They forgot the “don’t be evil” era ended a long time ago.
I applaud the initiative but it’s naive to think this’ll change anything. And when push comes to shove these people wont quit their comfy job in this economic climate.
An issue with this approach is that engaging in this way can start to reset your standards for "toxic people", and not in the cheerful "I'd like to buy the world a coke" manner.
One other issue I've had when I have tried to do this is that largely the "big" horrible issues with things are systematic rather than interpersonal- it doesn't matter who is operating the "baby seal blender", its operation is both the harm being done and the reason why "baby-seal-smoothies-r-us" operates so unless you cease the very profitable baby-seal-smoothy business the harm isn't going to stop.
Not to say that those issues are universally applicable, but rather to note that when you dance with the devil you need to observe how the devil is dancing with you; if you're going to go that way you need to be really careful in ways you don't need to be careful if you, say, just go work in a situation where the harm you create is less obvious and immediate.
It seems like a new version of this story, "[Big tech] workers protest their employer taking [federal agency] contracts" shows up at least once a year. I guess the steel man of this is that people think they can take jobs at these corps and push reform from within, but this seems powerfully naive to me. Fact of the matter is that a large portion of the compensation these companies provide is for buying off your better judgement. You're taking a deal with the devil when you sign on. There are a lot of better, smaller, companies you could be working for, but you chose the evil ones because it pays better.
>There are a lot of better, smaller, companies you could be working for, but you chose the evil ones because it pays better.
Amen.
I have a buddy who has very strong attitude about how "companies / your employer are not your friends" and I understand that to an extent. At the same time he also thinks that most companies are there to just extract what they can from you and discard you. Some sure, and at a high level yeah feels that way.
His approach is to behave similarly. He is there to extract every $ he can from his employer, and he does make a lot of money.
But the result is that he ends up working for those same companies he hates, they pay a lot so they expect a lot and the method of getting more is to do more and ... it seems more like a cycle where he gets the whole dynamic that he thinks is everywhere.
Personally I'm sure I could (well in the past) have made a lot more money, but I like working for places that give me flexibility, care if I'm happy there, and have good people around me. They're smaller places, but the lifestyle is better.
Is it such a stretch to assert that maybe the default for a large business shouldn't be "start doing evil shit"? Like, if all money is is aa social lubricant on doing sketchy shit, then there definitely is virtue to structuring things such that financial engineering can no longer work.
That is what they did to those protesting Google’s complicity in Israel actions in Gaza. But it is unclear if they hold Palestinian sympathy in the same contempt as sympathy for fellow Americans but we will see.
They only did that to employees who performed an occupation of some cloud exec offices. That's not quite the same as signing a petition and equating them is silly. I'm not trying to justify what happened, but I can at least appreciate why that might cross a line too far.
The government is bound by acquisition processes for these large contracts: they put out RFPs and companies compete for the contract. All Google has to do is not bid for the next contract.
Pretty sure the 13th Amendment guarantees this, in theory. (Corporations aren't natural persons, but forcing a corporation to provide a service boils down to forcing people to provide a service.)
The Supreme Court has upheld the Selective Service Act as allowable under the 13th Amendment as something other than involuntary servitude, repeatedly since 1918. So personhood isn't much of an obstacle to conscription.
The naïveté of workers in tech is astounding. Workers at Google have been complicit in the unravelling of the social fabric of the US since before Eric Schmidt. I only point to the destitution of the fourth estate by search advertising as the most egregious example.
Yes, the technical problems are interesting, the pay is good, but what society are you building?
The fifth estate is now, also, all but extinguished. Machine-driven psyops, in the form of algorithmic engagement, and AI-generated sentiment, mean that social fabric is no longer woven by people, but synthesized by corporations in service of their paperclip-maxxing agendas.
The recent case of Rob Pike, and today’s post by Brenden Gregg, only serve to remind me that the only thing one can depend on is the human mind to delude itself.
What else can explain the flagging of this submission? Google is the tech company of the internet age. That these goings on within it are worthy of being brushed aside by some members of this forum is indicative of a deep malaise in this community, an inability to see reality as it is.
I should end by saying, in my view, the only appropriate employee activism is handing in your resignation. Tech can’t unionize, as the workers don’t see themselves as equals, as disposable cogs in the service of corporations.
