Why I'm Forced to Say Farewell: Google Management Has Lost Its Moral Compass

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SH9QRTAlL02THgAN2AGmWe9El0_2ZJF6hhgDBx8k97c/edit?tab=t.0

by vrganj • 21 days ago

335 181 21 days ago

docs.google.com

vrganj4• 21 days ago

This mirrors my own experience as a European that worked at FAANG in the Bay Area.

It used to be a dream job. Now I've relocated back to Europe and want nothing to do with American Big Tech. It's become toxic and completely counter to my values.

America has become a much darker place that has a very different place in the world. American tech companies have not just accepted, but actively embraced this transition. I am not interested in joining them and being complicit.

jonnybgood• 21 days ago

Darker than what other point in America’s history?

wvh• 21 days ago

Perhaps darker than the initial mild optimism of the early internet.

sailfast• 20 days ago

European companies aren’t much different so just be sure to check where you stand first before you’re SURE you’ve actually escaped.

vrganj4• 20 days ago

I don't think there's a big risk the European startup I work for now is involved in bombing brown people in the Middle East, actively accelerating climate change or dividing society for engagement.

Seems like a much better bet for my values, at least.

lenerdenator2• 20 days ago

You're not gonna like it when you find out where, exactly, America learned those values from.

vrganj4• 20 days ago

Luckily, we've gone through that phase around ninety years ago in Europe. We've been trying to avoid it happening again ever since, though right now is a dangerous time here as well. But hey, at least Europe hasn't fallen yet.

jnaina• 21 days ago

moral clarity usually sharpens the moment the last RSU hits the brokerage account

lulzury• 21 days ago

Alphabet dropped “don’t be evil” from its moto in 2015. This guy went in knowing how the sausage was being made.

rvz• 21 days ago

Maybe they should not have joined the company in the first place if they had "morals" or "principles". Yet they still joined in 2017 even after knowing that slogan was removed anyway.

Company mottos, principles, slogans and values are all fake fronts to lure in these sort of people alongside the free food with the carrots on those sticks.

Once that all runs out or the company goes south and stops being a daycare, then they start doing silly virtue signalling posts like this.

Now you are seeing who was there for the 'good vibes', free food, rest n' vest and who was there to keep the company alive.

...And finally we know that this is a love letter to get themselves hired at Anthropic. I think you might need more than that honestly.

john_strinlai2• 20 days ago

they did not. it’s still right there in the code of conduct

https://abc.xyz/investor/board-and-governance/google-code-of...

scroll to the bottom

crispyambulance• 20 days ago

Motto's, slogans, mission statements...

All of these things are 100% bullshit and always have been. It's tragic that Google actually had people believing them when they championed "don't be evil".

DannyBee2• 20 days ago

Sometimes.

Sometimes not.

I left with more than 4 million in RSU's left.

Pretty much any Googler who leaves will be leaving lots of money on the table.

This is because they are usually 3/4 year grants, so it's pretty much impossible to leave without lots of unvested RSU.

There are some 1 year grants, but those are much more uncommon (~1%)

colordrops• 20 days ago

This must have been a long time ago? Because that's leaving over a billion dollars "on the table" at the current price.

zobzu4• 20 days ago

same I left with approx that amount and when stock was still fairly low compared to today, so left life changing money. no ragrets lol.

groundzeros20154• 20 days ago

Your total comp was ~1.2 mil/year?

ProllyInfamous2• 20 days ago

*"You cannot explain something to somebody whose livelihood depends upon [others] not understanding..."

Something. $omething. something. $teinbeck?

ambicapter• 20 days ago

Upton Sinclair

debo_• 20 days ago

Post-deposit clarity

honeybadger1• 20 days ago

yep, and happy to make everyone around them feel guilty when they got theirs. i strongly dislike people who do this performative crap while unfortunately believing in their right to say it.

throwaway2037• 20 days ago

Exactly.

