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

We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 888 posts

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#541

Post by ameister14 »

learc83 wrote: post #353
ameister14 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the USA is definitely a proponent of free speech, and actually that it takes it to extremes. Pretty much the only speech outlawed is child pornography and that which a reasonable person would see as inciting imminent violence. That's a pretty high bar, higher than any other country I've ever heard of.

I agree that the US has stronger free speech protections than any country I'm aware of, but we have more restrictions than the 2 you've mentioned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...

Yes, words under copyright and defamatory statements. Not a huge expansion, covered under 'pretty much' in my opinion.

Fighting words is essentially a dead precedent, and all that remains is inciting imminent violence, which I mentioned.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#543

Post by driverdan »

headsupftw wrote: post #316
Puer wrote: post #38

I considered working at Google last year after a recruiter reached out to me, but their decision to backtrack on their promise in China changed my mind. I do not morally condemn anyone who works at Google. I have many good friends that are both bright engineers and undeniably good people that work there. I just feel that as someone who's family is Taiwanese, I cannot in good consciousness support the company. I let t…

Do you in good consciousness support the U.S. government? I'm asking because the government doesn't recognize Taiwan as an independent country and kicked Taiwan out of the United Nations in 1971.

> Do you in good consciousness support the U.S. government?

What kind of question is that? No citizen supports all the actions of their government. Government options are a lot more limited than employment options.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#544

Post by Brain_Thief »

aibrahem wrote: post #136

As someone who lived most of his life in a dictatorship, I really struggle to understand the logic of these employees. I was actually surprised Google stepped out of China a couple of years ago and felt like the decision was taken by a bunch of people who don't understand what it's like to live in a non-democratic country. Do they think that everybody in China cares that their internet is censored or that they're bei…

As a lifelong US citizen I have to say that, while I want the best for the Chinese people in every respect, I believe it is fairly obvious that any expansion of the Chinese government's power would be bad for the world (specifically w.r.t. human rights). Many people in this thread seem to be advocating for the abandonment of the West's moral aspirations based upon the idea that a censored Google being available in China is the best thing for Chinese citizens. To me, this perspective seems to be incorrect and and strangely myopic. If we accept the premise (and not everyone here will) that the moral aspirations of the west point toward a more human-centric and democratic global future than those of the Chinese government, then it follows that individuals concerned with the human condition must not support an expansion of Chinese government power in the name of short-term corporate profit. Essentially, anything that increases the efficiency of the Chinese government, or lessens the pain of government censorship, increases that government's power and its ability to enact its goals and is therefore a net negative both for Chinese citizens and for the world. Providing censorship-friendly versions of western technology to non-democratic countries may be in the short-term best interests of the subjugated populations of said countries (and other parties such as shareholders), but that strategy is undeniably in the long-term worst interests of the world and its peoples.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#545

Post by minimaxir »

scarface74 wrote: post #341

And if the employees placed thier values over profits, why are they still there? I wonder if they are going to refuse their stock based compensation?

> btw if I quit on Feb 1, I'm walking away from half a million dollars in stock. This has some serious monetary consequences for me.

https://twitter.com/lizthegrey/status/1067469950594486272

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#546

Post by sdenton4 »

tomschlick wrote: post #499
yarrel wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to go with the vets' opinion on this one. If Brinks trucks do the same work, use Brinks trucks. They are civilian vehicles and all of the tasks you list are civilian tasks. Militarization of the police force is a very, very, very bad idea.

> I'm going to go with the vets' opinion on this one. Anecdotal opinions. I know plenty of vets who don't think MRAPs are a big deal at all. > If Brinks trucks do the same work, use Brinks trucks. Armored cars cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy and outfit from companies like Lenco. MRAPs are bought for ~$1k (transport costs) from the federal government. > Militarization of the police force is a very, very,…

It's exactly the riot cop problem. On the cop side, the more armor you have, the less you see and the more hostile the world /seems/; this increases the chance of using force instead of diplomacy in any given situation.

On the civilian side, you get to feel like you live in a goddamned war zone, with the police as combatants. It's not a nice feeling.

