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

Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

breitbart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 486 posts

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#331

Post by bitlax »

cromwellian wrote: post #319

Seems no one understands Popper's Paradox. Lots of talk about it being unfair that a workplace is intolerant of people who are intolerant. There are just some values that are not negotiable for a modern, civilized, homogeneous society. We're not talking about debates about the level of social welfare, or regulation, we're talking about common decency of treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or eth…

Modern intersectionality dictates that people be treated very differently based on their gender, sexuality, and ethnic origin.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#332

Post by lbsnake7 »

test001only wrote: post #323
cromwellian wrote: post #319

Seems no one understands Popper's Paradox. Lots of talk about it being unfair that a workplace is intolerant of people who are intolerant. There are just some values that are not negotiable for a modern, civilized, homogeneous society. We're not talking about debates about the level of social welfare, or regulation, we're talking about common decency of treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or eth…

This exactly. The common playbook now seems to be to hide racism and intolerance under the blanket of conservative and accusing anyone who opposes that to be against free speech and conservatives. These nonnegotiable values do not belong to the left or right, it belongs to the society as a whole.

Who decides these nonnegotiable values? Society as a whole? If half of the country voted for Trump and believes in his values, then half of the society that you are a part of has different nonnegotiable values. So these values are no longer nonnegotiable and are now very much just whatever values the majority holds.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#333

Post by betterunix2 »

rsj_hn wrote: post #41
tcbawo wrote: post #6

Is it really surprising that a multinational company would have a preferred candidate? Although, I'm sure they lobbied extensively for all major candidates. It is interesting that both major parties seem to want to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to free speech, "common carrier", and antitrust issues.

No, it's not surprising at all. Every company has a preferred candidate in pretty much every election, at least the CEO and top leadership certainly does. What is surprising is turning an all hands into a kind of mass grieving funeration for all of their 90K employees, replete with publicly weeping executives and the entire executive leadership being vocally outraged. Turning an all hands into a political event like…

Google employees are highly educated (disproportionate numbers of PhDs work there etc.), and highly educated people in America, on both the left and right, were mourning when Trump was elected. You do not have to be left leaning to think a President who does not read books, who admires dictators, who is surrounded by criminals, and whose campaign rhetoric involved the overt demonization of ethnic and religious minorities (and plenty of dog whistles too), might be a bad thing for this country. I would have voted Republican if the Democrat candidate had encouraged division in this country the way Trump did. I have intelligent Republican friends who voted for Hillary for the same reason; even my Christian Conservative father in law, who said Bush was not conservative enough, could not bring himself to vote for Trump (he only voted for congressional candidates in 2016). People across the political spectrum recognized the danger Trump poses from the moment he started talking about Mexican rapists.

One problem with the "debate" on Trump is the effort by some to make this into just another political disagreement and to normalize Trump. It is not just politics and the all-hands meeting was not a "political event." People have every reason to be scared by what has been happening since Trump took office.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#334

Post by CoolGuySteve »

oriol16 wrote: post #330
cromwellian wrote: post #319

Seems no one understands Popper's Paradox. Lots of talk about it being unfair that a workplace is intolerant of people who are intolerant. There are just some values that are not negotiable for a modern, civilized, homogeneous society. We're not talking about debates about the level of social welfare, or regulation, we're talking about common decency of treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or eth…

treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or ethnic origin This is a very vague statement, you can apply to your convenience. You could say Damore broke the principle and justify any penalty against him. I could say you don't follow this civility premise by choosing your partner based on your gender. Every country in the world has "ethno-nationalist views against immigrants", and things work fine.

The world would be $78 trillion richer if countries had open borders. So I'm not sure what definition you have for "fine".

https://www.economist.com/the-world-if/2017/07/13/a-world-of...

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#335

Post by tosser00001 »

cromwellian wrote: post #319

Seems no one understands Popper's Paradox. Lots of talk about it being unfair that a workplace is intolerant of people who are intolerant. There are just some values that are not negotiable for a modern, civilized, homogeneous society. We're not talking about debates about the level of social welfare, or regulation, we're talking about common decency of treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or eth…

"There's no reason anyone has to respect ethno-nationalist views against immigrants."

There are plenty of reasons to be against the current immigration regime that don't involve ethno-nationalism but it's nearly impossible to forward any such arguments without being accused of being an ethno-nationalist.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#336

Post by zmix »

oriol16 wrote: post #330
cromwellian wrote: post #319

Seems no one understands Popper's Paradox. Lots of talk about it being unfair that a workplace is intolerant of people who are intolerant. There are just some values that are not negotiable for a modern, civilized, homogeneous society. We're not talking about debates about the level of social welfare, or regulation, we're talking about common decency of treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or eth…

treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or ethnic origin This is a very vague statement, you can apply to your convenience. You could say Damore broke the principle and justify any penalty against him. I could say you don't follow this civility premise by choosing your partner based on your gender. Every country in the world has "ethno-nationalist views against immigrants", and things work fine.

> Every country in the world has "ethno-nationalist views against immigrants", and things work fine.

For whom?

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#337

Post by akhilcacharya »

swebs wrote: post #268
akhilcacharya wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering he continues to have a severely underwater approval rating I’d wager it’s less derangement and more the majority view. If anything the “it’s all normal, everything is fine” folks whose reactions are more interesting here. It’s certainly not the consensus view.

His approval rating has been hovering around 45-50%. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trum...

That is the sole pollster that indicates this. The rest indicate low 40's to mid-high 30's. This is despite a growing economy.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#338

Post by monochromatic »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #173
monochromatic wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Considering he continues to have a severely underwater approval rating I’d wager it’s less derangement and more the majority view. If anything the “it’s all normal, everything is fine” folks whose reactions are more interesting here. It’s certainly not the consensus view.

I haven’t exactly seen trans folks being rounded up and out into camps. The people who said everything was going to be all right were correct. TDS remains in effect for others.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#339

Post by monochromatic »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #337
swebs wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His approval rating has been hovering around 45-50%. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trum...

That is the sole pollster that indicates this. The rest indicate low 40's to mid-high 30's. This is despite a growing economy. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

And we still trust polls in a post-2016 world?

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#340

Post by test001only »

lbsnake7 wrote: post #332
test001only wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This exactly. The common playbook now seems to be to hide racism and intolerance under the blanket of conservative and accusing anyone who opposes that to be against free speech and conservatives. These nonnegotiable values do not belong to the left or right, it belongs to the society as a whole.

Who decides these nonnegotiable values? Society as a whole? If half of the country voted for Trump and believes in his values, then half of the society that you are a part of has different nonnegotiable values. So these values are no longer nonnegotiable and are now very much just whatever values the majority holds.

Why do you assume the basic values differ between these two set of people. That is seeing people in black and white. Let us take a nonnegotiable value of not being racist. Are you implying that 50% of the people are racist. Nope - that is certainly not the case. People who voted for Trump might have voted for various other things - there might have been certain issues that they resonated with him, vote for Republican party etc. They might have voted for him despite his flaws.
Post reply on HN