14 ms·
>Given that SF employees have presented at many conferences in the past I don't see that getting official approval for the presentation is that strange. It's n
by rsj_hn 9y ago
>Given that SF employees have presented at many conferences in the past I don't see that getting official approval for the presentation is that strange.
It's not strange at all. So dig up some of those slide decks of past SF talks and compare them to what was presented in the meatpistol talk. Then you can decide for yourself whether you think this talk was approved or not -- it would be the same PR department approving all the talks, right?. In any case, the facts may come out in the representation, as you suggest.
- ghaff 9y agoI have no idea about SF's processes specifically but it's certainly not universal practice to have conference presentations signed off by PR or anyone else within an organization. Doesn't mean there can't be repercussions if you say something inappropriate or disclose information you shouldn't, but not all companies require signoff from presentations.
- xorbyte 9y agoAny comparatively large corporation very likely has a release process for these sorts of things where a bunch of groups (like PR, maybe Legal etc) would take a look. Releasing company IP as open source outside of such a process would be a gross violation of any number of non-disclosure agreements between employer and employee.