My own approach is to treat cops as large, gun-wielding wild animals: maybe they'll be fine, but in any interaction there's a chance they'll fuck up your life permanently. And that's a direct consequence of having police on 'war footing' with the community, where the default reactions to problems are either violence or long-term imprisonment. And the ethics of this extends beyond my own interactions: if I see something illegal happening, calling the cops means putting people in extreme danger. As a result, I'm not going to call the cops for anything less than assault. Thus, police militarization works against actual enforcement of the law, because it estranges police from the population. (For a whole lot more, go listen to season 3 of the Serial podcast...)

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#547

Post by tomschlick »

driverdan wrote: post #540
tomschlick wrote: post #443

> MRAP's are for combat, not police work While they were designed for combat, they are effectively the same thing that Brinks uses to transport money. They are meant to stop bad things from killing the people inside. They have 0 offensive weapons. They are entirely defensive vehicles that have been used to rescue downed officers, civilians in harms way (gunfire), and multiple times in natural disasters where other ve…

They are not the same thing as a standard armored truck. The name itself gives that away (Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected). Police do not need mine-resistant vehicles. MRAPs have high maintenance and running costs. The simple fact that they are former military vehicles contributes to the military mindset of many police depts, something that should be avoided. Militarization of police forces is bad for citizens.

> Police do not need mine-resistant vehicles.

Serious eye roll here. You're discarding all of the other capabilities and suggesting that because it is ALSO mine resistant it must be bad.

> MRAPs have high maintenance and running costs.

That's assuming they are used all the time. Most departments have them parked at their HQs and only use them for call outs or training. Regular maintenance wouldn't reach the same levels of cost as buying a bearcat + maintaining that. Also as more depts get them, the maintenance costs will go down (excluding the OP comment here's area).

> contributes to the military mindset of many police depts

While I generally agree with that notion, I would much rather them buy the cheaper milsurp vehicle with more capability than buy one from Lenco, or not buy one at all and have to wait an hour during an active shooter.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#548

Post by orblivion »

megaman8 wrote: post #383

I think, what these employees don't realize is: Even when a company places values over profits, it is still in an attempt to maximize profits over the long term. By placing values above profits, it increases it's goodwill with customers thus increasing it's moat and it's retention, as well as it's employee retention. This strategy made sense in the early days. Not anymore. As Google's position becomes increasingly st…

I think it's always a combination of factors. Unless you subscribe to the theory that every CEO is 100% sociopath.

There's the consideration of true values. Then there's the consideration of lost opportunities from following those values. Then there's the cold consideration of the money gained from PR boost due to following the values. Then there's the "game theory" consideration of altogether dying in the marketplace if your competition don't act on those values.

I think the best thing for all of us to do on the outside is to create a culture where every company benefits from the PR boost. Google executives are one concentrated interest, separate from Microsoft, etc. The employees, I reckon, are not as financially motivated (i.e. don't stand to lose _as_ much individually) and can afford to advocate their values. It seems to me (I'll phrase it conservatively, since I'm just throwing out ideas here) that Google employees should make friends with Microsoft employees to make sure they raise the same noise on their end as well. Make it okay for each company to gain (monetarily or otherwise) from good PR, and make it less profitable for all of their competitors to sell out.

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#549

Post by TulliusCicero »

vorpalhex wrote: post #419
fouc wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, that's an excellent point. When a company is so big and entrenched it doesn't need to seem like the nice guy anymore. Perhaps similarly to anti-monopoly laws we should also have size caps on companies.

> we should also have size caps on companies As a thought experiment, I've often wondered the best way to maintain the positive corporate culture that small companies tend to lose as they grow. It's not clear it's simply growth, or whether it's profits. I wonder if a non-charity oriented non-profit would maintain a better corporate culture.

> the positive corporate culture that small companies tend to lose as they grow.

It's more like regression to the mean; it gets harder to be different as you grow. Good companies get worse, bad companies better (just look at Uber's internal culture).

Re: We are Google employees – Google must drop Dragonfly

#550

Post by sabas123 »

partiallypro wrote: post #453

I find the Google/Chinese search engine troubling, but I do think people are playing this up to be a lot more than it should be. I think one fact is that Google is in an area and recruits people that are hyper liberal individuals. For example: not wanting to work with the U.S. military on projects, having AI use gender neutral writing, random PC things, little diversity in political thought etc. I don't think Google…

Can you name a single example of something that you seem problematic?
Post reply on HN