5 ms·

I think what will end up happening is Google employees will just self-sort until there aren't enough people left in the company to oppose projects like this. Pe

I think what will end up happening is Google employees will just self-sort until there aren't enough people left in the company to oppose projects like this. People who are strongly opposed on moral grounds will leave, further strengthening management's choices. While Google is probably sad to see them go, it would be even sadder to continue missing out on the world's largest market. I doubt the employee protests will win out here in the long run.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
yorwba 8y ago
For that reason, Googlers who oppose these kinds of projects should enthusiastically sign up to work on them, so they can have a chance at influencing the outcome. It may feel like the morally superior choice to avoid getting involved, but it just means that the dirty work is done by someone who doesn't care. For the same reason, I don't think creating a censored search engine for the Chinese market is bad in itself. If you accept that the Chinese government isn't going to change its mind on censorship any time soon, you can still try to do your best within that constraint, e.g. by finding a site with the censored content that's not on the blacklist yet.
- fucking_tragedy 8y ago
  This is blind optimism in the face of hard facts. If Google wants to play in China, they will have to bend to the whims of the CCP. No amount of employee foot-dragging will change that fact. > For the same reason, I don't think creating a censored search engine for the Chinese market is bad in itself. This is one the arguments that got trotted out by Google employees last time Dragonfly made headlines. The CCP is putting people in concentration camps[1]. Dragonfly would help them do that better. [1] https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/muslims-camps-china/ https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/muslims-...
  - yorwba 8y ago
    They will have to bend, no doubt, but if they bend even slightly less than everyone else, that's still a win.
    - fucking_tragedy 8y ago
      No, it's not. "Everyone else is doing it" is not an excuse to help put people in camps.
      - yorwba 8y ago
        It is if you doing it puts fewer people in camps than the alternative.
        fucking_tragedy 8y ago
        The entire point of entering the Chinese market is to make money. Google will make more money doing what the CCP asks well and without question. Putting less people in camps and playing games with the CCP means less money or even losing the Chinese market.
        ionised 8y ago
        Which will never be how it works. You think the Chinese government will accept Google deliberately making it more difficult for them to surveill and imprison dissidents? You're out of your mind if you believe they would allow this in any way. They would sooner turf Google out on its arse than tolerate any interference. The Chinese government WANTS Google. Think about why that is.
    - omouse 8y ago
      You're right, it will be peace for our time if they bend slightly less: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_for_our_time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_for_our_time
    - ionised 8y ago
      That's a pretty pathetic and inconsequential win.
- ionised 8y ago
  > Googlers who oppose these kinds of projects should enthusiastically sign up to work on them, so they can have a chance at influencing the outcome. Incredibly naive in my opinion. Google is not a democracy, its a pulicly traded company. It's no better than a dictatorship. Further more, a developer does not 'influence' the Chinese government in any way, which is what Google will be beholden to. The good developers are better leaving to contribute elsewhere. At least when Google is nothing but amoral, unethical, grreedy developers with no social conscience then we can start treating the company as it deserves.
ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
>While Google is probably sad to see them go, it would be even sadder to continue missing out on the world's largest market. Honestly what I see happening, if Google isn't allowed to position themselves for a rentry into China, is Baidu eventually making an international debut. They have been developing an entire google-esque eco system in a bubble for years now. If Google was there, they wouldn't have such a strangle hold there, and wouldn't become an international threat.
- fucking_tragedy 8y ago
  Why would the CCP allow a foreign company to outcompete one of their own homegrown darlings?
  - RandomInteger4 8y ago
    What would it matter if Google is operating within the parameters of the government's censorship rules and generating tax revenue for the government?
    - fucking_tragedy 8y ago
      You're asking this question in an era where we've gotten into a trade war with China? Because the CCP and its members are heavily invested in quite literally everything that isn't a foreignly owned business operating in China.
      - throwaway2048 8y ago
        they are invested in those too (mandatory Chinese partners with 51% control, with mandatory IP transfers)
    - pertymcpert 8y ago
      It matters a great deal indeed.
omouse 8y ago
> further strengthening management's choices I think people are forgetting that each of those Google (former) employees have shares and are also shareholders and shareholders will start to get pissed when management is screwing up and will call for a new CEO or new execs or a new board to be put into place that will get Google back on track: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/technology/tech-workers-company-stock-shareholder-activism.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/technology/tech-workers-c... > I doubt the employee protests will win out here in the long run. If they lose more employees it can be argued that they're ignoring their fiduciary duty to the shareholders by tarnishing the brand of Google which makes hiring more difficult which leads to less profits. There's already activist shareholders asking for more gender diversity data for example: https://www.fastcompany.com/40474369/activist-investor-demands-that-google-provide-more-data-on-its-gender-pay-gap https://www.fastcompany.com/40474369/activist-investor-deman...
- robbrit 8y ago
  > each of those Google (former) employees have shares They have class C shares, which do not have any voting rights. Shareholders without voting rights have absolutely no power to influence policy. > If they lose more employees it can be argued that they're ignoring their fiduciary duty to the shareholders by tarnishing the brand of Google which makes hiring more difficult which leads to less profits. You're making a lot of jumps of logic here so I'll split things up: > If they lose more employees They're not bleeding employees so quickly that it will cause a problem, the overwhelming majority of Googlers will not leave over this. There's just a few of them, enough to make headlines but not enough to cause any real issue. > tarnishing the brand of Google They'd have to tarnish it a lot to get people to stop wanting to work for Google. Even with the latest headlines and controversies, it's still one of the best paying companies out there with awesome benefits, interesting work, and prestigious status. Even employees who are uncomfortable with some of the choices the company is making will think twice before giving all that up. > which leads to less profits In the long run this might be true. I'll use the counter-example of Microsoft though: they were the demon for decades and are still one of the most valuable companies in the world. If a tarnished brand for employees guaranteed less profits, they would have died a long time ago.
ionised 8y ago
> it would be even sadder to continue missing out on the world's largest market. Is that sad though? Really? I'm not exactly tearing up at the thought.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

