and all the over-the-top harassment claims. Consider also the most recent embarassment with the AI researcher who believed a computer performing pattern matching had feelings and sensations. It seems he is also apparently involved with some bizarre quasi-religious group, calling himself a preacher.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Not really sure what the big deal is. Did the cult hurt this fellow? Abuse him? Discriminate against him? Mob him? No. The article really just talks about his own disapproval of the cult. >It wasn't his business what these people got up to, frankly. Quoting the article: "The group is well-documented: There are allegations of child abuse, human trafficking, forced abortions, and rape within the group, which has some…
Should we forbid Catholics for the same reason?
Your answer lies in the distinction between cults and religion. In a nutshell, cults exert control over their members such that they compel them to behave contrary to their own interests.
So the modern, practical answer to that question is: No.
Your average Catholic is no threat and is very likely to be acting in their own interest, free of undue influence.
The Catholic Church, having had nearly two thousand years to brutally weave itself into society world-wide—has all but abandoned the behavior described above—with the exception of its clergy and people involved at the operational level of the church.
Indeed, they've outgrown the practice of using coercion at the level of the individual member, and now wield power as a small nation state with global reach.
>Should we forbid Catholics for the same reason?
If they're formerly or currently involved in any significant way at the operational level of the Church, then you may have an argument in the affirmative there. Albeit, a narrowly-scoped one.
So, if the author was fired for the reasons they believe, that's pretty bad behavior. But if he had not been fired, what was management supposed to have done about the cult members working for this department? Yes, the cult's leader sounds like a pretty awful person, but he wasn't working there. What were the cult members doing in their work in the department that was clearly wrong? It's suggested that there was favo…
Edit: also the self-dealing on hundreds of thousands of dollars in wine.
I wouldn’t be surprised to learn this is a common occurrence across tech. Coming from the Midwest, the West Coast seems full of cults. Talking to people, it doesn’t take long to find someone who was raised in a cult, or has family members in a cult.
I'm gonna make an assumption that you have a much more liberal definition of 'cult' than most of us are thinking of - I've lived and worked my entire life on the west coast, the last 2 decades in Northern California, and I don't think I've ever met someone raised in a cult.
So this is a video production department, which is kind of amazing when you think about it. The aesthetic of the modern corporate/tech video is cultish in character and it would make sense that these people know how to do this. And then it’s also interesting because one could assume that these people could do so because the actual engineers in Alphabet probably aren’t all that focused or interacting with this video t…
Obviously it is wrong to influence hiring/firing or purchasing decisions. But do you think there are grounds for removing cults in a general sense from a company? Surely it is an aspect of people private lives in the same way that religion is.
cults are pretty much corporations that aren't ashamed of their authoritarianism, with a few religious themes sprinkled in
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they didn’t cover their tracks very well anyways ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I mean they actually told him where they were from (geographically, if not organizationally), so clearly they didn't consider it something that needed to be secret. Which is interesting, because it gives us insight into their way of thinking [1]. They clearly don't consider themselves to be in any way toxic like the author thinks they are. Cults are interes…
The satanic and brainwashing/deprogramming scares of the 80’s changed the way a lot of people use the word, but for the preceding several millennia cult simply suggested: A membership community with secrets and opportunities reserved for members. There are millions of these around us, and we’re all probably members of several. It seems to be pretty normal throughout history. We just don’t acknowledge it as such becau…