←back to thread

Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

(support.google.com)
1783 points zaggynl | 3 comments | 18 May 20 15:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.66s | source
Show context
ddevault ◴[18 May 20 15:27 UTC] No.23223542[source]▶
Google & YouTube employees on HN: how do you justify still working at this company? Enough of the cognitive dissonance. Face your choices and tell me how you square yourself with them. For shame.
replies(30): >>23223599 #>>23223644 #>>23223678 #>>23223691 #>>23223692 #>>23223698 #>>23223717 #>>23223748 #>>23223771 #>>23223776 #>>23223779 #>>23223805 #>>23223873 #>>23223923 #>>23223946 #>>23223948 #>>23223951 #>>23223984 #>>23224027 #>>23224165 #>>23224204 #>>23224226 #>>23224276 #>>23224278 #>>23224408 #>>23225345 #>>23225509 #>>23225665 #>>23225802 #>>23229128 #
skybrian ◴[18 May 20 15:54 UTC] No.23224027[source]▶
I don't work there anymore, but this is a confused argument born of zealotry. Taking Google's money to work on open source is totally fine. More money spent on good things might even mean less spent on bad things.

For example, nothing good would come from the Go team quitting over unrelated political stuff.

replies(2): >>23224354 #>>23225443 #
pacala ◴[18 May 20 16:14 UTC] No.23224354[source]▶
FWIW, open source is not an absolute good. It is undercutting the ability of your peers to make a living. It is making software a commodity, such that capital rich hardware owners can make a killing. See AWS.

Commoditize your complement. https://www.gwern.net/Complement

replies(2): >>23224508 #>>23224585 #
1. SquareWheel ◴[18 May 20 16:24 UTC] No.23224508[source]▶
It may not be common, but it is possible to make money on open-source software. Redhat would be the largest example. Automattic's WordPress is another.

If software can be profitable whether it's open or closed-source, then isn't open-source inherently better?

replies(1): >>23225572 #
2. Apes ◴[18 May 20 17:34 UTC] No.23225572[source]▶
I'm not sure RedHat is a good example any more, since they were aquired by IBM.
replies(1): >>23225866 #
3. cosmojg ◴[18 May 20 17:52 UTC] No.23225866[source]▶
They continue to operate fairly independently, and there business is still fully open source. IBM executives have also paid lip service to their model, suggesting they might move towards it. (Of course, lip service is lip service, and action is action. Two different things.)