15 ms·

Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

• Bahamut 13y ago
  This is shameful behavior - it is tantamount to mob rule & harassment, with the effective statement that "We strongly dislike what you're doing, so we are going to disturb your private residence and prevent you from going to work". No person who isn't committing a serious crime deserves that whatever his/her beliefs.
  • walshemj 13y ago
    If I where a Googler working in SF id have to start seriously thinking about getting a PPW license. PPW is short hand for the Uk licence to carry a gun for personal protection - and yes there are tech companies that do have staff that do that.
    • hgsigala 13y ago
      Do you honestly think that carrying a weapon in the san francisco bay area is a good idea?
      • BryanB55 13y ago
        Yes. But clearly you have an opposing view on the right to defend yourself with a firearm. No need to make this into a gun debate.
        • ThomPete 13y ago
          And yet you do exactly that.
          • aaronem 13y ago
            As far as I can tell, it's a necessary consequence of any mention of firearms on HN, in any context. There seems little point in blaming any one participant, in any one instance, for the perennial argument over what is perhaps the most immediately, or at least the most reliably, polarizing issue ever raised on HN.
            • DanBC 13y ago
              Fireamrs is only one hot-button topic for HN. Others include Isreal / Palestine; sexism; RMS; etc. it is trivially easy to troll HN. HN does not do well at ignoring trolls or not responding to overly-enthusiastic posters. (There are some exceptions to this where a person will carefully talk through differences in opinion to try to understand or communicate a point of view but these are exceptions).
        • deleted 13y ago
          [deleted]
      • walshemj 13y ago
        If I am getting threatened by random loonies yes - just as if I had worked for one of my previous employers in NI I would have been very careful about who I talked to and which places I went. one of my mates is married to a DA in the USA and has had to "cheek his guns just in case some one tried to make the threat good. Don't assume that all us Brits are fluffy little things who will have a fit of palpitations when fire arms are mentioned
      • danielweber 13y ago
        I can come up with lots of reasons for why carrying a concealed weapon is more likely to be harmful than beneficial in these circumstances. But why is it a bad idea to carry a weapon in SF? Are people stopped and frisked? Are there metal detectors everywhere? Are there pickpockets all over the place that will steal your weapon and use it against you?
        • stefan_kendall 13y ago
          It is extremely difficult to legally buy and conceal a handgun that conforms to California law. You also can't pickpocket a gun to anyone carrying it appropriately. Try to take a gun from a cop and see what happens.
          • kasey_junk 13y ago
            Weapon retention is an extremely stressed training point for most law enforcement agencies (even over effective shooting in many places). That's because many LEO shootings involve their service weapons that have been taken (I've seen estimates in the 8-12% range). This is in a population that is trained in weapon retention. I've rarely met non-LEO folks who spend adequate time on the skill.
    • BryanB55 13y ago
      Good luck. I'd encourage this even if you are not a Google employee. You'll probably want to move out of California if you want the right to defend yourself and family though. Getting a concealed carry license there is next to impossible.
      • pavel_lishin 13y ago
        > Good luck. I'd encourage this even if you are not a Google employee. How come?
        • BryanB55 13y ago
          Well you asked so I'll answer but I understand that a lot of people on HackerNews may not share my same views on self defense. Also to be clear, I don't think a non-violent blockade necessitates the use of a firearm. However, I think the topic came up because protests can and do lead to a handful of rogue protestors going too far, getting too angry and attacking people. So to answer your question in a general statement: I'm a firm believer that is my responsibility to protect my life and my family and no one else's. I also think it is naive to believe that I could never be the victim of a crime or brutal attack by someone equipped with a more effective weapon than my hands. I'd much rather have a firearm in my hand then a cell phone waiting for 911 when someone is clearly trying to inflict severe harm or death.
          • pavel_lishin 13y ago
            Fair enough; I respect your desire and right to do so. I don't think it's for everyone, though, so I asked why you wanted to encourage everyone to do it. Thanks for answering my question. I, personally, believe that I'm statistically likely to make a situation worse or possibly hurt myself if I own a handgun. So I choose not to have one. I might choose differently at a later date, depending on where I live.
    • wl 13y ago
      San Francisco almost never issues such licenses. If memory serves, only two people currently have CCW licenses issued by the City and County of San Francisco. Those two people who have them have serious political connections.
      • refurb 13y ago
        Last I heard it was down to a single person. However, CCWs in California are state-wide licenses and many of the more rural counties are pretty liberal with giving them out. Even Sacramento is close to a "shall-issue" county. I've heard San Diego is pretty decent too. In other words, if you live in a county where you can get a CCW, you can carry it legally in the entire state.
    • abritishguy 13y ago
      The only place that a member of the public can get a PPW in the UK is Northern Ireland.
      • walshemj 13y ago
        yes and there was a huge fuss when they put the BT logo on the car park passes.
        • walshemj 13y ago
          Two who ever voted me down around 20% of my ex coworkers I know in BT from NI had close family members killed by terrorists in the troubles.
          • aaronem 13y ago
            "In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is." The trouble with the eternal firearms argument is that anti-firearms types tend to be theorists (many of whom, in my experience, have never even laid hands on a firearm, to say nothing of firing one), and pro-firearms types to be practitioners. It's sort of like expecting a random Haskell programmer and a random PHP programmer to see eye-to-eye on anything, or indeed to be able to have a productive conversation with one another. In theory, this can occur. In practice...
    • deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
      • ericcumbee 13y ago
        Why is it that you think because someone has a gun they are incapable of acting rationally? If I were in the above situation I would not draw my gun with out feeling that there was a real threat to my life or property. And in that case I would rather have a gun than not have a gun.
        • DanBC 13y ago
          Recommending gun ownership in response to non-violent protest seems sub-optimal. Perhaps a gun is a useful tool in that kind of situation, but surely there's a bunch of other conflict de-escalation stuff that can be learnt first.
          • ericcumbee 13y ago
            you assume that the gun is the first option, when in fact its a last resort.
            • DanBC 13y ago
              But I see recommendations for guns all the time. I don't see recommendations for de-escalation techniques. Perhaps this is something that gun companies could do to promote their responsible gun carry image? They could provide training programmes on conflict managemen and de-escalalation along with safe gun use?
