4 ms·
I think the context you're missing is that Drew caused a stink about this already back in 2021, the blacklisting was just the last iteration of the saga. So I'm
by cycomanic 4y ago
I think the context you're missing is that Drew caused a stink about this already back in 2021, the blacklisting was just the last iteration of the saga. So I'm not sure if his posting caused the Google team to rethink their stance, but it certainly caused quite a bit of bad publicity for Google.
- morelisp 4y ago[flagged]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- philosopher1234 4y agoI think you're being downvoted for stomping on the collective hacker news fantasy. The fantasy is maybe something like "google (mainstream tech, go, java, ...) is big and bad, and we're small and heroic". The fantasy is so attractive to people here that they will plug their ears and downvote you for pointing out: * Drew was being stubborn/childish in his original post * He claimed to be doing it on principle, but nothing has changed to satisfy his principles between then and now * The only actual change is that he got special attention from Russ, in addition to the original offered change (which he previously claimed was inadequate). Thus, a detached observer would conclude that Drew's interests were not what he claimed. They might even conclude that his real interest was engaging in this Hacker News fantasy, or getting attention from Russ, or attention from the community. Instead, spewed throughout this comments sections are longwinded and complex explanations to try and avoid the simple conclusion that Drew was (conscious or not) pursuing other aims than he claimed.
- jdiff 4y agoThank you, you're the first person to point out that him taking the temporary solution that was offered years ago after several angry blog posts about how it was unacceptable in principle or practice is inconsistent at best and hypocritical at worst.