Being that ICE has also been kidnapping some US citizens, this is par for the course. Beyond ICE, Google however needs to go further and also cut ties with Palantir which otherwise will become stronger by continuing to serve as a proxy cloud for ICE.
All these tech companies have cowards for leaders, and Sundar Pichai is no different. And he’s a non white immigrant! The CEOs fear being attacked by the administration through regulations or anti trust or not being given contracts. They are some of the most powerful people and yet they bend the knee so easily. Andy Jassy of Amazon is the worst though - funding the Melania documentary is so blatantly corrupt.
This era is evidence for why we cannot continue allowing individuals or mega corps to accumulate the kind of money and power they have. It is too easy to corrupt them.
This seems like a very white-centric categorization to assume that a Tamil Brahmin should necessarily see himself as in the same racial solidarity group as a Somali, Haitian, or Venezuelan as opposed to a European.
He’s going to be a victim of the same anti immigration anti foreigner anti minority movement that the other groups you mentioned will be victim to. Remember the DHS tweeted a supremacist call to deport 100 million people. That is only possible if you denaturalize all the citizens who were once just immigrant workers on visas. The fact that he’s “Tamil Brahmin” isn’t relevant - his right to exist in America is at risk, by his very own actions of supporting the administration.
The vice president's wife is a Telugu Brahmin, and the director of the FBI is a Gujarati Patidar. What evidence do you have for Trump and ICE having a problem with Hindustanis?
Take a look at the ecosystem of far right influencers and personalities guiding the MAGA movement, and what they post on Twitter. Go look at replies on deportation and ethnic cleansing (“remigration”) posts made by Elon or DHS or others. You’ll see a torrent of vile supremacist content, and most of it is directed at Indians. That includes insults aimed at Usha Vance, various Indian CEOs, and Indian people at large. It’s why Vivek quit social media - almost every single reply to any post he made was racist. It’s what the right always was, unfortunately, even though it looked for a bit like it might be moving on from that past.
When the deportation push shifts from illegal immigrants to legal ones - which it has to because their stated goal of deporting 100 million Americans is not possible otherwise - it’ll come for Indians too. In fact I would say Indians are perhaps the most hated group on the far right.
As for those Indians still ignoring what the administration stands for and where it’s going, such as the ones working for Trump, they’re useful idiots. Doing the dirty work that will come for them in the future.
Cowardice is the wrong word here. It implies that these people have a desired action that they're not taking because of fear, weakness, or hesitation.
What tech companies actually have is rapacious sociopaths for leaders. They have purposely brought about the current state of affairs through intensive lobbying, spending, and direct action.
For the most part, they don't believe that they should be held accountable for their behavior. They don't fundamentally believe in democracy, and many of them don't really believe humans and human life are more important than some other abstract concept that they have in their heads. At root, they all believe in rule by the elite.
This may seem like an argumentative distinction, but I would counter that it's crucial to understanding what we have to do next, which is not to try to convince them, but rather to take back the power that they've accumulated over us, against their best efforts to stop us.
> take back the power that they've accumulated over us, against their best efforts to stop us.
It sure would be nice if so many smart technologists hadn't spent the last two decades poo-pooing distributed p2p software in favor of centralizing https and javascript webcrapps because "they have nothing to hide" and can always "vote with their wallet".
Great. Also need Amazon and Microsoft to cut ties. Not just with ICE but the administration as a whole. Unfortunately this is also a time when employees have low leverage given all the layoffs. Better to fight for a union first.
They forgot the “don’t be evil” era ended a long time ago.
I applaud the initiative but it’s naive to think this’ll change anything. And when push comes to shove these people wont quit their comfy job in this economic climate.
Right way of resisting is not to quit your job, but to observe, be friendly, and gradually push away toxic people.
An issue with this approach is that engaging in this way can start to reset your standards for "toxic people", and not in the cheerful "I'd like to buy the world a coke" manner.
One other issue I've had when I have tried to do this is that largely the "big" horrible issues with things are systematic rather than interpersonal- it doesn't matter who is operating the "baby seal blender", its operation is both the harm being done and the reason why "baby-seal-smoothies-r-us" operates so unless you cease the very profitable baby-seal-smoothy business the harm isn't going to stop.