          • aaronem 13y ago
            Of course, and ericcumbee's point is well made; people who've never put any actual thought into what it's like to go armed are generally very quick to assume that those who do go armed see putting holes in things as a handy means of resolving any situation, from an argument in traffic to a panhandler begging change. (Far be it from me, of course, to speculate on any personal qualities, or lack thereof, which might be inadvertently revealed, by those who make this unwarranted assumption, in the process of doing same.) That said, if I am effectively trapped in my home by a currently non-violent protest which has as its manifesto the sort of manifest lunacy on display in the linked article, I am going to want to be able to defend family and self with force majeure, should matters proceed beyond noisy and foolish hot-headedness into an outright attack.
    • mortov 13y ago
      PPW in the UK ? Really ? Post Dunblane, all handguns are illegal in mainland UK. The only exceptions are for law enforcement/armed forces. [We'll ignore diplomatic missions using immunity/convention exceptions.] Northern Ireland does have PPW (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kin... and, handily for this topic, an FOI response on PSNI website http://www.psni.police.uk/firearms_applications_ppw.pdf http://www.psni.police.uk/firearms_applications_ppw.pdf). Without getting into all the republican politics, Northern Ireland is distinct in terms of the legal system and status compared to the mainland (of Scotland, England and Wales). You cannot use an example from NI to extend to the rest of the UK. I'll leave other commentors to discuss how sensible it is to talk about bringing guns into what seems to be a pretty hot debate on the street. One comment I read recently which has stuck with me goes along the lines of "there is no situation which resorting to violence will not make worse".
    • imroot 13y ago
      I have my CCW (Carrying of Concealed Weapon) license. In Kentucky, you must go through an instructional class before getting your weapon -- and you learn that pulling your weapon out should only happen when you're prepared to use it in a lethal manner -- otherwise the aggressor could fight you for your weapon. You don't get a handgun as a show of force -- you get one to protect yourself from imminent harm...and some asshat blocking a bus isn't putting you in imminent harm: you're in the bus, and hopefully the bus driver has already called 911 to get the person/people who are blocking the road out of your way.
    • jedmeyers 13y ago
      You will never get it. The only reasonable sheriff to issue a CCW in the vicinity is in San Mateo county.
  • XorNot 13y ago
    Meanwhile in another thread, people are lamenting the idea that the government can require you to get a permit to peacefully protest, and arrest you otherwise...
    • MAGZine 13y ago
      Protests against the government shouldn't require a permit from the government. That's really, really dumb, I'm sure we can all agree.
      • maxerickson 13y ago
        The permit is for the use of the public space. I don't think there should be harsh penalties for misusing public space, but I don't really trust people to be reasonable either (meaning I'm comfortable with some rules about the uses of public spaces).
  • tfinniga 13y ago
    I agree. I'd imagine if a bunch of google employees did something similar at the house of the person who organized this protest, it wouldn't be seen as being fair.
  • gaius 13y ago
    I mean, it's kinda like driving by your house with a camera then putting the pictures on the web. Or slurping up your wifi credentials. Good thing Google employees would never get involved in anything like that.
    • 02 13y ago
      It is exactly like those things.
      • walshemj 13y ago
        but Google did not turn up mob handed an picket you house and make threats about you and your family did it.
        • diydsp 13y ago
          > threats Can you please tell me where they threatened? I'm curious to know if they overstepped the boundaries of peaceful protest.
          • walshemj 13y ago
            err do I need to "tell" you that being blockaded into my home and having flyers with threatening language abut me handed to my neighbors woudl make me feel threatened - it's perception that matters here.
            • chillingeffect 13y ago
              You have repeated your belief that if you /feel/ threatened then you /are/ threatened. But threatened feelings are not enough to convict. Feelings are not facts. But, let's suppose you /were/ right for a moment. What conclusions would that lead us to? If you were right and gaius (the poster above) or I felt /threatened/ by google's actions of photographing our houses and slurping our wifi credentials, would that mean that google had indeed threatened us? After all, he /felt/ threatened. In your words, the perception of being threatened matters, right? So, if you're to be believed, google _has_ threatened /me/, because /I/ feel threatened by their taking pictures in public and slurping my wifi. If this is true, then according to you, what they have done /is/ tantamount to mob rule and harassment, and Google /is/ guilty of same, as it follows all the way back up to Bahamat's post above. But of course this is not true. Google is not guilty of mob rule and harassment. Or do you believe that Google is guilty of mob rule and harassment? If there is a threat, there must be evidence of a threat. Above posters and I have requested evidence. Evidence of a crime, not evidence of feelings. To back up the charge of a threat, can you articulate: 1. A statement to inflict pain, injury, damage, etc. 2. The event for which retribution is sought? If you have those two, you have a threat. Otherwise, I'm very sorry for the feelings you feel, but the protestors have acted no worse than Google. I'm grateful my country allows us to communicate our grievances to one another.
• bovermyer 13y ago
  Meanwhile, Kiev is under siege by a REAL threat, and children in Africa are starving. Every single one of these "demonstrators" seeking to prevent people from working, harassing them, and destroying their personal property needs to seriously rethink their priorities in life.
  • beering 13y ago
    By your logic, you should be in Africa RIGHT NOW distributing food to children instead of whining on HN. So, why are you waiting to book your tickets? Aren't you thinking about your priorities in life? That something bad is happening somewhere else in the world doesn't mean you can't spend effort on something close to you.
    • leothekim 13y ago
      It's more about perspective, not priorities. For example. I think the citizens of Detroit would probably kill to have the sort of problems that San Francisco currently has. Low unemployment, high rents/real estate prices (yes, these suck, but so does miles of blighted and unmaintained housing and a bankrupt city government) and a youthful and thriving industry would make San Francisco the envy of a lot of cities.
  • diydsp 13y ago
    Your statement is the definition of the red herring logical fallacy: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=fallacies+starving+africa https://duckduckgo.com/?q=fallacies+starving+africa
    • bovermyer 13y ago
      Fair enough. Would it be better to say, then, that these demonstrators are just misanthropic?
• zoidb 13y ago
  I know it must be worth a lot for the area he lives in but it's still amusing they call his two story plain looking house a "palace."
  • bovermyer 13y ago
    And "pompous," don't forget pompous. My house in Minneapolis is easily twice the size of that. I wonder what they'd think of me?
    • walshemj 13y ago
      mm last year I almost brought a listed building and it's mentioned in pevenser (the definitive guide to uk architecture) - obviously the SF mob would have me guillotined.
      • madaxe_again 13y ago
        I work in eCommerce, and I live in/own a Grade I listed house that has several pages in Pevsner. I am, clearly, satan incarnate.
