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

381–390 of 472 posts

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#381

Post by LoganDark »

neya wrote: post #368
LoganDark wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 thi…

> How does that disprove anything I said? >> 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...

I read it again. Is that really spying? Is it spying that the activations were accidental, is it spying that they are grading them, or is it spying that sensitive data sometimes appears in recordings? Is it spying that the sensitive data ends up making its way to subcontractors? I don't get what makes this spying to you. All of the above?

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#382

Post by busterarm »

DangitBobby wrote: post #251
busterarm wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that but not clearing with your management that you're not working on something that is actually being worked on as a product. Definitely they put some manager and/or team in a very uncomfortable position releasing this.

Management literally announced it for him.

That's a gross misunderstanding of corporate life.

_A_ manager boosted it on twitter. It's not an announcement in the sense that companies announce things. You're also assuming that one team knows what the other is doing.

This is literally the reason there are standard procedures for doing things like this.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#383

Post by ktm5j »

saghm wrote: post #359
ktm5j wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Superiors like...his manager, who announced the project for him?

If that's really the case (which isn't really clear from this post) then I feel like we're missing some details.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#384

Post by DANmode »

nl wrote: post #380
DANmode wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People said the same thing about non-compete agreements. Sorry, not buying that’s for anyone’s good.

I don't understand your point. What I'm saying is that it might be "obvious" that it's ok to volunteer for a dog rescue group. Is it equally as ok to volunteer to raise money for a dog rescue group operating in Gaza? What about other charities operating in Gaza? What about in Israeli occupied territories?

> I don't understand your point.

Then you don’t know the history of the non-compete agreement in the tech industry.

For decades, people were wringing their hands and holding themselves back from living well because they couldn’t possibly work for another software company after Google, Microsoft, whomever - because the contract stated they couldn’t work for competitors.

Well, then States showed up and said “that’s not even legal”, and people stopped handwringing.

But before, it looked very much like this thread.

If I was working for a dentist, none of your questions would be viable (let alone reasonable) for the employer to be asking.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#385

Post by DANmode »

altmanaltman wrote: post #260
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?

Legally, yes. I mean it still depends on a lot of things but mostly at will employment contracts will have clauses about such things. You will have to get approval from legal before you can get on a board of even a dog rescue or a glove repair company. A practical consideration is simple like if you are a google exec and you are on board of a dog rescue company and that company gets hit with allgeations that you are…

> if you are a google exec

But that’s not who is being discussed. Why create a new topic?

If a low-level employee is part of a rescue accused of shooting all of the dogs, that’s just another day.

> News will cover it as "Google Exec on Board of Evil Dog Rescue Company" so you extend that repuation risk to Google as well since you are actively employed there

No problem with a standard morality clause in the contract, so they can pull the plug when you embarrass them.

I do have a problem with the idea that I need to check in with my employer every time I take a shit in my personal life.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#386

Post by NBJack »

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…

Regardless of what you or I think of the policy, most major software companies (Google included) have clauses in your employment contract around how you represent the company in a real or percieved official capacity. This wasn't just some account persona; it was published as if it were an official open source product endorsed by Google (complete with branding). The author apparently didn't have permission or legal right to do so, and publicly violated their agreement.

Was the response short sighted? Up for debate. But unfortunately for the author, they have no real legal standing on this matter. Had it been their own repo, sans any branding, it would likely have been fine.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#387

Post by Ukv »

fg137 wrote: post #139
justinwp wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are assuming that it was "personally" releasing something and that the process wasn't followed.

Why isn't it under google's username on github? Why does the repo say "This is not an officially supported Google product."? Is it actually approved by Google or not? You need to actually answer these questions instead of dodging them.

> Why isn't it under google's username on github?

It's under "googleworkspace", one of Google's GitHub organizations (linked on https://developers.google.com/workspace).

> Why does the repo say "This is not an officially supported Google product."?

This seems to be boilerplate that Google puts on open-source releases, e.g: https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/kaniko

It's not saying that it's not released by Google, but that it's not an officially supported Google product. I presume to make it clear that it's not covered by support agreements/bug bounties/etc. in the way products like Google Docs would be.

> Is it actually approved by Google or not?

It went through the launch/approval process (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48655744) and was announced by Justin's manager.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#388

Post by [deleted] »

n6242 wrote: post #314
Grombobulous wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your encouragement is admirable but could be interpreted as naive. For one thing, the author of this tool used Google trademarks (the logo) to represent the project. If you are even slightly larger than a mom and pop small business you pretty much have to defend that trademark or else you risk losing it. But, okay, fine, you can just tell them not to use your trademark and have them say it's not an official t…

In a modest 25 people company you absolutely can just go and do this of your own initiative and it will be tolerated or encouraged. Any company that size where it's not possible will close in 18 months when it runs out of investor money without having accomplished anything. You should still mention you're doing it beforehand, though.

[deleted]

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#389

Post by tlogan »

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.

In any reasonable company (with common sense leadership), someone would not be fired for doing something (with good intentions) that does not harm company very much.

Releasing something like this did not really harm the company (the project is still on GitHub).

Any smart executive could have spun the release of this CLI into a win.

Even if some other team complained that this was encroaching on their work, a smart executive would say: “cool show me your work tomorrow morning so we can replace this with you work”

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#390

Post by me-vs-cat »

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 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.

There are many things you should be able to do publicly without repercussion from your employer. However, your example is berating them, and I'm taking that literally: "to criticize in an angry manner".

If I read this correctly, then you believe your employer should be able to fire you if you angrily criticize them in public under your name. I agree in principle, that could damage their trust in your ability to do your job. Depending on specifics, that damage could be enough to justify firing you.

I don't understand why doing so anonymously should change the potential damage to their trust in you, if they later learn you said what you did.

Post reply on HN