
The Artist Leaving the Googleplex - wallflower
http://www.e-flux.com/journal/the-artist-leaving-the-googleplex/
======
kapitza
What I find most interesting about this piece is the awesome lifestyle of
flitting from grant to grant as a semi-celebrity in the international jet-set
art world. Also lets you feel good about "leaking" your employer's information
to "organizers." Take that, employer! And best of all, you get to use the word
"show" as a nontransitive verb, as in "I showed at Venice."

Apparently this lifestyle is only available if you're a (to use the author's
term) "Marxist." But then again, I suppose anyone can read Negri and Hardt if
they're patient enough.

No word on what, if any, ideological filters Google is supposed to apply to
its contractor pool so this doesn't happen again. Perhaps they could ask trap
questions about postcolonial theory, rejecting anyone who answered
correctly...

~~~
gwern
There's a lot of odd insinuations and expectations in this piece. I found
particularly strange the part where he talks about his joy in talking
communist politics in Berkeley and then immediately muses about how to make
these skills 'marketable' and about his resentment that he might not be
rewarded with a comfortable bourgeois middle-class existence. Feels like there
are a lot of unstated assumptions and arguments behind his opinions and
actions which he never makes explicit or considers.

~~~
mucker
Or abusing the system to score income on the sale of his house. I nearly
snorted at that point.

~~~
paulcole
I think you're misinterpreting this. I think he moved into a unit of a luxury
building (that was required to be rented to a low income person) and lived
there until the unit was sold.

~~~
eru
True, seems like that at second reading.

(Seems like a pretty silly requirement to me. Can't they just use the tax and
welfare system to combat inequality in a sane way?)

------
rdtsc
I think the problem with Google is that it advertised (still does?) itself, in
a rather believable way, as being be diverse, fun, everyone working together
-- developers, janitors and artists all holding hands creating a brigher
tomorrow and perhaps fighting against evil.

Well it worked for me back then, I really did believe Google was "Don't Be
Evil" kind of company and so on, vis-a-vis say Microsoft, or say Walmart.
Which were not evil, just you know, regular companies makign money. At least I
remember buying into the PR.

So you see, Google took advantage of that image, and it worked out great for
them. The problem is as soon as they went that way it became a high risk game,
because from then on they will be judged according to that standard.

So I don't see a problem at all with criticizing it. It really set itself up
to a higher standard, so there is nothing wrong with pointing fingers at it
and saying "look at the hypocrisy".

The other more telling thing, is the story around it the video. How quickly
this supposedly tollerant, open, diverse company moved to fire this person.
You can only be tollerant and open as long as you are tollerant and open about
approved things. You have the freedom to choose between the chocolate cake and
the strawberry cake, but you don't get to ask how the cake is made, basically.

~~~
ryanobjc
I'm getting tired of hypocrisy being held up as the ultimate sin. The world is
more complex than that. Humans cannot fully logically integrate EVERYTHING
they believe at the same time, it's just biologically impossible. Expecting
people to be 100% consistent 100% of the time is ultimately silly.

And for companies, well they are ultimately just groups of people. So the same
issue.

Also, open and tolerant doesn't mean unlimited anything goes. This applies
even to the parent-child relationship. If you disagree, think about the
parents who had to deal with children who steal, use violence and destroy
stuff. You ultimately have to draw a line at self preservation! Same thing for
a company and culture. You have to preserve the culture, and if that means
ejecting people who mean to do it harm, then how is that a horrible thing? The
author himself would eject counter-revolutionaries from his revolutionary
party, so in principle he agrees with this sentiment.

As for the 'Don't Be Evil' \- lots of people at Google still believe in this.
The problem is once you go global, life gets very very hard and you are forced
to make difficult decisions. And sometimes you get them wrong. And you try
again. But to harp on bad decisions is like a husband who won't EVER let his
wife forget THAT ONE TIME. That's hardly constructive.

~~~
rdtsc
> I'm getting tired of hypocrisy being held up as the ultimate sin.

I didn't say it is the ultimate sin. So should it not be criticized and
pointed out? It is like saying "well murder is worse than theft, so don't talk
about theft". That's not how it works. I think every culture and society has a
strong bias against hypocrisy and it is a popular topic in folk stories and
culture (say making fun or criticizing hypocrites).

Just like many pointed out at a core character flaw in the author -- he was
stealing food and not abiding by the NDA, implying they probably would not
want to be friends them or work wit, because there is an integrity issue
(which I agree with), hypocrisy is the same way -- it points to a flaw deeper
issue at the core. If it is of a company, it points to a structural or culture
issue.

> Expecting people to be 100% consistent 100% of the time is ultimately silly.

Just like people in power are watched, criticized and held to a higher
standard, so are companies. With people say, you might care if US president is
doing cocaine or likes stealing from department stores, but you might not care
as much if someone you never heard across town does it. Why? Because those in
power, when they corrupt, they can cause a lot of damage. I was a bit extreme
in the sample, but think about this one as well -- someone who holds nuclear
launch codes should not believe that the world was created 4000 years ago.
This can happen in US and is worrisome right?

