To you and your parent comment, coming from outside of Google:
Anytime you get a large enough group of people, minimum size of one, evil will exist. That’s something we have to learn how to cope with, and sometimes we have to accept that we aren’t in control.
There’s sort of a rebel spirit in the USA where people see themselves as perpetuating evil if they’re not actively fighting it, boycotting this and that, throwing the tea in the Boston harbor.
On the flip side, I’d make the argument that one’s personal self-preservation is more important than “making a difference,” and that people have way less of a chance to make a difference than they give themselves credit for. As you said, quitting Google would not have much effect.
All of that said, I don’t see anything uniquely evil about Google compared to any other Fortune 500 or even much smaller mid-sized business. I think I could even make the argument that they are decidedly less evil than many much smaller businesses with approximately 200 employees.
And the upside of Google is tremendous. A lot of commercial products have an incredibly positive impact.
I just don’t think anyone has to feel bad for holding down a steady job, especially since we shouldn’t judge people on their employment prestige in the first place. Having the ability to choose employer based on moral compass is itself an indicator of privilege, so I wouldn’t want to look down on a cigarette company employee (especially individual contributors) for holding down that job, never mind a software company that makes a bunch of stuff that people largely like and benefit from.
I feel that when everyone would apply this world view there would be no point in ethics at all and we would live in a more grim world than we already are. I find it very discouraging since this assumes that we have no choice. But we do.
I met a guy studying CS in Cuba (he grew up there) on a Congress and visited him there. The living conditions there are not nice, wealth is something most people there don’t have access to. But this guy was asked by FB/Google to interview for a position and he proudly told me how he declined and wrote them exactly why he morally thought he will never work there. Regardless of the correctness of his view it impressed me that he held principles higher than his potential income. If you just follow financial incentives in your decisions plus a minimal ethical code that will keep you out of prison you are contributing to humanities demise. Long term if too many people just follow their incentives without reflecting on their net contribution to society as a whole this will destroy our society.
Also it’s not like you will be out on the streets if you don’t work for Google/FB. You’ll most likely still be considered rich with whatever you make at other companies in this sector.
I agree, I doubt there can be much difference between Fortune 500's company A and Fortune 500's company B, in the long run.
I thought, though, that "being evil" (whatever that means) came from some kind of instinct of survival experienced when facing the threat of bankruptcy, or at least very strong market pressures. And and it didn't seem to me that Google had been facing these yet.
I thought, though, that "being evil" (whatever
that means) came from some kind of instinct of survival
experienced when facing the threat of bankruptcy, or at
least very strong market pressures. And and it didn't
seem to me that Google had been facing these yet.
It's even more difficult than fighting for survival. A publicly-traded company can't just survive, turning a tidy profit every year. It needs to grow at a rapid pace or else those stocks (and therefore the executives' stock options) are useless.
Google didn't need to fight to survive, but they also didn't have the option of remaining "Google, circa 2004" or whatever we think their last year as a mostly-good company was.
Anytime you get a large enough group of people, minimum size of one, evil will exist. That’s something we have to learn how to cope with, and sometimes we have to accept that we aren’t in control.
There’s sort of a rebel spirit in the USA where people see themselves as perpetuating evil if they’re not actively fighting it, boycotting this and that, throwing the tea in the Boston harbor.
On the flip side, I’d make the argument that one’s personal self-preservation is more important than “making a difference,” and that people have way less of a chance to make a difference than they give themselves credit for. As you said, quitting Google would not have much effect.
All of that said, I don’t see anything uniquely evil about Google compared to any other Fortune 500 or even much smaller mid-sized business. I think I could even make the argument that they are decidedly less evil than many much smaller businesses with approximately 200 employees.
And the upside of Google is tremendous. A lot of commercial products have an incredibly positive impact.
I just don’t think anyone has to feel bad for holding down a steady job, especially since we shouldn’t judge people on their employment prestige in the first place. Having the ability to choose employer based on moral compass is itself an indicator of privilege, so I wouldn’t want to look down on a cigarette company employee (especially individual contributors) for holding down that job, never mind a software company that makes a bunch of stuff that people largely like and benefit from.