    • gamegoblin 13y ago
      My thoughts exactly. As another raised in the Midwest (and a less affluent area than Minneapolis), my mom's house would cost several million in the Bay Area, but is only middle-of-the-line middle class here. 200K max.
  • esw 13y ago
    I thought exactly the same thing. I just looked it up on Zillow to check out the lot size, and noticed that it still had photos from the last time it was sold (in 2010). They may have done the same thing, and confused the rather overwrought decorating sensibilities of the previous owner with the Google developer.
  • MichaelTieso 13y ago
    I'm surprised the two stone lions guarding the door didn't scare them away.
• moocowduckquack 13y ago
  All of you other tech companies, all of you other developers and everyone else building the new surveillance state--We're coming for you next. Given that this seems to cover almost anyone involved in telecoms, if they are successful how will they know?
• keidian 13y ago
  Is this serious or supposed to be satire or something? Cause it reads like something a deranged person would write to me... Making comments about how Google employees automatically bring police, "All of Google's employees should be prevented from getting to work", etc. Yeah they do bring police.. to deal with nutjobs that decide to randomly show up at their houses and stop them from working, stop a bus in the middle of the street and cause a disruption, etc.
  • giarc 13y ago
    I think these people don't understand the irony of their claims about google employees bringing police to their neighbourhoods.
    • aaronem 13y ago
      Of course not. Instead, they blame Google, and its employees, for the police presence which they themselves necessitate.
  • calibraxis 13y ago
    Just read the PDF, and it's an interesting and reasonable perspective on tech. Probably sounds blasphemous to an audience excited about investments/acquisitions of $15M, $30M and $1.54 billion (from HN's current front page), but I think techies are due for a reasonable backlash for their usual servility to power, by people concerned about their society.
    • matthewmacleod 13y ago
      With respect, you are wrong. It's neither interesting nor reasonable, and indeed is barely coherent. Gentrification is a real problem, with inequality at it's roots. I think most people would agree with that. And I'd also agree that it's easy for some in the tech community to lose touch with the relative privilege that they often live in. But this is not a "reasonable backlash" – it's a bunch of incoherent knee-jerk harassment by people who should really be doing something better with their time. The proper channel for dealing with housing issues is local government; for NSA issues, national government; in neither is the correct channel the harassment of individual employees of a company which may (or may not be) the cause of those issues.
• yalogin 13y ago
  Is this an Onion style web site or is it real? If real its utterly incoherent thinking and illogical behavior on part of the people involved. I still cannot accept its real.
  • warp 13y ago
    Looks like typical indymedia stuff (so I assume it is real). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Media_Center https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Media_Center
  • equalarrow 13y ago
    It's real. Looking at their other stories/posts, I find it - I dunno what I find it, actually. It does strike me as a fight and struggle with everything. A war on life. Personally, I'm not into the military at all, never have been. I do find that Google's connection with the military (more than just Boston Dynamics) unfortunate. I'm sure they have a reason why they are doing what they do with them, as do all the companies that work with that part of the government. It would be nice (a pipe dream I suppose) if tech companies shunned the military. Singling out this this guy - I'm not sure what good it will do. Which ultimately leads me to think about you have to be the change you want to see. Harassing people like this is probably not going to get them to change their mind. At all. Reminds me of some documentary I watched (The Corporation maybe?) where some protestors were at an ex-Shell Oil ceo's house, doing their thing. The guy came out, offered them team and biscuits and engaged in a sit down discussion with them on his lawn. Granted, no one changed anyone's minds, but the fact they could engage in a civil conversation - both sides! - was a good thing. As someone who's lived in SF since the early 90's and seen it go thru good and bad and ho hum times, I think all this tech worker/bus hype is misplaced. I've also lived in NYC and dated someone who completed their masters at Columbia in urban planning. While I'm not claiming to be an expert, I know a thing or two about the real reasons for skyrocketing rents and 'gentrification'. For anyone looking for a great history of NYC, check out Ken Burns 'New York'. Awesome in it's scope and presentation. It get's really interesting and relevant to today when it hits the 20th century and Robert Moses appears. (SF's version of Moses is Justin Herman) So would I prefer the manhattanization of SF over the detroitization of SF? Absolutely. Is it that simple? Probably not. But for anyone that's been around for more than few years, you remember what the corner of 10th & Market was like before it went thru it's Twitter and redevelopment phase? This is one example and I do feel like it was a dick move on Twitter's part to cry about the tax break. But, if it means the area is cleaning up, then I figure that's better than the way it was. Anyway, I don't feel like any of these tech protests are worth much or will amount to anything. I feel like the protesters are targeting the wrong thing and need to refocus their efforts on their local government.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• doctorwho 13y ago
  Where were these uber-concerned citizens while George Bush was raping the US and Iraq? Why are they not protesting at the White House or stopping NSA employees from getting to work? But yeah, trample the rights of individual people, that will help. It's easy (and a lot less dangerous) to hate and pester a guy who makes more money than you. Forget about who's ruining the country and focus on the guy you think is responsible for you losing your rent controlled apartment. A few disingenuous trouble makers (organizers) stirring up the poor and the stupid for a cause that isn't a cause, just the distracting, headline grabbing, crusade du jour.
  • thomasz 13y ago
    In primary school? Seriously, this sounds exactly like the pseudo radical bullshit you'd expect from not-quite-20 year old college freshmen.
  • watwut 13y ago
    Maybe they through Iraq war is a good idea and support surveillance state? I do not understand what SF issue is really about, but it seems to be local problem unrelated to international or security politic.
    • icebraining 13y ago
      The text is TFA is strongly anti-surveillance state.
      • watwut 13y ago
        In all honesty, I found TFA extremely hard to read. It is almost as if the text would be random generated. Something about that style made my brain pick up parts, maybe because parts make sense while whole paragraphs make much less sense. So, I missed the anti-surveillance state aspect. My bad.
  • Thrymr 13y ago
    http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/03/20_antiwar.shtml http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/03/20_antiw... http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_8626408 http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_8626408 https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/21/18487630.php https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/21/18487630.php EDIT: The same website also covered NSA protests: https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/10/26/18745485.php https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/10/26/18745485.php
• riddlemethat 13y ago
  I hope that Google is working to protect the people who work for them. It's scary that nutjobs like this are publishing personally identifiable information and all but directly encouraging mob action.
• csbrooks 13y ago
  I wonder what the person did? If it were me, I'd be tempted to just pop out the back way, and take the train to work or something. I'm sure the protesters are hoping for a big confrontation. OK, actually, if it was me I'd stay home and peek through my windows, take a bunch of pictures, and write up a blog post about it. I kinda want a group of crazies to protest outside my house, it sounds sort of exciting.
  • keithpeter 13y ago
    I've had to cross picket lines (not outside my house). Not fun.
    • walshemj 13y ago
      That's not a picket line as it is not a legal strike
    • scotth 13y ago
      What happened?
      • keithpeter 13y ago
        Nothing dramatic, I was working at a different company within the compound and not involved at all with the dispute. Just... nerve wracking a bit (confined road in, rows of people abiding by the law but just looking you straight in the eye)
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• jijji 13y ago
  If this guy and all of his friends would actually get off their lazy butts and get a job, they might understand the need for other people to work. We all need to make money to live, have a roof over our heads, and feed our family. Just because you don't have a job or an income doesn't mean other people shouldn't either.
  • shadowmint 13y ago
    That's not really a fair comment and it trivializes the issues these guys are trying to raise. Getting a job isn't the issue; it's a complex mix of the privileged position and hard work that led to them being able to get that job, which these people cant do and the extremely obvious difference in economic status having that job grants, which includes people being evicted from their homes so that higher paying individuals can move in. You can see how people can get upset about it. You can't just tell them to go get jobs; that won't solve anything. All it does is make you feel better, for now. If you want to solve the problems like this you have to actually engage with the community which is feeling disenfranchised. No one wants to, but problems like this don't just 'magically' go away. (To be clear, I don't like what's happening here at all, but comments like yours are inflammatory and make things worse for the people on both sides)
    • cpncrunch 13y ago
      The person organizing the bus protests (Erin McElroy) has two degrees...that seems pretty privileged to me. I don't live in SF, but it looks to me like the problem is simply lack of new housing.
  • tsax 13y ago
    Well that's just crazy right-wing hate radio talk, man! /sarc
• idm 13y ago
  I lived in Berkeley for 5 years, and I can totally imagine this happening. While some parts of the condemnation are crazy (2 story palace!?) I nevertheless see the kernel of truth that lies somewhere in the murky rationale of that rant. Now, it's certainly not fair or reasonable to target a private individual like this, but I used to work in a DoD lab and I've considered many of the same issues raised by the protestors. I think the bizarre nature of this protest reflects a widespread confusion over the best way to surface the issue of government/commercial collaboration on the topic of surveillance. On the collaboration point, the protestors are right on. Like so many Berkeley events, lucidity comes with a parade attached to it.
  • RodericDay 13y ago
    why is it not reasonable to target individuals? when you target corporations, people point out that they are complex structures and that the decisions made by them do not represent every single employee when you target specific employees with decision-making power, people point out that the corporations are the problem and they are beholden by law and so on and so on when you discuss that maybe the blame is on capitalism for institutionalizing antisocial behavior, you're called naive and showered with examples of the good things it's produced there's some cognitive dissonance from detractors/businesspeople not primarily concerned with social welfare in taking one of these positions at a time and not realizing that everyone else sees them take the three in conjunction
• smtddr 13y ago
  I feel for the plight[1] these people are facing, I really do and I want to help. _BUT_ if you started showing up at my home protesting and making my family uncomfortable, that creates a different problem entirely. Anyways I'm assuming this site is fake because I can't find this being reported anywhere else... and I assume the protesters know better than to pull a stunt like this. 1. Let's be clear though, this is a first-world problem.
  • chroem 13y ago
    What they're doing is trying to make it socially unacceptable to assist the NSA/ DoD, and quite frankly it's overdue. I get the feeling that most of the criticism here against the protesters is because HN identifies with the Google employee(s), not because the protesters are wrong. It's a purely emotional reaction.
    • aniket_ray 13y ago
      These protesters are skirting the real issue which is that they cannot afford prime SF real estate anymore. When these protesters, themselves, were uprooting the original inhabitants they did not really care but now that they are being uprooted, they suddenly are crying foul. The criticism here against the protesters is because they are asking for free handouts rather than them actually working to earn them. Yes I understand it is not easy to be retrained and I don't have a good solution for people being uprooted. Yet, most commenters here on HN identify with startups/capitalism and believe that creating something that the market wants is ultimately the only way to earn a living. Certainly not protesting for free handouts. The strange thing is that the protesters would have found lots of support among Google and other Tech industry employees if they had not targeted them in the first place. PS: Google does not assist the NSA. Google has made it categorically clear. Guardian too had to backtrack on it's claims about that.
      • FireBeyond 13y ago
        "These protesters are skirting the real issue which is that they cannot afford prime SF real estate anymore. When these protesters, themselves, were uprooting the original inhabitants they did not really care but now that they are being uprooted, they suddenly are crying foul." I cannot up vote or emphasize this enough. They do not want the Meatpacking District of the early 20th Century. They want the bohemian eclecticism that -they- created in the 80s and 90s when they evicted -those- families. And now it's happening to them, and it's the most evil thing that needs to be stopped by any means necessary.
• mgunes 13y ago
  Excellent. If engineers and technologists refuse to take personal political and ethical responsibility for the future they help build, they need to be reminded to do so. We need more of this.
  • walshemj 13y ago
    so Googlers should take things into their own hands and take "action direct" against those harassing them.
    • aaronem 13y ago
      Are you seriously suggesting, Citizen, that the same standard applies both to the oppressor and the oppressed? Have a care, Citizen; such regressionist attitudes court accusations of reactionism.
      • walshemj 13y ago
        Of course not as a professional any excesses are just officer class high jinks - nothing to see hear run along like a good chap won't you
  • tsax 13y ago
    ^^ left-wing degeneracy for all to see. popcorn
    • walshemj 13y ago
      smiles you think I coming at this from a right-wing perspective lol.
      • tomp 13y ago
        No I just think that your comment did in absolutely no way make this discussion better.
        • 13y ago
• jskonhovd 13y ago
  I don't know how I would respond to this. If I had a family, I would be completely terrified for the safety of my kids. I guess when it comes to family its hard to not be irrational. Anyway, I guess I would stay calm and call the cops, and unfortunately think about moving.