Not to say that those issues are universally applicable, but rather to note that when you dance with the devil you need to observe how the devil is dancing with you; if you're going to go that way you need to be really careful in ways you don't need to be careful if you, say, just go work in a situation where the harm you create is less obvious and immediate.
Or Simple Sabotage[1]?
[1]: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/26184
Doesn't work when the boss is one of the toxic ones. Hierarchies preserve power top down.
It seems like a new version of this story, "[Big tech] workers protest their employer taking [federal agency] contracts" shows up at least once a year. I guess the steel man of this is that people think they can take jobs at these corps and push reform from within, but this seems powerfully naive to me. Fact of the matter is that a large portion of the compensation these companies provide is for buying off your better judgement. You're taking a deal with the devil when you sign on. There are a lot of better, smaller, companies you could be working for, but you chose the evil ones because it pays better.
>There are a lot of better, smaller, companies you could be working for, but you chose the evil ones because it pays better.
Amen.
I have a buddy who has very strong attitude about how "companies / your employer are not your friends" and I understand that to an extent. At the same time he also thinks that most companies are there to just extract what they can from you and discard you. Some sure, and at a high level yeah feels that way.
His approach is to behave similarly. He is there to extract every $ he can from his employer, and he does make a lot of money.
But the result is that he ends up working for those same companies he hates, they pay a lot so they expect a lot and the method of getting more is to do more and ... it seems more like a cycle where he gets the whole dynamic that he thinks is everywhere.
Personally I'm sure I could (well in the past) have made a lot more money, but I like working for places that give me flexibility, care if I'm happy there, and have good people around me. They're smaller places, but the lifestyle is better.
> You're taking a deal with the devil when you sign on
Yes, for sure.
However, the evil keeps escalating. We've passed some pretty scary rubicons already.
Is it such a stretch to assert that maybe the default for a large business shouldn't be "start doing evil shit"? Like, if all money is is aa social lubricant on doing sketchy shit, then there definitely is virtue to structuring things such that financial engineering can no longer work.
on monday they'll have to update the article
> 900 former Google employees
That is what they did to those protesting Google’s complicity in Israel actions in Gaza. But it is unclear if they hold Palestinian sympathy in the same contempt as sympathy for fellow Americans but we will see.
They only did that to employees who performed an occupation of some cloud exec offices. That's not quite the same as signing a petition and equating them is silly. I'm not trying to justify what happened, but I can at least appreciate why that might cross a line too far.
>That is what they did to those protesting Google’s complicity in Israel actions in Gaza.
I can't believe Google chose the 1 billion dollar IDF contract over the wishes of 50 (ex-)employees.
Dumb question: Can a US company even refuse service to a US Federal Government agency?
The government is bound by acquisition processes for these large contracts: they put out RFPs and companies compete for the contract. All Google has to do is not bid for the next contract.
Yes.
They could be nationalized in times of war, but that hasn't happened since WW2 I think.
The antitrust case and other regulatory arm twisting is more to worry about.
Yes they absolutely can. Providing services to the government is strictly a choice made by the business.
I think it's kind of past the point of wondering what somebody can and cannot do according to the law? There used to be the constitution and stuff.
There is an exception that can be made by the government for wartime, but otherwise, yes.
Pretty sure the 13th Amendment guarantees this, in theory. (Corporations aren't natural persons, but forcing a corporation to provide a service boils down to forcing people to provide a service.)
The Supreme Court has upheld the Selective Service Act as allowable under the 13th Amendment as something other than involuntary servitude, repeatedly since 1918. So personhood isn't much of an obstacle to conscription.
The naïveté of workers in tech is astounding. Workers at Google have been complicit in the unravelling of the social fabric of the US since before Eric Schmidt. I only point to the destitution of the fourth estate by search advertising as the most egregious example.
Yes, the technical problems are interesting, the pay is good, but what society are you building?
The fifth estate is now, also, all but extinguished. Machine-driven psyops, in the form of algorithmic engagement, and AI-generated sentiment, mean that social fabric is no longer woven by people, but synthesized by corporations in service of their paperclip-maxxing agendas.
The recent case of Rob Pike, and today’s post by Brenden Gregg, only serve to remind me that the only thing one can depend on is the human mind to delude itself.
