5 ms·

I suppose however it is hard to revolt against the hand that feeds you more than 2x market rate. "Everyone has their price" sort of thing ..

by suls 10y ago

idlewords 10y ago
That works both ways, though. Everyone also has an ethical limit, and that is a powerful point of leverage, especially in an industry where good engineers are hard to find and quick to find jobs.
tptacek 10y ago
It's very hard to be the only person promising to revolt, but it gets easier the more people that do it. What's the threshold percentage of Google or Facebook's workforce that would need to commit themselves before it would not only be safe to join them, but their demands would need to be reckoned with by management? I don't know (I'm really asking) but my gut says it's nowhere close to 51%.
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  The problem is how do you coordinate that? It's like forming a union in secret... Under the king of surveillance. How do you even get two people together, when talking to the wrong one will probably get you fired? I also think many of those most likely to have privacy issues with Google at this point have moved on, it's not like this is a new concern with Google. I suspect a lot of people still at Google have embraced the post-privacy mindset I've seen suggested and even endorsed by a variety of futurists.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    I think there are lots of valid questions to be asked about any ambitious project and it's not wrong to ask them. But I'm focused right now on my question, the one I just asked. What do we think the threshold is? What's the inflection point?
    - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
      I think it may be higher than you think. Given how much of their revenue is advertising, and their entire direction on that advertising and how they market it is the targeting based on user profiles... I'd think firing even a large number of employees is easier than giving up your entire business. Unless, and I guess maybe this is a worthwhile question to tackle first: Could Google and Facebook's advertising models still work without the privacy issues? Is their value as ad platforms still there if they can't operate that level of tracking?
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  "It's very hard to be the only person promising to revolt, but it gets easier the more people that do it." Been there, done that. Several times. It's why I don't do it anymore. That threshold is higher than many people think. What happens most is insider attack where a person unsure will sell the people out to administration or management. Revolt gets squashed with that person maybe getting some compensation for it. Hard to build up to the necessary threshold without this happening. Once it does, it's witchhunting time. Most people just aren't cut out for spending long periods of time in such circumstances. I doubt the tech people hoping from one cozy job to the next at six digits will have more endurance or patience than rebels in other sectors. I still see potential, esp if a wave of support started on social media somehow, but it looks bleak if we're talking organized rebellion inside likes of Facebook or Google.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    What other similar things have you tried to organize? How many people got involved? What were the outcomes?
    - nickpsecurity 10y ago
      I have to keep the details private. All involved under 30 people who had some fight in them and motivation to resist in direction I pushed. First one all but me backed out on key moment with one selling me out. Others had similar pattern with lots of support in those that talk, too few actually acting, some ratting, and it fizzling out as actors get scared or removed from a situation with too many talkers. All went that way. Im actually doing another right now but directly and in open since I anticipate others will bitch out. In any case, the pattern I describe seems very similar to large-scale activism work or just how people in this country talk vs respond on big issues. It's either human nature itself or a weakness of American culture.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        Ok, but right now we're closing on on 1300 signatures for the NeverAgain.tech pledge. I'm not so worried about the kinds of things that happen in 30 person groups, though I recognize those things are real.
- pcwalton 10y ago
  Furthermore, I think that a relatively small number of us signing the pledge can have outsized impact when you take the political climate in the Bay Area (and California/the West Coast generally) into account. It's not like we're a small political minority wanting to defy Trump. Quite the opposite: the pledge serves as a way of reminding the people in charge that those of us opposed to Trump's policies in the areas that these companies depend on vastly outnumber the likes of Thiel. In fact, you don't even have to look at just the Bay Area. Americans don't want a Muslim registry. They don't want mass deportations. Even Trump voters don't want mass deportations [1]. Tech companies need to remember that if they facilitate mass deportations, they are working against the will of the American people. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/09/trumps-voters-dont-actually-support-mass-deportation/?utm_term=.ece27674f30d https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/09/trump...
matt4077 10y ago
That just highlights you moral bankruptcy if you cooperate with these practices: these people are employable like no one else, and they should have the ability to safe up a very nice cushions rather quickly.

