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

411–420 of 472 posts

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#411

Post by frollogaston »

whstl wrote: post #291
magicalist wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a fair point that it's still up, though looking just now for two minutes there are at least some issues with auth[1] which would make me really not trust it. It was just speculation about what could be bad enough if they really did have permission to release it, but the OP is being so cagey below now I'm just wondering if they got release permission but misrepresented what they would be releasing or something. >…

If that's a real problem and fireable offence, then there's people at Google that should be fired ASAP for failing to delete this repository.

Maybe at this point it's even more disruptive to delete it since people are using it. There's a real reason to not want someone to release an official-looking CLI when you're already doing an actual official one for the same thing.

Idk if the firing was justified since he supposedly followed process and had manager approval, but that's only one side.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#412

Post by frollogaston »

pydry wrote: post #309
frollogaston wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a customer and dev, it's confusing to me when I look at Google's stuff and see official-looking unofficial CLIs.

As a customer who uses open source I care more about whether it works well than whether it's officially sanctioned but I can see how some of google management and its employees would take a diametrically opposite view to the i dotting and t crossing. There are a couple of unsanctioned clients in particular where I'd take a dim view of the company trying to kill them and one where it actually happened to wide condemna…

Unofficial is fine. It's also fine if the only way to use it is some unofficial or not-fully-supported thing, or if there are two ways but the unofficial one is better. It's just, if there's a real supported tool, it'd better not be possible to confuse with the unofficial one. If I were evaluating using a product like this and got confused about such a basic thing, I'd be gone.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#413

Post by frollogaston »

blitzar wrote: post #304
khazhoux wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm noticing a few commenters who work (worked?) at Google (inferred from comment history) who are critical of this person's actions. Tangent: did you really go through people’s histories far back enough to find out they were googlers/ex-googlers? Did you use an agent to do that?

How do you know that a HN commenter worked at Google - they will tell you.

If one Googler mentions anything about the past, another with supposedly longer tenure will come to call him/her not an OG original googler, and say that year wasn't the golden era of Google but an earlier year was

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#414

Post by olalonde »

whstl wrote: post #395
olalonde wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird that he even had the ability to create public repos inside the official Google Workspace org then. That said, I agree that some information seems to be missing. Like, why not instead fire the guy who announced the project on X and who I presume is his manager? Confusing.

The manager, Addy Osmani, also reportedly left Google, which is interesting. Also more interesting is the fact the repository is still alive and kicking. I can see Google firing the dev but HR/Legal giving a bogus reason, as is regular practice.

Interesting. I did a bit of digging and the disclaimer about not being an officially supported Google product was there from the start. There was briefly a logo that used Google colors[0] but it seems extreme to fire someone over such a small misstep. I'd say either HR gave him a bogus reason like you said or he's not telling the whole story.

[0] https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli/blob/1991d536b4a45e60...

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#416

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#417

Post by whstl »

frollogaston wrote: post #411
whstl wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's a real problem and fireable offence, then there's people at Google that should be fired ASAP for failing to delete this repository.

Maybe at this point it's even more disruptive to delete it since people are using it. There's a real reason to not want someone to release an official-looking CLI when you're already doing an actual official one for the same thing. Idk if the firing was justified since he supposedly followed process and had manager approval, but that's only one side.

Google doesn’t even care to tell its side.

HR/Legal very often will give bullshit reasons for termination, since their main job is to shield the company from lawsuits anyway.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#418

Post by DANmode »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #399
DANmode wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

California has had a ban on noncompetes since the gold rush.

and yet this is all very recent:

1.) https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30843644

2.) https://eppscoulson.com/google-got-slapped/

3.) https://www.lcwlegal.com/news/ab-1076-and-sb-699-codify-cali...

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#419

Post by DANmode »

altmanaltman wrote: post #405
DANmode wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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,…

Its not a new topic, the same applies for any employee as well. And no that's not just another day from the pov of google. That example was too extreme but even for minor things that can be a security concern etc if they are in active positions like that. Also we are not talking about pooping? Why change the topic?

I like your shooting all of the dogs example.

That’s why I went with it - yes, a one-of-thousands engineer (or janitor, for that matter) from Google who also headed or even founded a dog shelter that shot all of the dogs is non-news, as far as Google and their legal team are concerned.

Same as an employee’s “pooping”.

Enforce or enact a morality clause, or explicitly pay me not to do things - beyond that, my business after hours is mine.

Re: Fired by Google for creating the Google workspace CLI

#420

Post by dekhn »

userbinator wrote: post #277
dekhn wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The policy was always crystal clear, but at the same time, tons of people found it confusing. "I wrote this at home on my personal computer in my free time? Why does google own it? how can that be legal" came up a lot. People would get into huge fights with OSPO over this.

Keeping a very strict "firewall" between your personal and corporate life is the best way to avoid such situations, but then again, these are Google employees we're talking about...

I'm not 100% sure what your point is here, but the point I was making is that even in theory if you have a "firewall", your contract with Google (that you signed and agreed to) says that Google owns your code output even if it's done at home on your own time. It really comes down to (at least for Googlers in California) whether the work is related to Google's business (which often covers things like games, even if Google is not a game developer), and even then, you need to submit the work to the Googler lawyers and have them make the determination, before you get permission to publish the code on your own.

I saw this play out repeatedly with OSPO and saw many people who believed they had set up firewalls to allow this, and I understood Google's position and appreciated that they made it fairly easy for most people to open source their code.

Post reply on HN