5 ms·

It was the part where people decided to ignore what was actually being presented, and instead derailed every possible conversation about google into their prede

It was the part where people decided to ignore what was actually being presented, and instead derailed every possible conversation about google into their predetermined track. Not you specifically, but this entire fuschia thread. What is someone to think when every time their work is presented publicly the comments are all completed unrelated to what was presented? You too would conclude that group is unlikely to present meaningful feedback or thoughts. (I have never, and will never, work for google).

rejectedandsad 5y ago
I agree, actually, but that's fundamentally different from saying people aren't "qualified".
KozmoNau7 5y ago
Perhaps it would useful for Google and googlers to "read the room" - as it were - and consider why a lot of people have such strong reactions to Google's conduct and methods, why a lot of people are distrustful of anything that comes out of Google (and FAANG in general), and why the reactions are so strong from privacy advocates and the open source/free software crowd in particular, in context of where and how Google started and where it is now.
- lacksconfidence 5y ago
  I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. Should the developers that work on specific input methods for fuscia be "reading the room" and instead spend their time switching to work on ad tech, where they can influence it? Google has 10's of thousands of engineers, wedging ad tech discussions into the output of every last one of them seems completely and utterly unrelated to the article.
  - KozmoNau7 5y ago
    I would humbly suggest that people working for companies that have become notorious for customer-unfriendly behavior and a complete disregard for privacy, reconsider whether that is something they wish to continue to contribute to, or not. Do they wish to contribute to the coffers of a company that will use every possible means available to erode privacy, to extract maximum value from open source without giving one iota back, and to enforce more and more corporate censorship on the open web. Advertising and a complete disregard for privacy is in every part of Google's DNA, you cannot possibly claim ignorance of it, simply because you are in a department not directly working on advertising. That is equivalent to covering your ears with your hands and going "la la la I can't hear you". That is why it gets brought up in every discussion about Google, because one bad apple really does spoil the entire bunch, their bad behavior in regards to privacy and a complete lack of customer support taints the entire organization, and everyone who works for Google has sold their respectability for a Silicon Valley paycheck. Everyone who works in tech needs to take a good long hard look in the mirror, and decide for themselves whether they're OK with everything their employer is doing, and if not, perhaps consider why they choose to still work there.

rejectedandsad 5y ago

I agree, actually, but that's fundamentally different from saying people aren't "qualified".

KozmoNau7 5y ago

Perhaps it would useful for Google and googlers to "read the room" - as it were - and consider why a lot of people have such strong reactions to Google's conduct and methods, why a lot of people are distrustful of anything that comes out of Google (and FAANG in general), and why the reactions are so strong from privacy advocates and the open source/free software crowd in particular, in context of where and how Google started and where it is now.

lacksconfidence 5y ago
I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. Should the developers that work on specific input methods for fuscia be "reading the room" and instead spend their time switching to work on ad tech, where they can influence it? Google has 10's of thousands of engineers, wedging ad tech discussions into the output of every last one of them seems completely and utterly unrelated to the article.
- KozmoNau7 5y ago
  I would humbly suggest that people working for companies that have become notorious for customer-unfriendly behavior and a complete disregard for privacy, reconsider whether that is something they wish to continue to contribute to, or not. Do they wish to contribute to the coffers of a company that will use every possible means available to erode privacy, to extract maximum value from open source without giving one iota back, and to enforce more and more corporate censorship on the open web. Advertising and a complete disregard for privacy is in every part of Google's DNA, you cannot possibly claim ignorance of it, simply because you are in a department not directly working on advertising. That is equivalent to covering your ears with your hands and going "la la la I can't hear you". That is why it gets brought up in every discussion about Google, because one bad apple really does spoil the entire bunch, their bad behavior in regards to privacy and a complete lack of customer support taints the entire organization, and everyone who works for Google has sold their respectability for a Silicon Valley paycheck. Everyone who works in tech needs to take a good long hard look in the mirror, and decide for themselves whether they're OK with everything their employer is doing, and if not, perhaps consider why they choose to still work there.