I suppose however it is hard to revolt against the hand that feeds you more than 2x market rate. "Everyone has their price" sort of thing ..

by suls 10y ago

I suppose however it is hard to revolt against the hand that feeds you more than 2x market rate. "Everyone has their price" sort of thing ..

idlewords 10y ago

That works both ways, though. Everyone also has an ethical limit, and that is a powerful point of leverage, especially in an industry where good engineers are hard to find and quick to find jobs.

tptacek 10y ago

It's very hard to be the only person promising to revolt, but it gets easier the more people that do it. What's the threshold percentage of Google or Facebook's workforce that would need to commit themselves before it would not only be safe to join them, but their demands would need to be reckoned with by management? I don't know (I'm really asking) but my gut says it's nowhere close to 51%.

ocdtrekkie 10y ago
The problem is how do you coordinate that? It's like forming a union in secret... Under the king of surveillance. How do you even get two people together, when talking to the wrong one will probably get you fired? I also think many of those most likely to have privacy issues with Google at this point have moved on, it's not like this is a new concern with Google. I suspect a lot of people still at Google have embraced the post-privacy mindset I've seen suggested and even endorsed by a variety of futurists.
- tptacek 10y ago
  I think there are lots of valid questions to be asked about any ambitious project and it's not wrong to ask them. But I'm focused right now on my question, the one I just asked. What do we think the threshold is? What's the inflection point?
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    I think it may be higher than you think. Given how much of their revenue is advertising, and their entire direction on that advertising and how they market it is the targeting based on user profiles... I'd think firing even a large number of employees is easier than giving up your entire business. Unless, and I guess maybe this is a worthwhile question to tackle first: Could Google and Facebook's advertising models still work without the privacy issues? Is their value as ad platforms still there if they can't operate that level of tracking?
nickpsecurity 10y ago
"It's very hard to be the only person promising to revolt, but it gets easier the more people that do it." Been there, done that. Several times. It's why I don't do it anymore. That threshold is higher than many people think. What happens most is insider attack where a person unsure will sell the people out to administration or management. Revolt gets squashed with that person maybe getting some compensation for it. Hard to build up to the necessary threshold without this happening. Once it does, it's witchhunting time. Most people just aren't cut out for spending long periods of time in such circumstances. I doubt the tech people hoping from one cozy job to the next at six digits will have more endurance or patience than rebels in other sectors. I still see potential, esp if a wave of support started on social media somehow, but it looks bleak if we're talking organized rebellion inside likes of Facebook or Google.
- tptacek 10y ago
  What other similar things have you tried to organize? How many people got involved? What were the outcomes?
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    I have to keep the details private. All involved under 30 people who had some fight in them and motivation to resist in direction I pushed. First one all but me backed out on key moment with one selling me out. Others had similar pattern with lots of support in those that talk, too few actually acting, some ratting, and it fizzling out as actors get scared or removed from a situation with too many talkers. All went that way. Im actually doing another right now but directly and in open since I anticipate others will bitch out. In any case, the pattern I describe seems very similar to large-scale activism work or just how people in this country talk vs respond on big issues. It's either human nature itself or a weakness of American culture.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      Ok, but right now we're closing on on 1300 signatures for the NeverAgain.tech pledge. I'm not so worried about the kinds of things that happen in 30 person groups, though I recognize those things are real.
pcwalton 10y ago
Furthermore, I think that a relatively small number of us signing the pledge can have outsized impact when you take the political climate in the Bay Area (and California/the West Coast generally) into account. It's not like we're a small political minority wanting to defy Trump. Quite the opposite: the pledge serves as a way of reminding the people in charge that those of us opposed to Trump's policies in the areas that these companies depend on vastly outnumber the likes of Thiel. In fact, you don't even have to look at just the Bay Area. Americans don't want a Muslim registry. They don't want mass deportations. Even Trump voters don't want mass deportations [1]. Tech companies need to remember that if they facilitate mass deportations, they are working against the will of the American people. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/09/trumps-voters-dont-actually-support-mass-deportation/?utm_term=.ece27674f30d https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/09/trump...

matt4077 10y ago

That just highlights you moral bankruptcy if you cooperate with these practices: these people are employable like no one else, and they should have the ability to safe up a very nice cushions rather quickly.