4 ms·

My thinking is more in line of: if privacy team was bigger, it would intuitively have a way easier job keeping tabs on all the developments. However, that's a j

by lrem 8y ago

My thinking is more in line of: if privacy team was bigger, it would intuitively have a way easier job keeping tabs on all the developments. However, that's a job without talent attractors like glamorous launches. When you're sailing smooth, nobody knows you exist. But when I mention they're hiring in an incident, I learn this is the wrong time to mention them. But then again, I'm neither in privacy team, nor Chrome team, know no specifics of this case and can't really argue any position (note how I'm neither defending nor condemning the issue of OP). Just pointing out generalities that I don't see mentioned.

danShumway 8y ago
If Google's privacy team is understaffed or doesn't have enough resources to do its job, we should have a conversation publicly about that. I get where you're coming from, but Google isn't a company without resources. In this specific scenario, where there is an actual power dynamic at play, it's not enough to just say, "well, people should get involved." The people who get involved are not the people who are making long-term decisions about process. If Google itself isn't acknowledging the problem, or worse, if Google is actively thwarting or working against its own privacy team, then anyone who gets involved will also end up starved for resources or moved to other teams. Google is not a level playing field for people who want to change the system from inside. So it's not wrong at all for you to bring this up during an incident. But if we take the premise that this incident is the result of one of the largest companies in the world starving its own privacy team, not paying enough to attract talent, or not giving them enough input into internal processes... well, that's honestly something that needs to be discussed company wide. That's a very serious situation. And if that's the case, users should be distrusting Google's privacy commitments until it has that conversation. The first step to fixing a problem is acknowledging the problem -- you won't get anywhere trying to fix a system that doesn't want to be fixed. From the responses that have come out of Google regarding this incident, it doesn't sound much like it wants to be fixed. Changing that is the first step. Hiring people is the second. By all means, let's talk about Google's privacy team. I am all for that. Let's get productive. But let's get actually productive. Let's have an open, public talk about management and resource allocation, and why the team is understaffed. From Google's AI/self-driving divisions, we know what it looks like when the company gets serious about attracting talent. And we know it has the resources to do so.

by lrem 8y ago

danShumway 8y ago

If Google's privacy team is understaffed or doesn't have enough resources to do its job, we should have a conversation publicly about that. I get where you're coming from, but Google isn't a company without resources. In this specific scenario, where there is an actual power dynamic at play, it's not enough to just say, "well, people should get involved." The people who get involved are not the people who are making long-term decisions about process. If Google itself isn't acknowledging the problem, or worse, if Google is actively thwarting or working against its own privacy team, then anyone who gets involved will also end up starved for resources or moved to other teams. Google is not a level playing field for people who want to change the system from inside. So it's not wrong at all for you to bring this up during an incident. But if we take the premise that this incident is the result of one of the largest companies in the world starving its own privacy team, not paying enough to attract talent, or not giving them enough input into internal processes... well, that's honestly something that needs to be discussed company wide. That's a very serious situation. And if that's the case, users should be distrusting Google's privacy commitments until it has that conversation. The first step to fixing a problem is acknowledging the problem -- you won't get anywhere trying to fix a system that doesn't want to be fixed. From the responses that have come out of Google regarding this incident, it doesn't sound much like it wants to be fixed. Changing that is the first step. Hiring people is the second. By all means, let's talk about Google's privacy team. I am all for that. Let's get productive. But let's get actually productive. Let's have an open, public talk about management and resource allocation, and why the team is understaffed. From Google's AI/self-driving divisions, we know what it looks like when the company gets serious about attracting talent. And we know it has the resources to do so.