And it is the same with companies. A company like Google which control,
manages, stores and handle a large amount of world's internet and data
traffic, having "minor" integrity issues is a huge deal. Some 2 person company
who is spamming everyone with Viagra emails, is doing a lot worse, but nobody
cares about that, because they don't have any power or influence.

> This applies even to the parent-child relationship

Agree on principle, in general here. But that is a bit odd case, mostly
because it turn the "company is a family and is like careful watchful father,
looking after its children". There is something very jarring about that to me.

> Same thing for a company and culture. You have to preserve the culture, and
> if that means ejecting people who mean to do it harm

I think the debate is about culture and the artist pointed towards what the
culture might be. I think they are trying to say there is a problem with it.

> As for the 'Don't Be Evil' \- lots of people at Google still believe in
> this.

Of course. The best PR is the one that is bought internally. Assigning high
ethical standards and morality to companies is the problem here isn't it. The
fact that many seemingly bright, analytically minded people bought into it is
a bit worrying.

~~~
ryanobjc
See, the problem here is you're just too cynical. Sometimes a cigar is just a
cigar.

Regarding hypocrisy, the problem isn't that people are distrustful of thieves,
the problem is its a capital sin that is used to find the slightest of
problems with your opponents then based on literally doing nothing wrong,
attempt to destroy them. It's about giving people space to change their mind.
Unless you think the whole 'flip flopper' development was positive and we
should prize people who hold on to opinions regardless of how incorrect they
become.

As for personality, this article popped up today and I think it's relevant:
[http://www.npr.org/sections/health-
shots/2016/06/24/48185966...](http://www.npr.org/sections/health-
shots/2016/06/24/481859662/invisibilia-is-your-personality-fixed-or-can-you-
change-who-you-are)

Finally, as for Google's data I can say without a doubt that we have one of
the best internal IT and security policies I have seen anywhere. Not only are
the polices solid, the implementation is vastly superior to any other security
system in the civilian area, and possibly some military ones. The google
privacy and security teams (yup, multiple) are passionate about this and are
extremely proactive. There is a lot of people working on this area. I fully
trust Google with my data.

------
asuffield
(Tedious disclaimer: my opinion only, not speaking for anybody else. I'm an
SRE at Google.)

> sometimes mining information to leak to organizer friends

> After 9–12 hours on campus I would fill my Google-issued bag with Naked
> juices and to-go containers of food for my roommates

So... deliberate violation of the corporate NDA (which is massively
disrespectful to the other people who work here) and stealing food from the
cafes. I'm happy to work at a company that fires people who take something
offered in good faith and abuse it. It is a part of our company culture to
give people broad freedom to do what they think they should, on the
understanding that they will act responsibly and not abuse the privilege.

(I can't comment much on the rest of the article, except to say that I feel a
person who has openly admitted their tendency to dishonesty is perhaps not
best afforded a high level of trust in the claims that they make)

~~~
curiouscat321
The NDA is inexcusable. The food though...seems like everybody does it.

~~~
freditup
I've often taken a drink or a snack from the office for later in the evening
or the next day. Never considered that this might be frowned upon. On the
other hand, taking large quantities of items frequently seems like an abuse of
a perk.

~~~
jankassens
That's how I understand it. "fill my bag with juices" is not the same as
taking a snack for later.

------
mathattack
Wow - what a self-indulgent pseudo intellectual prick. Nobody forced him to
work there.

------
golergka
OK, so this guy's problem with Google is that it doesn't give all of its perks
to all employees? Why the hell would the company treat employees from
significantly different labour markets the same way in the first place? Is
there some crazy assumption that any employee should be equally valuable to
the company?

~~~
I_HALF_CATS
Uh, working 4am to 2:15pm has nothing to do with meal perks.

~~~
eru
I wonder why they don't just hire people in a better timezone.

(Though eg bakers in Germany got up even earlier to make fresh bread every
day.)

------
timcederman
The author is an unreliable narrator. He mentions many incongruous aspects of
his experience that just can't be true. For example, he says he waited in line
next to people in SurveyMonkey t-shirts, but he worked at Google from 08-09.
SurveyMonkey was only in Portland at that time.

------
brudgers
Direct link to video:
[https://player.vimeo.com/video/15852288](https://player.vimeo.com/video/15852288)

------
adamsea
"Being a person means being paranoid that you might be a puppet, and being an
artist means making things that you want to see exist, to defy that paranoia,
by communicating past anything you could rationally explain away."

------
Grue3
As much as I dislike Google's practices, I don't think a self-described
Marxist can claim moral superiority over anyone.

------
thesimpsons1022
can't post anything negative about Google on HN. Will get automatically down
voted by their thousands of drones, I mean employees.

~~~
Gigablah
Is it actually possible to downvote postings on HN?

(Why am I being downvoted for asking an honest question?)

~~~
thesimpsons1022
yes but I believe you need a certain amount of karma

~~~
hueving
You can't downvote articles, just comments (at least with my karma). IIRC
articles move down if they fail to receive up votes and collect comments.

~~~
striking
You can't ever downvote articles, although they will drop faster in ranking if
they're flagged by (many) users. Also, there's a "flamewar detector" which has
something to do with vote to comment ratio.