<rant> I am so tired of reading these stupid "why I am leaving my job after making millions". One thing I can say about myself: I work for money. That's it. Lots of things the companies that I work for (normally 25,000+ employees) do immoral and unethical things. Still, I stay, earn money, and I don't write stupid fucking self-righteous blog posts after I leave. At this point, blog posts like this look like an "own goal". </rant>

BikiniPrince• 20 days ago

Also his complaints about morale compass failure are largely activism goals. Hard to make money when you waste it.

I tell employers I’m clearly a mercenary and I am only here for the money. I do great work, but I’ve been compensated well.

bigbadfeline• 20 days ago

I am so tired of reading these stupid "why I am"

Don't read them. The rest of us may actually gain from another perspective, different from corporate marketing.

halfmatthalfcat• 20 days ago

This is incredibly annoying to see in the real world. People who pontificate values on LinkedIn but work for a company they disagree with, only to see them stay until they hit 4 years and leave. No idea how they think they have any moral high ground.

Henchman21• 20 days ago

“Severance”, On Apple TV+ provides one answer

advisedwang2• 20 days ago

Google provides annual RSU refreshes. There is no "last RSU".

This announcement is also 9 years after they started, and Google has a 4 year vesting schedule, so it's not even possible that this coming after the initial grant vests.

This is a completely unfair and unsubstantiated dismissal of the article.

raverbashing• 21 days ago

While I can understand the concerns, I wouldn't use a google doc to air my grievances though

macintux• 20 days ago

"Oops, sorry, we have no idea how your document was lost in that cloud failure"

mDyJzDPmBdG• 21 days ago

Isn't his just weird repost of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48496396 ?

bArray• 21 days ago

Maybe send it out like a leak to get more attraction?

advisedwang2• 20 days ago

Google docs are how leaving notes are usually written internally at google. My guess is this is the internal version accidentally seen outside.

BLKNSLVR• 21 days ago

Whilst I appreciate the commitment to their values, I wonder where they stand on the 'safety' of their users as it relates to the Android Developer Verification update (currently top of HN, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48755965).

"Security" vs Openness

“make things so secure that we ourselves can’t break them, whether the device costs $1000 or $100, or the user is a celebrity or a refugee“

That can mean different things to different people in different contexts. Could easily mean building a software platform with security features that banks will build their apps to require.

jasonvorhe2• 21 days ago

That is wasn't even covered says enough for me.

ausernamethisis2• 19 days ago

I wonder where they stand on the 'safety' of their users as it relates to the Android Developer Verification update

He discussed this briefly in a talk he gave at the Grazer Linuxtage 2026 in April https://media.ccc.de/v/glt26-615-what-can-we-learn-from-andr... at around minute 46

robotmaxtron• 21 days ago

google used to be cool

Aldipower2• 20 days ago

25 years ago

DonHopkins• 20 days ago

Not as cool as Yahoo! used to be.

WarmWash• 20 days ago

They should have stuck with the charging money model instead of giving away services for the cost of attention.

There is a deep irony in Google becoming one of the greatest corporations ever on the back of an ostensibly socialist utopia business model. Everyone on earth with an internet connection can use the full suite of google products (which pretty much every person reading this chooses to use daily) without having social class be a limiting factor like it is with paid services. Litterally anyone with internet can access and use the same youtube and office suite that a billionaire on his yacht is using (perhaps the billionaire has yt premium though).

And here we are, 25 years later, and google is considered one of the most evil and malicious corporations, despite most people never paying them anything (and a large subset of those never loading one of their ads either).

From a high level POV, its an incredibly perplexing outcome. Compared to someone like Apple, who charges money, has zero openness, and prices to align with first world upper class, still being largely beloved.

Aldipower2• 20 days ago

You know, Google hinders competition. They are so powerful, they dictate the rules. If you do not play by Google's rules and align to their algorithms, you are allowed to consume, but not to provide. You have to pay them and others to even gain a small amount of visibility in their search results. The Google and YouTube algos are unfair as f*ck and promote the already successful.

