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

Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 772 posts

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#741

Post by munk-a »

cortesoft wrote: post #586
munk-a wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those people aren't barred from suffering from invasions of privacy and rootkits for the sake of a minor convenience. Most places outside of tech folks with tolls need to carry company tools where they go - doctors carrying hospital beepers was essentially a meme in the 90's.

I am just explaining why they don't just give everyone a phone right away.... my company asks you if you want a work phone or to use your personal phone and get a stipend

Companies have the ability to make this option accessible or obscure, given the anecdote it sounds a lot like google was going out of their way to make it obscure and I'd suspect it was done for dishonest reasons.

I think it's fine to choose to use a personal device, but employee education around personal devices is very poor - no one sits you down and goes through your rights as a worker and companies benefit by keeping those rights obscure.

You can accept the risk if it's worth it for you and that's fine - but a lot of people aren't aware of the risks and their employer certainly won't tell them.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#742

Post by Viliam1234 »

thomasahle wrote: post #215
khazhoux wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditto. I find it bizarre that there's people who use the same device to span pictures of their weekends and their kids, as photos of whiteboards with highly-confidential trade secrets. Tawdry jokes with friends and family alongside messages from your manager.

We use the same mind, same hands, same eyes for all of those things as well. People view and use their phone as an extension to their body. I don't think it's possible to change that.

To build on your analogy, in some cultures people use exclusively one of their hands to eat, and the other to clean their butts. We could learn do the same with two phones, I guess.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#743

Post by bigiain »

daniel-cussen wrote: post #710
bigiain wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if your first paragraph is correct, what are we to make of the HR person saying "But that isn't how we use it, we would never access your personal data."? Were they lying? Or was there a real internal rule about "never" accessing personal data? A rule that was in disagreement with the $x million worth of coordinations of legal documentation? And if your second paragraph is correct, then "Google HR lies to you on y…

If they make verbal assurances that they'll do nothing bad, perhaps they'd be willing to write them down on the contract.

The upstream comment says that not only did they refuse to back up their verbal assurance that "they'll do nothing bad" with anything in writing, they withdrew the job offer over it.

It's been some time since "Do no evil" meant anything there...

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#744

Post by drewbug01 »

knorker wrote: post #661
drewbug01 wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t really what happened, you know. I think this is the “game of telephone” effect in action. It was a configuration change to an extension already installed by google onto employee computers. Hardly injecting malware.

I know. I think what I said is a fair description. I boggles the mind how someone could think this is ethical, and can defend this.

What boggles the mind is how you can think that's a fair description. I stated to you that it wasn't malware, and you said "I know."

How can it possibly be fair to paint something as malware if you "know" it wasn't? It's not even "like" malware - the whole point of the software was to inject notices that Google wanted its employees to see when they visited sites. That's the whole reason it exists!

Calling it "basically [...] malware" paints it as evil and bad by association, completely overlooking the fact that Google itself wanted that extension installed and the only thing done here was add another site to the list of sites that got a pop-up.

If you don't agree with what was done, fine. But don't call it a "fair description"; it's not remotely fair.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#745

Post by pksebben »

chii wrote: post #460
ahelwer wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you buy a share of a publicly-traded company you are not "investing" in the company, "contributing capital", whatever. The company does not use your money to build out its infrastructure; generally they don't see a dime of it. There are a few exceptions like with Tesla who issue new shares to cash in on their inflated stock price, but this is generally rare. Most companies are doing the opposite: buying more of th…

> If you buy a share of a publicly-traded company you are not "investing" in the company no you are - because it's a chain of capital investment that is linked all the way to IPO (or private investment pre-IPO). You purchase a share publicly from _someone_ who has purchased it from someone else. This chain of purchases leads all the way back to the initial share offering. Just because your dollar doesn't go directly…

that all sounds like an incredibly roundabout way of inflating ownership structures rather than contributing meaningfully to value. how much fidelity can be assumed by this, over time? Unless you assume that value traded in a market is perfectly efficient (which it's not) the value signal is going to degrade over time. so, how long can you trust that the "chain of investment" faithfully represents value added? a year? ten years? how about investments in companies that have been around for 50, 75, 100 years? Why is it that we take as a given that ownership of value necessarily connotes the owner is themselves valuable?

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#746

Post by thraway12 »

creato wrote: post #599
nullc wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Adobe, Apple Inc., Google, Intel, Intuit, Pixar, Lucasfilm and eBay. Apple's involvement was particularly egregious: they threatened to destroy adobe with spurious patent litigation unless they participated. Google executives also explicitly acknowledged that there actions were illegal and directed staff to keep discussions about it out of email. The companies basically got a slap on the wrist: the settlement wa…

> Apple's involvement was particularly egregious: they threatened to destroy adobe with spurious patent litigation unless they participated. My impression (from the emails that were quoted in the news at the time) was that Steve Jobs was the driving force behind it. All the other participants seemed to just go along with it. Still wrong, but I doubt it would have happened without Jobs pushing it.

ah yes, because as we know, executives' personalities are frequently reflected in their emails. /s What a crock

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#747

Post by wyclif »

willcipriano wrote: post #211
MereInterest wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it great when even something as huge and life-changing as a job is subject to a contract of adhesion with no negotiation allowed? I'm sure glad to live in such a free country with great worker rights. (Sarcasm intended.)

I have no idea how those contracts are enforceable. Quit your job, move across the country and then on your first day here are nine contracts to sign, no you can't take them home we need them now. If you don't sign you are unemployed and we want that relocation money back. I used to ask potential employers when I got deep into interviews with them. "Is there any way I can see all the contracts I would need to sign on…

I have always been the type to have a natural aversion to signing anything. Except for my marriage license, I've always done it under duress. But you know what's even worse? When employers or vendors ask you to sign lengthy contracts, and express a range of emotion from concern to outrage when you insist on reading what you are signing up to!

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#748

Post by wyclif »

DrHydeous wrote: post #679
astura wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What good is that if you're an "at-will" employee? They can just change the rules at any time for any reason and fire you if you don't agree to them. I have enough experience to know absolutely nothing about me employer is guaranteed/permanent in the US. Relevant story for the HN crowd: I worked for a small company (~250 employees). Real chill place. Six months after I start they were suddenly bought out by a huge mu…

I would assume that if they do decide to "change the rules" then the penalty clauses in the contract kick in, such as payment in lieu of notice. Jesusland does actually enforce contracts, right?

Where is "Jesusland"? (I'm from a small, deep blue, Acela corridor state that the current President-elect hails from, so pardon me for not knowing where this place is located).

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#749

Post by grzm »

wyclif wrote: post #748
DrHydeous wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would assume that if they do decide to "change the rules" then the penalty clauses in the contract kick in, such as payment in lieu of notice. Jesusland does actually enforce contracts, right?

Where is "Jesusland"? (I'm from a small, deep blue, Acela corridor state that the current President-elect hails from, so pardon me for not knowing where this place is located).

Likely they're referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesusland_map

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#750

Post by wyclif »

grzm wrote: post #749
wyclif wrote: post #748

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is "Jesusland"? (I'm from a small, deep blue, Acela corridor state that the current President-elect hails from, so pardon me for not knowing where this place is located).

Likely they're referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesusland_map

Well, if "Jesusland" = red state USA, it seems to me the blue states have exactly the same kinds of employment contracts.
Post reply on HN