• rexreed 13y ago
  This is getting to be a bit absurd. I understand and can sympathize with the plight of folks who feel that they are becoming economically marginalized in the region, because in many ways it is really happening. But public badgering of mid to low-level folks is not a way to gain a lot of support. It's like damaging the lobby of a Bank of America or smashing the windows of a McDonalds -- all it does is ruin the day for the poor middle to low income folks who run the branch and does nothing to the folks who you aim to target.
  • brudgers 13y ago
    The analogy between Google and McDonalds only works in regard to commercial creepiness. It does not sufficiently cover collaboration with the surveillance state's organs.
    • calt 13y ago
      >The analogy between Google and McDonalds only works in regard to commercial creepiness. It does not sufficiently cover collaboration with the surveillance state's organs. What??? Uhh. This guy is the surveillance state's organs. You mean he's from Oregon? No wait...
    • matthewmacleod 13y ago
      I don't think anybody wants a situation in which companies pick-and-choose which laws to follow, and which to ignore. The proper target for anger in this case is the NSA and the government which allowed this to happen.
      • jedmeyers 13y ago
        And we might guess that majority of those "protesters" either did not vote or voted for Obama.
        • deleted 13y ago
          [deleted]
      • 13y ago
• Xdes 13y ago
  This is a good example of what the liberal democratic movement should be about: policing corporations. Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, and the rest of them will never end their reprehensible behavior from lawsuits or other slaps on the wrists. Until there is a boot-on-ground movement to obstruct these corporations and their employees they will continue to act without consequence using their hoards of capital.
  • crashandburn4 13y ago
    what negative things do you really think google are doing with their capital? if you're talking about rising house prices in san francisco making it difficult for people to get housing and apartments I understand, but do you specifically blame google and other tech companies for that? is there something else that has made you angry about this? I am genuinely curious as I personally don't see anything wrong with the companies actions and do not agree with a protest that ( I think) constitutes personal harassment. full disclosure I'm from the UK and somewhat removed from the situation so there may be news stories that have passed me by, if you think they're relevant please link them.
  • judah 13y ago
    Agreed. It's time to obstruct these money-making corporations. We can slap their hands with lawsuits brought against them for making money, or we can shut down their greedy, wealth-building schemes. These money-loving fat cats have it coming to them and we need to stand up against them, especially since we have nothing better to do after quitting our mindless jobs at our former corporate greed houses. Anyone who wants money should be obstructed and shut down! Anyone who starts a new company should be seen as a money-loving greed-inducing pawn in the corporate cog, renewing their vicious cycles of greed! Anyone who takes part in a money-making company is no better than taking part in Nazi Germany! Who's with me? Who's with me??!!11oneoneone
    • Xdes 13y ago
      The issue isn't about capitalism. The issue is about the responsibility that these corporations are willfully ignoring once they have acquired copious amounts of capital. There seems to be this tendency with especially big corporations and individuals to suddenly throw their users and customers under the bus in favor of working with the government. Now the government shouldn't be engaging in this kind of solicitation to begin with, but that doesn't mean these corporations should be absolved of all guilt. Any corporation that would rather derive its value as a government datafarm than from wealth creation has betrayed its user, customers, and capitalism.
• wf 13y ago
  Can someone help me understand what effect would be had if Google did exactly what these people wanted and uprooted to elsewhere? I feel like that would cause a way bigger problem than it would solve, but my intuition doesn't have a solid basis.
  • Xdes 13y ago
    Like it or not these Silicon Valley types are coming in and pillaging the local economy with capital that isn't even theirs. It's a very unsustainable and disruptive environment that displaces workers, creates instability, and increases civil unrest. Innovation and economic progress, while essential to the advancement of society, needs to be amortized to decrease these negative side effects.
  • throwaway_yy2Di 13y ago
    "Can someone help me understand what effect would be had if Google did exactly what these people wanted and uprooted to elsewhere?" Together with the rest of Bay Area tech? Perhaps like the collapse of the auto monopoly in Detroit, but with an even larger industry and a worse-run city (SF).
• shoeless 13y ago
  How is protesting in a residential neighborhood allowed? Did this group have a permit? Is the SF Bay area different in this regard - no permit allowed?
  • anExcitedBeast 13y ago
    "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble...."
    • FireBeyond 13y ago
      If you tell someone and their family that you are going to stop them from leaving their home, and there is a not unreasonable expectation of assault and or battery in that, you are going beyond the right of peaceable assembly and into the realm of false imprisonment, or kidnap.
    • cafard 13y ago
      "peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances". Is Levandowski in any meaningful sense the government, and if so what grievances is he in a position to redress?
• jasonkester 13y ago
  Absolutely horrifying. More so because there are actually people here in this thread defending the crazy person who's trying to destroy somebody's life because they don't like the company he works for.
  • mattmaroon 13y ago
    That article was insane. How dare he try to get actual houses built so people can live there! And those crazy tech people with their law and order, and the jobs they create in the service industry! We cannot tolerate that!
  • mgunes 13y ago
    No, there aren't "people"; there is "a person", me. Just one person. Everyone else is speculating on how the poor little "Googler"'s life is destroyed by a naive peaceful protest, derailing the issue with anti-left wing jokes, suggesting that "Googlers" carry weapons, and so on. HN at its best: when its ideological toe is stepped on. popcorn
    • walshemj 13y ago
      And if I as a "techie" feel threatened an oppressed by those individuals I am. I am in no way a right winger I was coming at it form the same direction that those who fought in cable street did. "An injury to one is an injury to all"
      • mgunes 13y ago
        "Threatened" and "oppressed", by non-violent assembly and protest? Come on.
        • bovermyer 13y ago
          So if I hang out in your front lawn and prevent you from leaving your house (in a non-violent manner) with a bunch of my friends, does that make me non-threatening and non-oppressive?
• bitskits 13y ago
  The more reasonable direct action would be to simply not use a smartphone, not use the internet (or Google Maps), and not host a website. Opt out of the whole thing. I'm not clear on how these people can justify blocking the buses and showing up at people's houses, but then organize using Google's products.
  • diydsp 13y ago
    No way. The benefits of technology (and the natural resources it consumes such as airwaves and exotic materials) should not be reserved for those who kowtow to commercial interests. A more reasonable direct action is to develop and socialize technological practices which uphold community values: DuckDuckGo, Open Street Maps, Firefox, Cyanogen, encryption, CB radio, amateur radio, GNU/Linux.
    • bitskits 13y ago
      I'm saying it is MORE reasonable than showing up at someones house, not necessarily the best course of action. I agree there are other reasonable courses of action as well, as you outlined.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• bananacurve 13y ago
  They probably used Google Maps and Streetview to get there.