yorwba 8y ago

For that reason, Googlers who oppose these kinds of projects should enthusiastically sign up to work on them, so they can have a chance at influencing the outcome. It may feel like the morally superior choice to avoid getting involved, but it just means that the dirty work is done by someone who doesn't care. For the same reason, I don't think creating a censored search engine for the Chinese market is bad in itself. If you accept that the Chinese government isn't going to change its mind on censorship any time soon, you can still try to do your best within that constraint, e.g. by finding a site with the censored content that's not on the blacklist yet.

fucking_tragedy 8y ago
This is blind optimism in the face of hard facts. If Google wants to play in China, they will have to bend to the whims of the CCP. No amount of employee foot-dragging will change that fact. > For the same reason, I don't think creating a censored search engine for the Chinese market is bad in itself. This is one the arguments that got trotted out by Google employees last time Dragonfly made headlines. The CCP is putting people in concentration camps[1]. Dragonfly would help them do that better. [1] https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/muslims-camps-china/ https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/muslims-...
- yorwba 8y ago
  They will have to bend, no doubt, but if they bend even slightly less than everyone else, that's still a win.
  - fucking_tragedy 8y ago
    No, it's not. "Everyone else is doing it" is not an excuse to help put people in camps.
    - yorwba 8y ago
      It is if you doing it puts fewer people in camps than the alternative.
      - fucking_tragedy 8y ago
        The entire point of entering the Chinese market is to make money. Google will make more money doing what the CCP asks well and without question. Putting less people in camps and playing games with the CCP means less money or even losing the Chinese market.
      - ionised 8y ago
        Which will never be how it works. You think the Chinese government will accept Google deliberately making it more difficult for them to surveill and imprison dissidents? You're out of your mind if you believe they would allow this in any way. They would sooner turf Google out on its arse than tolerate any interference. The Chinese government WANTS Google. Think about why that is.
  - omouse 8y ago
    You're right, it will be peace for our time if they bend slightly less: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_for_our_time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_for_our_time
  - ionised 8y ago
    That's a pretty pathetic and inconsequential win.
ionised 8y ago
> Googlers who oppose these kinds of projects should enthusiastically sign up to work on them, so they can have a chance at influencing the outcome. Incredibly naive in my opinion. Google is not a democracy, its a pulicly traded company. It's no better than a dictatorship. Further more, a developer does not 'influence' the Chinese government in any way, which is what Google will be beholden to. The good developers are better leaving to contribute elsewhere. At least when Google is nothing but amoral, unethical, grreedy developers with no social conscience then we can start treating the company as it deserves.