Your comment in itself is deeply ironic.

jfil• 19 days ago

Regular end-consumers didn't pay them anything. The people paying were corporations that advertised online. Through Google's publisher network (Adsense), their Doubleclick acquisition and the DART For Publishers middleware, and the ad buying tool (Google Ads), they completely price-fixed the market. Add to that "Jedi Blue", their non-compete cartel with Meta, and you can see Google is built on crime.

jqpabc123• 21 days ago

"Don't be evil" was just a diversion from a path that was laid out from the beginning.

And it worked --- for a while. Until the path became impossible to deny.

jasonvorhe2• 21 days ago

Yeah, I'm sure the "don't be evil" charade was good marketing from the get-go or else they would've never taken In-Q-Tel funding.

okokwhatever• 20 days ago

Can anyone in this industry really say goodbye without posting it? We act like artists, believing our ideals will illuminate the world with our moral compass.

This is surreal.

anon7000• 20 days ago

Not until tech companies stop pretending tech jobs are special. It’s part of the entire industry culture at this point that you join certain positions to “make a big difference.”

Yet most startups are just b2b AI sass or whatever.

jasonlotito3• 20 days ago

This was a post to colleagues.

Someone else shared it out. Now, calm down. Your acting emotional. Maybe try smiling.

compiler-guy• 20 days ago

Thousands, maybe tens-of-thousands, leave tech companies everyday and never post anything. You just don’t hear about them.

hadi77ir• 20 days ago

he resigned because of... "politics"? and not because of the path Google has chosen for Android security?

vrganj4• 20 days ago

They are one and the same.

rpdillon• 20 days ago

The only stated reason for his resignation is that Google is no longer adhering to their promise to not use AI for weapons. I was surprised that the reasoning was so one-dimensional.

datakan• 20 days ago

While I don't agree with the author exactly, I do admire someone sticking to their guns (no pun intended). Like Oscar Wild said, "Morality, like art requires drawing a line somewhere".

One of my favorite 80's movies was Real Genius with Val Kilmer. He accidentally helps develop a weapon and then goes to extreme measures to prevent its use. For some people creating weapons is a line they wont cross and that's not a bad thing.

jasonlotito3• 20 days ago

He has not been responsible for Android Security since 2019.

https://www.mayrhofer.eu.org/post/leaving-google/

KKKKkkkk1• 20 days ago

The actual reason is right at the top: he's a director who was "promoted" to IC.

zobzu4• 20 days ago

i know right. i imagine they were other reasons and this one sounded nice to share on a public doc tbh.

yandrypozo• 20 days ago

right, I don't see the connection between being _forced_ to resign and his his pacifist principles + as EU academic he sees himself as target of likely mass surveillance

sherburt32• 20 days ago

These tech-bro public resignations are so tedious. Ostensibly he seems fine with the existence of AI mass surveillance and AI powered murderbots but he just never envisioned a scenario where they would get used that wasn't congruent with his politics.

cma• 20 days ago

Ratified treaties are the supreme law of the land and he's pointing out "all lawful uses" isn't what the admin says it is.

sherburt32• 20 days ago

That doesn't appear to be stopping the current administration. That's why I think you should be more concerned about the tools of oppression existing rather than the laws that govern them.

ChrisArchitect• 20 days ago

[dupe] Discussion on website source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48496396

jongjong• 20 days ago

It's a systemic issue unfortunately. When some of these unethical CEOs say that they feel like they have no control and that if they didn't do it, someone else would, I believe them and it makes sense. That's why they should try to reform the system.

AlexandrB• 20 days ago

Why is this a Google doc and not just an HTML page? I was super-confused when the links didn't behave like normal links. This is like when people post a screenshot of an Apple note.

jasonlotito3• 20 days ago

Because it was intended for colleagues and not the wider public.

https://www.mayrhofer.eu.org/post/leaving-google/

ubermonkey• 20 days ago

This dude only now thinks Google has lost its moral compass? In 2026?

Bruh.

nicolaslegland• 20 days ago

"I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy"

FpUser• 20 days ago

" I still believe in Android as the (currently) best end-user facing operating system for mobile devices, with its balance between openness, flexibility, and security."

I do not give a shit whether it is the best. If one can be cut off instantly by whims of some algo with no recourse - thank you but I'll pass. