5 ms·

You don't understand Google culture if you think this line would fly with anyone there. Entitlement for full time employees is baked into the charter, along wit

You don't understand Google culture if you think this line would fly with anyone there. Entitlement for full time employees is baked into the charter, along with transparency. That's a good thing and a bad thing, in different ways. It gave bad actors a lot of autonomy, but it also exposed them to scrutiny and pushback from good actors. What's surprising is that now these reprisals are trying to push that back to make Google more like other normal companies and organizational structures.

0815test 7y ago
> It gave bad actors a lot of autonomy, but it also exposed them to scrutiny and pushback from good actors. So far, we've seen quite a bit of the former and very little of the latter. Google's work culture seems to have become politically divisive to a rather surprising extent - if this is what "entitlement" boils down to, surely a more "normal" structure (though I'd settle for just a marginal increase in professionalism, similar to what we see in other "grassroots-led" organizations) can't be all that bad!
- KirinDave 7y ago
  I agree! The victories are small and recent. The exposure of executive sexism, The push back against military contractors, and the recent pride petitions are modest victories at best, and they've come with a heavy price. Still, many other major tech companies lack a list at all, despite every indication of facing similar issues.
fourthark 7y ago
This is the big point. It's true that it is not normal for employees to be able to speak against their company (or express strong opinions publicly). Yet Google has always prided itself on being different in having outspoken employees. This is why it looks bad for Google when it's just business as usual everywhere else.
lawnchair_larry 7y ago
Everyone I know at Google hates these “protests” and can’t stand the entitlement. It sounds to me like they are a vocal minority. This has nothing to do with transparency and speaking out against your employer. The issue is not that they have a voice, it’s how they choose to use it.
- KirinDave 7y ago
  There are several people from Google here speaking out in support and literally thousands of people stood with the walkout. So it doesn't seem like a "small minority" unless you know a hell of a lot of people.
  - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
    1000 employees is 1%. Even if 10,000 showed up, which they did not, that is still a small minority.
    - KirinDave 7y ago
      Unfortunately I cannot reveal real numbers to reveal the breakdown, but even a cursory modeling of this with Bayesian techniques suggests more than a tiny minority of people hold the sentiment in question.
- tptacek 7y ago
  You seem to know weird subsets of people at different companies. If we weren't ostensibly in the same field, I wouldn't comment (because of course two random people on HN would know different people at Google). But we are, and the Google security people I talk to are more supportive of the protests; several are now on the job market because of it. I feel pretty comfortable with how representative the people I talk to are of Google product security and vulnerability research, for whatever that's worth to you.
  - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
    Yes, it’s definitely me that knows “weird subsets” of people, whatever that is supposed to mean. You’re immune to bubbles, and I am in one, right? Or is that a sneaky way of saying, “The people I know don’t think that, so I suspect you made that up”? This is a silly thread, but for what it’s worth, I have not talked to anyone at Google in a security role about this issue. I’ll be more blunt. I am highly skeptical that anyone in security there quit their job over the protests. But, I have no reason to doubt that your sample supports the protests. Do keep in mind though that most people who don’t support them are keenly aware that going near any activism topic, especially at Google, is personal and professional jeopardy. Many people think they can’t even debate these things without running the risk of being on the receiving end of the scorched earth tactics employed by activists. And I’m not even talking about conservatives (of whom I know very few in tech, if any). It’s not that they think it’s great that Rubin got dumptrucks of money, but the mentality is that if you take any issue with any of the demands or tactics, or the frequency with which they dominate the focus of employees trying to do their work, you’re suddenly a misogynistic transphobic racist enemy of the people.
xyzzyz 7y ago
You don't understand Google culture if you think this line would fly with anyone there. Entitlement for full time employees is baked into the charter, along with transparency. This part of Google culture is long dead. It used to exist, but it doesn't anymore. There's no transparency anymore, and large factor of ending it was strategic leaks by employees, who hoped to achieved their goals by getting media attention. The entitlement is also gone in the era of cost-cutting by ruthless Ruth. The company you're thinking about entered senescence somewhere around 2012-2013 and died in 2015-2016.