ApolloFortyNine 8y ago

>While Google is probably sad to see them go, it would be even sadder to continue missing out on the world's largest market. Honestly what I see happening, if Google isn't allowed to position themselves for a rentry into China, is Baidu eventually making an international debut. They have been developing an entire google-esque eco system in a bubble for years now. If Google was there, they wouldn't have such a strangle hold there, and wouldn't become an international threat.

fucking_tragedy 8y ago
Why would the CCP allow a foreign company to outcompete one of their own homegrown darlings?
- RandomInteger4 8y ago
  What would it matter if Google is operating within the parameters of the government's censorship rules and generating tax revenue for the government?
  - fucking_tragedy 8y ago
    You're asking this question in an era where we've gotten into a trade war with China? Because the CCP and its members are heavily invested in quite literally everything that isn't a foreignly owned business operating in China.
    - throwaway2048 8y ago
      they are invested in those too (mandatory Chinese partners with 51% control, with mandatory IP transfers)
  - pertymcpert 8y ago
    It matters a great deal indeed.

omouse 8y ago

> further strengthening management's choices I think people are forgetting that each of those Google (former) employees have shares and are also shareholders and shareholders will start to get pissed when management is screwing up and will call for a new CEO or new execs or a new board to be put into place that will get Google back on track: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/technology/tech-workers-company-stock-shareholder-activism.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/technology/tech-workers-c... > I doubt the employee protests will win out here in the long run. If they lose more employees it can be argued that they're ignoring their fiduciary duty to the shareholders by tarnishing the brand of Google which makes hiring more difficult which leads to less profits. There's already activist shareholders asking for more gender diversity data for example: https://www.fastcompany.com/40474369/activist-investor-demands-that-google-provide-more-data-on-its-gender-pay-gap https://www.fastcompany.com/40474369/activist-investor-deman...

robbrit 8y ago
> each of those Google (former) employees have shares They have class C shares, which do not have any voting rights. Shareholders without voting rights have absolutely no power to influence policy. > If they lose more employees it can be argued that they're ignoring their fiduciary duty to the shareholders by tarnishing the brand of Google which makes hiring more difficult which leads to less profits. You're making a lot of jumps of logic here so I'll split things up: > If they lose more employees They're not bleeding employees so quickly that it will cause a problem, the overwhelming majority of Googlers will not leave over this. There's just a few of them, enough to make headlines but not enough to cause any real issue. > tarnishing the brand of Google They'd have to tarnish it a lot to get people to stop wanting to work for Google. Even with the latest headlines and controversies, it's still one of the best paying companies out there with awesome benefits, interesting work, and prestigious status. Even employees who are uncomfortable with some of the choices the company is making will think twice before giving all that up. > which leads to less profits In the long run this might be true. I'll use the counter-example of Microsoft though: they were the demon for decades and are still one of the most valuable companies in the world. If a tarnished brand for employees guaranteed less profits, they would have died a long time ago.

ionised 8y ago

> it would be even sadder to continue missing out on the world's largest market. Is that sad though? Really? I'm not exactly tearing up at the thought.