6 ms·

"Weirdly this feels like a non-issue" It is. That page is awful with a hood that keeps flapping around up and down and text that is trying to be true to itali

"Weirdly this feels like a non-issue" It is. That page is awful with a hood that keeps flapping around up and down and text that is trying to be true to italics for quotes instead of lots of diacritics and ends up looking badly diseased. Then the letter sidesteps into a memo, which is equally odd and awkward. It's all a bit odd. S and B (in my very opinionated ... opinion) did create a great thing in Google. I can't fault people trying to make a living and running with the ball to the point where the playing field is not just paved with gold but it nearly redefines what the concept of gold is. I think they should have retired before "do no evil" was ditched. That would have cemented their status as internet demi-gods. Instead I think their legacy will be wierdos whot spy on you

abbadadda 7y ago
> wierdos whot spy on you LOL. I agree with a lot of your points but this one really hit home. On this one, the spying, I always wondered how odd or awkward it had to be internally to push new methods, techniques, or initiatives for "improving user experience" (I.e., spying). I interviewed for some Technical Solutions Engineer role at Google a long time ago. I really wanted the job but when asked a couple questions about how I'd technically achieve some goal related to spying on users and I always found myself hesitating, looking at the interviewer, and thinking, "is it ethically okay if I say this?" I can't imagine how the work environment transitioned at Google over the years from "do no evil" to actively fostering spying on users. I have to imagine it happened because there were few if any laws around user privacy while Google was up and coming. But I know Google has good internal controls for privacy, but I have to imagine there were many unethical or borderline conversations in the name of better spying on users data. I'm still trying to get away from Gmail because I know everything I send/receive is parses but the struggle is real. This is in addition to Chrome and an Android phone, not to mention Google search results. What's the risk of all this spying? In sum, what is at risk is the loss of free will. People who don't care because "they have nothing to hide" cannot see the forest for the trees. Then again, I need to make some changes myself. As an ancient Chinese proverb says, "To know, and not to do, is in fact not to know."
- Spoom 7y ago
 I think it's very likely that they wanted you to question the ethics there. I don't know what your interview was like though. Googler, opinions are my own.
 - perl4ever 7y ago
 I don't think trying to select for an ethical core really works. Ultimately, you are either going to go along with the people around you or you are going to stick to some principles that aren't shared by everybody, and in the latter case, you're going to be unsuitable for the job, because you're not running the company. So looking for evidence of ethics in an interview is just looking for a smooth talking hypocrite, even if you think you really want to.
 - davidwihl 7y ago
 The point is about asking good questions and having a healthy debate not about arriving with a preconceived “ethical core.”
 - taneq 7y ago
 The one Googler I know personally and have talked to about this stuff seems to have a weird blind spot around privacy and data collection. They're super friendly and happy to discuss products and features, but any questions about keeping data on your own device, limiting data access etc. just gets a blank stare, as if the very concept of "data which Google doesn't track" is nonsensical to them.
 - Riverheart 7y ago
 It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. -Upton Sinclair
 - drusepth 7y ago
 I'm just now realizing why I might have failed my interviews that I thought I nailed some questions in...
kyrra 7y ago
About "don't be evil": It's still very much in there. From: https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ > And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! The problem was that it was moved from near the top to being near the bottom (though it's own paragraph). Sadly there were lots of very inaccurate headlines like this: > Google Removes 'Don't Be Evil' Clause From Its Code of Conduct https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393 https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-do...
- hanse00 7y ago
  It's there on paper, but is is really still there?
  - meowface 7y ago
    Was it ever really there for the entire time period between the founding and when it was moved to a lower part of the page?
    - hanse00 7y ago
      I don't know, I wasn't there the whole time :)
  - kyrra 7y ago
    I am a Googler, opinions on my own. The problem with the phrase is that it is very relative depending on your meaning of evil. It's a shifting over time and varies by person. At the same time it provides a good guiding principle for Google as a whole. You need to think about users in different parts of the world with different ideas of what is good and evil, and try to cater to all of them. It's a really hard problem. That code have conduct I linked tries to explain how evil is defined and give more concrete principles to follow. From my experience, no one tries to be evil within Google, and we try to do right by our users. But when you're dealing with products like YouTube and Search with massive amounts of user-generated data, suggesting good answers that satisfy everyone and doesn't generate news headlines is impossible. We do what we can, but when you have billion user products, some people are always going to be pissed at you.

