4 ms·

The protestors complaints are justified. Google has made surveillance easier and privacy a distant wish. The tech elite have by-and-large ignored the poor. Roof

The protestors complaints are justified. Google has made surveillance easier and privacy a distant wish. The tech elite have by-and-large ignored the poor. Rooftop gardening is a fun leisure activity and not a solution to obesity, global warming, or world hunger. But however well intentioned, the protestors are hurting their own cause by resorting to ruthless tactics. The problem of rising surveillance, income inequality, and food shortages are not the fault of one man, or one company. We are all complicit. We all thrive off of an exploitative, unsustainable system. Finding scapegoats gets us no where. Be more productive - Propose solutions. Get the attention of people who can make a difference. Lead people in making a difference. Still, this is a reminder that we've all failed to create a better world with technology.

npsimons 13y ago
I'm all for free speech, and let these people have their voices heard; that being said, here's my free speech: fuck these protestors. They aren't being constructive. They aren't being original. They aren't addressing problems that aren't already known about and definitely aren't caused by any one person. What they should be doing is working on more pro-active, productive solutions, you know, like eliminating the most dangerous factor in driving. I look forward to a day when I don't have to worry about losing both my feet below my knees, as one of my cousins did, because of a drunk driver. And while I don't look forward to the privacy implications of only Google offering driverless cars, I do look forward to a world replete with driverless cars. And I might add, this is one of the very few cases in which technology can honestly solve a societal problem.
smtddr 13y ago
I was going to downvote you based on your first sentence. But then the rest of your comment brought you back to earth. Now that last sentence though: >>Still, this is a reminder that we've all failed to create a better world with technology. You cannot[1] say tech has given the world a net negative. This is all pedantic though because the bottom line is the protesters are upset and emotions have boiled over striking anyone that happens to be nearby. Right now, that's Google. Please Google and its employees, don't respond in a way that'll make this whole thing blow up more than it already has. The protesters do have a point; they're just not venting their anger in the best way possible. Their focus on Google will makes tech-people forget the bigger picture and start thing about "Why Google?" "Why this G-employee?"... and then we start down the path of crazy-town where there is no positive-outcome. 1. I do realize this is potentially debatable given the invention of stuff like the atomic-bomb. But let's not go there. As long as we haven't blown ourselves up and out of existence, tech is a net positive.
- normloman 13y ago
  I'm talking about silicon valley in particular. If you ask me, the privacy implications of facebook, google, et al cancel out the benefits of sharing photos with friends and more accurate search results. Not a net negative either. Just breaking even. Certainly, the world is a better place than it was in the last few decades. Technology had a role in that, but so did politics, culture, and societal trends.
  - smtddr 13y ago
    That's cool. I don't completely agree but at least if we're focused on SV then your point is reasonable.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - actsasbuffoon 13y ago
    Before it was known as Silicon Valley it was home to places like Bell Laboratories, Xerox PARC, the Stanford Research Institute, etc. Tech workers in SV created ethernet, optical storage, text to speech recognition, laser printing, the modern graphical user interface, and all of that was just at Xerox PARC! I'm pretty sure the transistor was invented at Bell Labs in SV. I agree that there are some privacy concerns about what's going on with social media companies, but if you think that's of equal importance to the transistor then I don't think we live in the same universe.
  - nmodu 13y ago
    With respect to self-driving cars, wouldn't the increased safety of our roads greatly outweigh the privacy implications? Think of all the lives that could be saved. >If you ask me, the privacy implications of facebook, google, et al cancel out the benefits of sharing photos with friends and more accurate search results. We aren't just talking about "sharing photos with friends and more accurate search results" anymore. Having had many people that I care about torn away from me due to fatal car accidents, I personally believe that the trade-off here is a no-brainer. >Still, this is a reminder that we've all failed to create a better world with technology. Self-driving cars can (and will) create a better world.
leothekim 13y ago
"The tech elite have by-and-large ignored the poor." Wrong. For example, Bill Gates has donated the majority of his fortune to his foundation to help rid Malaria from impoverished nations around the world. He has even convinced Warren Buffett to donate most of his fortune to philanthropic causes.
FireBeyond 13y ago
"Rooftop gardening is a fun leisure activity and not a solution to obesity, global warming, or world hunger.” This is a straw man. Who, let alone the poor guy being protested, ever claimed that it was? He lives in SF. He most likely doesn’t have a yard. Is a roof top garden a net positive, or negative, to any number of things, including personal contentment?
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  He lives in Berkeley. And the rooftop garden is in reference to the apartment building he is planning to build in downtown Berkeley. Levandowski has also purchased a property on the corner of Dwight and Fulton, just one block from Shattuck Avenue. At this location, he has hired the Nautilus Group to construct a proposed 77-unit apartment building call Garden Village complete with rooftop gardens, 24-hour surveillance, private security, and a fleet of electric vehicles parked in an underground garage. The residents will have the luxury of renting these cars whenever they want to cruise out to the beach for a dip. I thought for sure that would be something the typical Berkeley person would be all about. Rooftop gardens to grow your own veggies. Eco Friendly car sharing. That all sounds pretty good to me. Why are they hating on that?