  • stefan_kendall 13y ago
    But aside from all the great free services google provides, and the money it has poured into its offices and the surrounding area, what has it done? What have the Romans ever done for us?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso
  • uname1 13y ago
    The picture of his house on the flier was from Streetview...
• pnathan 13y ago
  Well, if this isn't an incentive for Google devs to get together and make a gated community together completely cut off from other people, I don't know what is. Not only that, it certainly won't endear this group's ideals to Googlers, while in fact they may have value.
• pettys 13y ago
  I read the article and the flier; I felt like I was approaching it open-minded. I conclude it's propaganda because it paints common circumstances with unfairly pejorative language, and by that undermines the few valid points it brings up. The brochure closes with: "Steal from the techies you babysit for." If that's your message, you and I are not on the same side.
• k-mcgrady 13y ago
  I thought protesting the buses was reasonable and justified. Picking on a single employee of a company, especially someone who probably doesn't have any control of the company (i.e. not the CEO, President etc.) and distributing leaflets about him is despicable. However is there any link between this protest and the bus protests? The bus protests were for economic reasons mainly. This is about surveillance so I'd guess this protest didn't include many people from the bus protests.
• djim 13y ago
  am i the only one happy that folks like this left jobs working for the government and their contractors to work for a company like google?
• paulgb 13y ago
  > Our problem is with Google, [...], and the gentrification its employees are causing in every city they inhabit Never thought I'd see someone on the left shaming a company for paying their employees well.
• jsonmez 13y ago
  I hate this because I am in support of freedom. I love this because I am in support of freedom.
• loudin 13y ago
  Why all the rage directed at Google and not, say, the government that institutes these policies? Something just feels 100% misguided about these attacks.
• brudgers 13y ago
  If the headline were Demonstration at the Home of Developer and this was only over luxury condominiums, would the response of HN be more neutral or favorable? I suspect it would be, and that raises an interesting question in regard to why I am conditioned to give more weight to etiquette when the issues are more weighty -. this event touches on corporatism, militarism, economic disparities, and the illegal use of public infrastructure for private profit all in addition to basic neighborhood activism. When did citizenship come to be considered poor form?
• lolwutf 13y ago
  And this is why you should have a gun in your home, folks!
  • buckbova 13y ago
    There's no better deterrent than racking a shell into your shot gun.
  • lolwutf 13y ago
    Wow, I got upvotes on this? I was sure this was destined for Invisible Grey Text Land.
• acslater00 13y ago
  Welcome to Berkeley, I guess. Honestly, it was only a matter of time before the dissident left decided that the software community was just another monied enemy for them to hate. The good news is that nobody really takes them seriously, so if you can tolerate the occasional impotent protest and the (very) occasional WTO-style near riot, you can proceed with your life and ignore them.
  • SyneRyder 13y ago
    For someone completely outside the Bay Area, it can be hard to judge whether this is a big deal or not. The frequency of the news reports makes it seem like all the Google Buses are being blocked / attacked each morning, and now that employees are being targeted individually at their homes. I know it's turned me off accepting jobs in the Bay Area - it isn't the only reason, but it has been part of it. It would be reassuring to know if these are just isolated incidents being magnified by the media lens.
  • yapcguy 13y ago
    Define "software community". Not every software developer is working for a large corporation or venture-backed start-up.
• DannoHung 13y ago
  Whoever wrote this is a fucking lunatic. I mean, common, "His house is a pompous, minimally decorated two story palace with stone lions guarding the door." You lost me right there. And then the parts about Google X developing "war robots" and Google threatening to release a "massive amount of carbon"? Just... no. I thought the protestors had a reasonable argument about Google hindering the development of better public transportation and displacing San Francisco individuals by running private bus services that isolated Googlers from the community, but this is sheer lunacy.
  • ForHackernews 13y ago
    Are housing prices in San Francisco really so insane that a two-story house is "pompous" and a "palace"? > developing "war robots" Technically, since their acquisition Boston Dynamics, Google is indeed in the business of war robots: http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/google-buys-major-military-robot-maker-why-does-search-giant-2D11744237 http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/google-buys-major-military... Though they've said they're only going to fulfill their existing military contracts, not seek out others. I guess we'll see what happens on that front.
    • DannoHung 13y ago
      Maybe if this was a protest of a Boston Dynamics employee in Massachusetts, but this guy apparently works for Google X. So... self driving cars and diabetes contact lenses?
      • blhack 13y ago
        >diabetes contact lenses The way these people see the world: those contact lenses are just one more way for the evil rich to impose their rule on the poor. They get treatment, and the poor don't.
      • diydsp 13y ago
        Cherry picking. The list of Google X projects is largely secret. There are reportedly 98 more. [1] [1]http://9to5google.com/2011/11/14/sergey-brin-is-working-on-a-list-of-100-secret-projects-at-clandestine-google-x/ http://9to5google.com/2011/11/14/sergey-brin-is-working-on-a...
• rjf90 13y ago
  I'm seeing a strong parallel with occupy wall street. Clearly there are differences - these people seem more militant for one - but this is clearly a movement born out of an emotional response, if not shear jealousy. These protesters are uninformed at best, and their tactics will not yield any results.
• mdip 13y ago
  When you attack an individual because of the place s/he chooses to work you take the "Let's all protest the activities of Big X" down to a personal level. I'd be horrified if I woke up and found a large group of people protesting in front of my house because of who I work for. Reading this message, I instantly put myself in that employee's shoes and instantly became hostile toward the organization arranging this. I made a second near-instantaneous cognitive jump, and this is the most important part, to completely disregarding whatever legitimate (or otherwise) complaints this group had and to assume that I should give Google the benefit of the doubt. This may be just me, since I avoid politics at nearly all costs, but despite the fact that I'd probably agree with this particular groups gripes, I can't make my mind see them as anything other than a waste of perfectly good oxygen. Did they change my political opinion? Probably not, but they were more likely to make me against their particular cause than for it by this action. Can anyone see anything of value that they might have gained in the process? I'm finding it difficult to come up with anything...
  • scarmig 13y ago
    Question: people will often protest at the houses of CEOs, who consider themselves just employees doing their jobs. E.g. after the Bhopal disaster, people protested at the home of the Union Carbide CEO as he was trying to evade responsibility and minimize payouts to the victims. Is this inappropriate? I agree with you that the protestors didn't gain anything from this particular protest and did harm to their cause, if anything.