abbadadda 7y ago

> wierdos whot spy on you LOL. I agree with a lot of your points but this one really hit home. On this one, the spying, I always wondered how odd or awkward it had to be internally to push new methods, techniques, or initiatives for "improving user experience" (I.e., spying). I interviewed for some Technical Solutions Engineer role at Google a long time ago. I really wanted the job but when asked a couple questions about how I'd technically achieve some goal related to spying on users and I always found myself hesitating, looking at the interviewer, and thinking, "is it ethically okay if I say this?" I can't imagine how the work environment transitioned at Google over the years from "do no evil" to actively fostering spying on users. I have to imagine it happened because there were few if any laws around user privacy while Google was up and coming. But I know Google has good internal controls for privacy, but I have to imagine there were many unethical or borderline conversations in the name of better spying on users data. I'm still trying to get away from Gmail because I know everything I send/receive is parses but the struggle is real. This is in addition to Chrome and an Android phone, not to mention Google search results. What's the risk of all this spying? In sum, what is at risk is the loss of free will. People who don't care because "they have nothing to hide" cannot see the forest for the trees. Then again, I need to make some changes myself. As an ancient Chinese proverb says, "To know, and not to do, is in fact not to know."

Spoom 7y ago
I think it's very likely that they wanted you to question the ethics there. I don't know what your interview was like though. Googler, opinions are my own.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  I don't think trying to select for an ethical core really works. Ultimately, you are either going to go along with the people around you or you are going to stick to some principles that aren't shared by everybody, and in the latter case, you're going to be unsuitable for the job, because you're not running the company. So looking for evidence of ethics in an interview is just looking for a smooth talking hypocrite, even if you think you really want to.
  - davidwihl 7y ago
    The point is about asking good questions and having a healthy debate not about arriving with a preconceived “ethical core.”
- taneq 7y ago
  The one Googler I know personally and have talked to about this stuff seems to have a weird blind spot around privacy and data collection. They're super friendly and happy to discuss products and features, but any questions about keeping data on your own device, limiting data access etc. just gets a blank stare, as if the very concept of "data which Google doesn't track" is nonsensical to them.
  - Riverheart 7y ago
    It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. -Upton Sinclair
- drusepth 7y ago
  I'm just now realizing why I might have failed my interviews that I thought I nailed some questions in...

kyrra 7y ago

About "don't be evil": It's still very much in there. From: https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ > And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! The problem was that it was moved from near the top to being near the bottom (though it's own paragraph). Sadly there were lots of very inaccurate headlines like this: > Google Removes 'Don't Be Evil' Clause From Its Code of Conduct https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393 https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-do...

hanse00 7y ago
It's there on paper, but is is really still there?
- meowface 7y ago
  Was it ever really there for the entire time period between the founding and when it was moved to a lower part of the page?
  - hanse00 7y ago
    I don't know, I wasn't there the whole time :)
- kyrra 7y ago
  I am a Googler, opinions on my own. The problem with the phrase is that it is very relative depending on your meaning of evil. It's a shifting over time and varies by person. At the same time it provides a good guiding principle for Google as a whole. You need to think about users in different parts of the world with different ideas of what is good and evil, and try to cater to all of them. It's a really hard problem. That code have conduct I linked tries to explain how evil is defined and give more concrete principles to follow. From my experience, no one tries to be evil within Google, and we try to do right by our users. But when you're dealing with products like YouTube and Search with massive amounts of user-generated data, suggesting good answers that satisfy everyone and doesn't generate news headlines is impossible. We do what we can, but when you have billion user products, some people are always going to be pissed at you.