npsimons 13y ago

I'm all for free speech, and let these people have their voices heard; that being said, here's my free speech: fuck these protestors. They aren't being constructive. They aren't being original. They aren't addressing problems that aren't already known about and definitely aren't caused by any one person. What they should be doing is working on more pro-active, productive solutions, you know, like eliminating the most dangerous factor in driving. I look forward to a day when I don't have to worry about losing both my feet below my knees, as one of my cousins did, because of a drunk driver. And while I don't look forward to the privacy implications of only Google offering driverless cars, I do look forward to a world replete with driverless cars. And I might add, this is one of the very few cases in which technology can honestly solve a societal problem.

smtddr 13y ago

I was going to downvote you based on your first sentence. But then the rest of your comment brought you back to earth. Now that last sentence though: >>Still, this is a reminder that we've all failed to create a better world with technology. You cannot[1] say tech has given the world a net negative. This is all pedantic though because the bottom line is the protesters are upset and emotions have boiled over striking anyone that happens to be nearby. Right now, that's Google. Please Google and its employees, don't respond in a way that'll make this whole thing blow up more than it already has. The protesters do have a point; they're just not venting their anger in the best way possible. Their focus on Google will makes tech-people forget the bigger picture and start thing about "Why Google?" "Why this G-employee?"... and then we start down the path of crazy-town where there is no positive-outcome. 1. I do realize this is potentially debatable given the invention of stuff like the atomic-bomb. But let's not go there. As long as we haven't blown ourselves up and out of existence, tech is a net positive.

normloman 13y ago
I'm talking about silicon valley in particular. If you ask me, the privacy implications of facebook, google, et al cancel out the benefits of sharing photos with friends and more accurate search results. Not a net negative either. Just breaking even. Certainly, the world is a better place than it was in the last few decades. Technology had a role in that, but so did politics, culture, and societal trends.
- smtddr 13y ago
  That's cool. I don't completely agree but at least if we're focused on SV then your point is reasonable.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- actsasbuffoon 13y ago
  Before it was known as Silicon Valley it was home to places like Bell Laboratories, Xerox PARC, the Stanford Research Institute, etc. Tech workers in SV created ethernet, optical storage, text to speech recognition, laser printing, the modern graphical user interface, and all of that was just at Xerox PARC! I'm pretty sure the transistor was invented at Bell Labs in SV. I agree that there are some privacy concerns about what's going on with social media companies, but if you think that's of equal importance to the transistor then I don't think we live in the same universe.
- nmodu 13y ago
  With respect to self-driving cars, wouldn't the increased safety of our roads greatly outweigh the privacy implications? Think of all the lives that could be saved. >If you ask me, the privacy implications of facebook, google, et al cancel out the benefits of sharing photos with friends and more accurate search results. We aren't just talking about "sharing photos with friends and more accurate search results" anymore. Having had many people that I care about torn away from me due to fatal car accidents, I personally believe that the trade-off here is a no-brainer. >Still, this is a reminder that we've all failed to create a better world with technology. Self-driving cars can (and will) create a better world.

leothekim 13y ago

"The tech elite have by-and-large ignored the poor." Wrong. For example, Bill Gates has donated the majority of his fortune to his foundation to help rid Malaria from impoverished nations around the world. He has even convinced Warren Buffett to donate most of his fortune to philanthropic causes.

FireBeyond 13y ago

"Rooftop gardening is a fun leisure activity and not a solution to obesity, global warming, or world hunger.” This is a straw man. Who, let alone the poor guy being protested, ever claimed that it was? He lives in SF. He most likely doesn’t have a yard. Is a roof top garden a net positive, or negative, to any number of things, including personal contentment?

jack-r-abbit 13y ago
He lives in Berkeley. And the rooftop garden is in reference to the apartment building he is planning to build in downtown Berkeley. Levandowski has also purchased a property on the corner of Dwight and Fulton, just one block from Shattuck Avenue. At this location, he has hired the Nautilus Group to construct a proposed 77-unit apartment building call Garden Village complete with rooftop gardens, 24-hour surveillance, private security, and a fleet of electric vehicles parked in an underground garage. The residents will have the luxury of renting these cars whenever they want to cruise out to the beach for a dip. I thought for sure that would be something the typical Berkeley person would be all about. Rooftop gardens to grow your own veggies. Eco Friendly car sharing. That all sounds pretty good to me. Why are they hating on that?