0815test 7y ago

> It gave bad actors a lot of autonomy, but it also exposed them to scrutiny and pushback from good actors. So far, we've seen quite a bit of the former and very little of the latter. Google's work culture seems to have become politically divisive to a rather surprising extent - if this is what "entitlement" boils down to, surely a more "normal" structure (though I'd settle for just a marginal increase in professionalism, similar to what we see in other "grassroots-led" organizations) can't be all that bad!

KirinDave 7y ago
I agree! The victories are small and recent. The exposure of executive sexism, The push back against military contractors, and the recent pride petitions are modest victories at best, and they've come with a heavy price. Still, many other major tech companies lack a list at all, despite every indication of facing similar issues.

fourthark 7y ago

This is the big point. It's true that it is not normal for employees to be able to speak against their company (or express strong opinions publicly). Yet Google has always prided itself on being different in having outspoken employees. This is why it looks bad for Google when it's just business as usual everywhere else.

lawnchair_larry 7y ago

Everyone I know at Google hates these “protests” and can’t stand the entitlement. It sounds to me like they are a vocal minority. This has nothing to do with transparency and speaking out against your employer. The issue is not that they have a voice, it’s how they choose to use it.

KirinDave 7y ago
There are several people from Google here speaking out in support and literally thousands of people stood with the walkout. So it doesn't seem like a "small minority" unless you know a hell of a lot of people.
- lawnchair_larry 7y ago
  1000 employees is 1%. Even if 10,000 showed up, which they did not, that is still a small minority.
  - KirinDave 7y ago
    Unfortunately I cannot reveal real numbers to reveal the breakdown, but even a cursory modeling of this with Bayesian techniques suggests more than a tiny minority of people hold the sentiment in question.
tptacek 7y ago
You seem to know weird subsets of people at different companies. If we weren't ostensibly in the same field, I wouldn't comment (because of course two random people on HN would know different people at Google). But we are, and the Google security people I talk to are more supportive of the protests; several are now on the job market because of it. I feel pretty comfortable with how representative the people I talk to are of Google product security and vulnerability research, for whatever that's worth to you.
- lawnchair_larry 7y ago
  Yes, it’s definitely me that knows “weird subsets” of people, whatever that is supposed to mean. You’re immune to bubbles, and I am in one, right? Or is that a sneaky way of saying, “The people I know don’t think that, so I suspect you made that up”? This is a silly thread, but for what it’s worth, I have not talked to anyone at Google in a security role about this issue. I’ll be more blunt. I am highly skeptical that anyone in security there quit their job over the protests. But, I have no reason to doubt that your sample supports the protests. Do keep in mind though that most people who don’t support them are keenly aware that going near any activism topic, especially at Google, is personal and professional jeopardy. Many people think they can’t even debate these things without running the risk of being on the receiving end of the scorched earth tactics employed by activists. And I’m not even talking about conservatives (of whom I know very few in tech, if any). It’s not that they think it’s great that Rubin got dumptrucks of money, but the mentality is that if you take any issue with any of the demands or tactics, or the frequency with which they dominate the focus of employees trying to do their work, you’re suddenly a misogynistic transphobic racist enemy of the people.

xyzzyz 7y ago

You don't understand Google culture if you think this line would fly with anyone there. Entitlement for full time employees is baked into the charter, along with transparency. This part of Google culture is long dead. It used to exist, but it doesn't anymore. There's no transparency anymore, and large factor of ending it was strategic leaks by employees, who hoped to achieved their goals by getting media attention. The entitlement is also gone in the era of cost-cutting by ruthless Ruth. The company you're thinking about entered senescence somewhere around 2012-2013 and died in 2015-2016.