    • aaronem 13y ago
      It's still inappropriate, but considerably less so, both because a C-level officer of such a large company is likely to have security arrangements of some sort, and because a C-level officer has at least some influence over the policies of the company in question -- the CEO, of course, most of all. That said, there is a qualitative difference between showing up at the guarded front gate of a CEO's mansion, and showing up on the ordinary front doorstep of a rank-and-file employee's two-story house. The former can at least be said to "go with the territory". The latter verges very closely on an imminent threat of bodily harm; the whole point of such action is to demonstrate to its victim that he and his family are not safe anywhere, not even in their home.
• ojbyrne 13y ago
  There are actual defense research establishments in the Bay Area. If these people were actually concerned with "collaboration with the military" perhaps they should be protesting in front of Lawrence Livermore Labs. Its absurd.
• uname1 13y ago
  Why aren't they at the doors of the government officials in charge of the surveillance state? It seems like a demonstration about inequality and gentrification wrapped in the hot topic of the day. (surveillance)
• JeremyMorgan 13y ago
  I would like to know what this "privilege" is all about. I'm a tech worker who makes a very good salary. Am I privileged? I couldn't afford a fancy high end college, so I chose a cheaper one and got a loan from the Government, which I paid back in full. I studied hard in a public school and those achievements helped me get a grant to offset some cost as well. I got a job in tech support, worked my way up through the ranks by pushing myself and going above and beyond every day. I continually educate myself with classes and books that I pay for out of my own pocket, and invest my own time to keep my skills sharp and advance myself. I am a "tech worker" and I have a job that pays well above average, so am I privileged? I would like to know what was handed to me that couldn't have been given to anyone else who worked hard. I'm not a rarity: tens of thousands of people in the tech industry are exactly like me. They saw a target and they hit it. That's why I don't support these idiots. It's an idea full of fallacies. They're just trying to ruin the lives of hard working mid level people based on perceived wrongs by their bosses by people with nothing better to do.
  • krisdol 13y ago
    > I would like to know what this "privilege" is all about. I'm a tech worker who makes a very good salary. Am I privileged? Yes. So am I and so is most of the audience here.
    • JeremyMorgan 13y ago
      In what way? How is what do confined to an exclusive group of people? I can understand Americans as a whole being privileged, yes. We have tons of opportunities people in other countries don't. But we're talking about Americans protesting against Americans and that's why it doesn't make much sense.
      • ForHackernews 13y ago
        > How is what do confined to an exclusive group of people? At a very basic level, not everyone is smart enough to do what you do. At a more practical level, not everyone has access to a good education, or grew up in a community that encourages education. I know I'll get a bunch of responses like "What access!? Just go on codecademy and teach yourself Javascript!" But good luck teaching web development to a 21 year old who's never been taught how to read properly.
• leothekim 13y ago
  The article has a deeply discrimatory ring to it. It's essentialist to single out Google as the sole source of whatever problems San Francisco has. It also has the ring of "these immigrants are destroying the character of our community and taking our jobs, and not giving back. Let's send these immigrants a message." Disturbing, terrifying, and misguided.
  • walshemj 13y ago
    Interesting that the employee targeted appears to be an immigrant and not a WASP.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• scarmig 13y ago
  I'm of two thoughts on this. Obviously, sucks a lot to be dude, but no one is being violent (though some of the rhetoric veers toward threats, which is absolutely inappropriate), and this strategy puts immense pressure on Google. Additionally he's well-chosen as a target: quite wealthy, working on a product that's closely linked to military applications, and unluckily enough (for him) someone involved in the changing urban landscape of Berkeley, which helps protestors tap into a channel of great resentment. It's a tactic that's typically been used against CEOs in the past (e.g. after the Bhopal disaster): using it against someone lower on the totem poll makes me a bit uncomfortable, but it seems like a natural extension. The real WTF is this: what the hell are they hoping to accomplish? Everything in their manifesto is scattershot, and comes off as just a spray of resentment. I could maybe imagine a demand for Google to cease all contracts with the US military, but (1) they failed to make that demand the explicit focus and (2) they've not laid the groundwork for that demand. You don't jump into harsh escalations until you've built a community organized around the demand, but few people have heard of the Google car-military connection. The goal seems more just to express inchoate anger at Google and gentrification without having some specific outcome in mind. So, on strategy I give them an F. Tactics a B, mostly because the execution is flawed because of an absent strategy, leading to their manifesto reading as frothing rage than an intelligent indictment of him and Google. All the neighbors who receive this flier to are going to walk away sympathetic with the guy and respecting him more.
• mc32 13y ago
  This is coming awfully close to bullying, if not terrorizing an individual because of a difference of opinion on what they do or whom they work for. This is awful. I might not agree with some things Google does or any corporation does; however, this approach will only serve to alienate dissidence since most people will not want to be associated with this kind of awful tactic. Just because people (public) is not taking your side should not signal you the protester to go gonzo, off the reservation, as it were. This is not the way to dissent. It's a desperate and counterproductive approach which _might_ get sympathy form the choir. In that sense, it's a very selfish (self-pleasing) act.
• andrewfong 13y ago
  This flyer is just plain nuts. Some choice quotes: "The self-driven car has been another pet project of the DARPA for many years. It sponsored a recurring Grand Challenge for people designing self-driving vehicles, hoping someone would crack open the new technology. Anthony Levandowski was one of the wonder kids who flocked to these competitions, looking for a federal handout and fame. Now, with Google handing him more money than he could ever dream of, Levandowski is working long hours bringing this dream of the military into reality." "Levandowski started a company that created computer tablets designed to display blueprints at construction sites. The reasoning behind their venture was that updating and then printing new blueprints took a few days and slowed construction time. With this new product, construction companies could create condominiums, malls, and subdivisions with the least possible delay and the maximum profit. In praise of his prodigious business acumen, the administration-run UC Berkeley News decided to run an article on him in 2003, championing his ability to make money and enable the housing bubble that was just starting to expand." "The proposed project is a testament to the arrogance, disconnection, and luxury of the ruling class. Growing their own vegetables in a rooftop garden and selling them to other wealthy people allows them, somehow, to pretend that the planet is not being ravaged by the same economy they depend on for their wealth, comfort, and safety." "Preparing for the action, we watched Levandowski step out of his front door. He had Google Glasses over his eyes, carried his baby in his arm, and held a tablet with his free hand. As he descended the stairs with the baby, his eyes were on the tablet through the prism of his Google Glasses, not on the life against his chest. He appeared in this moment like the robot he admits that he is." Seriously? That last one is particularly horrifying and almost sounds like an implicit threat.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  • stdgy 13y ago
    We are writing to warn you that your neighbor is a talented and driven individual. He should not be tru... Wait, what?