What else can explain the flagging of this submission? Google is the tech company of the internet age. That these goings on within it are worthy of being brushed aside by some members of this forum is indicative of a deep malaise in this community, an inability to see reality as it is.
I should end by saying, in my view, the only appropriate employee activism is handing in your resignation. Tech can’t unionize, as the workers don’t see themselves as equals, as disposable cogs in the service of corporations.
Good luck, everyone.
Didn’t they fire some people from google who were protesting US military contracts a while back?
Being that ICE has also been kidnapping some US citizens, this is par for the course. Beyond ICE, Google however needs to go further and also cut ties with Palantir which otherwise will become stronger by continuing to serve as a proxy cloud for ICE.
All these tech companies have cowards for leaders, and Sundar Pichai is no different. And he’s a non white immigrant! The CEOs fear being attacked by the administration through regulations or anti trust or not being given contracts. They are some of the most powerful people and yet they bend the knee so easily. Andy Jassy of Amazon is the worst though - funding the Melania documentary is so blatantly corrupt.
This era is evidence for why we cannot continue allowing individuals or mega corps to accumulate the kind of money and power they have. It is too easy to corrupt them.
> he’s a non white immigrant!
This seems like a very white-centric categorization to assume that a Tamil Brahmin should necessarily see himself as in the same racial solidarity group as a Somali, Haitian, or Venezuelan as opposed to a European.
He’s going to be a victim of the same anti immigration anti foreigner anti minority movement that the other groups you mentioned will be victim to. Remember the DHS tweeted a supremacist call to deport 100 million people. That is only possible if you denaturalize all the citizens who were once just immigrant workers on visas. The fact that he’s “Tamil Brahmin” isn’t relevant - his right to exist in America is at risk, by his very own actions of supporting the administration.
It doesn't much matter how Pichai sees himself.
What matters is how Trump and ICE see him.
And all they really notice is the color of the skin.
The vice president's wife is a Telugu Brahmin, and the director of the FBI is a Gujarati Patidar. What evidence do you have for Trump and ICE having a problem with Hindustanis?
It is a matter of time. They go for one group first, then the other group. Until then, they're useful, albeit foolish, tools.
Take a look at the ecosystem of far right influencers and personalities guiding the MAGA movement, and what they post on Twitter. Go look at replies on deportation and ethnic cleansing (“remigration”) posts made by Elon or DHS or others. You’ll see a torrent of vile supremacist content, and most of it is directed at Indians. That includes insults aimed at Usha Vance, various Indian CEOs, and Indian people at large. It’s why Vivek quit social media - almost every single reply to any post he made was racist. It’s what the right always was, unfortunately, even though it looked for a bit like it might be moving on from that past.
When the deportation push shifts from illegal immigrants to legal ones - which it has to because their stated goal of deporting 100 million Americans is not possible otherwise - it’ll come for Indians too. In fact I would say Indians are perhaps the most hated group on the far right.
As for those Indians still ignoring what the administration stands for and where it’s going, such as the ones working for Trump, they’re useful idiots. Doing the dirty work that will come for them in the future.
Cowardice is the wrong word here. It implies that these people have a desired action that they're not taking because of fear, weakness, or hesitation.
What tech companies actually have is rapacious sociopaths for leaders. They have purposely brought about the current state of affairs through intensive lobbying, spending, and direct action.
For the most part, they don't believe that they should be held accountable for their behavior. They don't fundamentally believe in democracy, and many of them don't really believe humans and human life are more important than some other abstract concept that they have in their heads. At root, they all believe in rule by the elite.
This may seem like an argumentative distinction, but I would counter that it's crucial to understanding what we have to do next, which is not to try to convince them, but rather to take back the power that they've accumulated over us, against their best efforts to stop us.
> take back the power that they've accumulated over us, against their best efforts to stop us.
It sure would be nice if so many smart technologists hadn't spent the last two decades poo-pooing distributed p2p software in favor of centralizing https and javascript webcrapps because "they have nothing to hide" and can always "vote with their wallet".
Great. Also need Amazon and Microsoft to cut ties. Not just with ICE but the administration as a whole. Unfortunately this is also a time when employees have low leverage given all the layoffs. Better to fight for a union first.
Google couldn’t cut ties to genocide let alone local police.
Yet another egregiously [flagged] story.
Ffs HN. It's awful sad watching the site be killed like this.