  • moocowduckquack 13y ago
    Unfortunately it looks like the ideas of Ted Kaczynski + Internets + Snowden/NSA feeding into a new Luddite movement of ultra-woo. It could be a full blown cult within the year. Personally I don't think it is possible to avoid this escalating, is just about whether it is just briefly messy or turns into a more long lived affair.
• ubercore 13y ago
  I agree with everyone that's calling this mob behavior and harassment. In no way is this "OK". But... I'm actually glad this discussion is happening. I think it's a really interesting problem that faces a lot of cities, ones even less prosperous than SF. Hopefully the opposition can follow up this overwrought and misguided protest with an actual dialog with companies like Google and the city. I also hope they stop singling out employees.
• n1ghtmare_ 13y ago
  What the frack is this nonsense ? Whoever wrote this should seek professional help. Sometimes it's scary to know how many nutjobs are out there.
• kyleblarson 13y ago
  I am seriously dumbfounded by this for so many reasons. Why pick on GOOG in particular? Isn't Palantir "more evil" by their screwed up logic?
• no_wave 13y ago
  It's so upsetting that they're protesting the single most life-saving technology that's likely to be developed in our lifetime (self-driving cars). Life-saving for everyone, too - poor and rich.
• seniorsassycat 13y ago
  I think Google's threats of releasing "massive amounts of carbon" refers to the emissions of their employees commuting individually instead of by busses.
• pdknsk 13y ago
  I am fascinated and bewildered. I had not known fliering is a word.
• jastevenson 13y ago
  "Gentrification" became a bad word at some point. I don't see it that way. I hope that the tech industry gentrifies the hell out of SF to get rid of nutcases such as these people.
• stygiansonic 13y ago
  By their messed-up logic (I can't tell whether this is parody or not), their use of jQuery on their website would put them among the military-industrial-surveillance supporters since they are lending their implicit backing to a project/library that the NSA uses on their website.
  • moocowduckquack 13y ago
    I think the dependency irony starts hitting much further up the stack than the jquery library on the website, given the nature of a website on the public internet.
• mindcrime 13y ago
  Man, everytime I read more about this, I lose a little more of my sympathy for these protesters. They sound more and more like a bunch of whack nut-jobs in every article. I don't disagree that they have some valid concerns, but they aren't doing themselves any favors with this over-the-top stuff. In fact, I suspect they are unintentionally setting themselves up as "the bad guys" in this story. I can't help but think the protesters should take a long, hard look at who their leadership is, and find somebody new.
• cromwellian 13y ago
  The real problems in San Francisco and elsewhere, the problems that are hurting and displacing people, aren't caused by self-driving cars or software to make construction more efficient, and the people experiencing pain will not be made better by casting out all of the professionals, many of whom politically side with progressive causes. (And isn't doing home composting and growing your own garden what Berkeley protesters would demand people do?) The local governments need to figure out ways to encourage affordable housing. Yes, DARPA funds long range research which can be used for military purposes. That includes the Internet, which was DARPA funded. But all technological research has dual use. The Internet could have been used as a command-and-control network for the military during war, but it is also used to distribute political dissent. The same research into chemicals and biology that allow life saving medicines to be created to save children around the world can also be used to make chemical and biological weapons. Fertilizer grows food, it also makes bombs. Google X's Car project doesn't seem to have anything to do with making weapons for the DoD. This is pure guilt-by-tenuous-association. Many college campuses also enter these DARPA challenges, where's the protests? The purpose of the car is to solve a very real social problem: hundreds of thousands of people are killed in auto accidents around the world every year and millions more are seriously injured needing to go to the emergency room. This is an enormous social cost which could be used to fund better housing, or education, but instead is going to treat injuries and repair and replace damaged vehicles. There is no evidence of a Google contract with DoD for Google Car technology for weapons. What I find really disturbing is the level dehumanization. The protest is peaceful now, but the first step to encouraging violence against someone is to describe them in dehumanizing terms (a robot). When gun-advocates like Sarah Palin start using rhetorical devices that dehumanizes opponents and paints literal gun targets on them, we are not surprised turning up the rhetorical temperature leads to violent confrontation, the behavior shouldn't be tolerated or defended on the other side.
  • diydsp 13y ago
    > to describe them in dehumanizing terms (a robot). Anthony Levandrowski has self-described himself as a robot: "Although Levandowski spent most of his childhood in Brussels, his English has no accent aside from a certain absence of inflection—the bright, electric chatter of a processor in overdrive. “My fiancée is a dancer in her soul,” he told me. “I’m a robot.” "[1] [1] http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/11/25/131125fa_fact_bilger http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/11/25/131125fa_fact_...
• jpadkins 13y ago
  Ironically, these anti-Google bay area protesters are starting to sound a lot like conservative anti-immigration talking points. * We don't want your kind in our neighborhood. * We don't want our culture changed. * Your mere presence is ruining our life. * You are different than us, therefor unwelcome here. I thought Berkeley was the peaceful co-existence crowd?
  • dubfan 13y ago
    The political spectrum wraps around and converges at the extremes. I'm reminded of the controversy in Portland around water fluoridation. Many of the ostensibly left-wing opponents of fluoridation, when presented with the argument that poor people without access to dental services would suffer without water fluoridation, rebutted this by essentially saying that poor people don't deserve to have healthy teeth anyway.
• cpncrunch 13y ago
  Here is the person who is organizing the bus protests. I'm not sure if she was involved in this particular demonstration: http://www.erinmcelroy.net/resume.html http://www.erinmcelroy.net/resume.html
  • nostrademons 13y ago
    That's just as bad as the protesters who show on the doorstep of a Google engineer. Attack the action and not the person. In this case you don't even know if that person is the one involved in this action.
    • cpncrunch 13y ago
      No, it wasn't an attack. I was simply curious about who was organizing these protests, as I'm sure a lot of people are.
• doctorwho 13y ago
  Google employees will now organize to lobby to bring a "stand your ground" law in California. When that happens we'll see how many hipsters feel like threatening someone who can afford a semi-automatic weapon and has the skills to rig it up to a quad-copter, or their home security system.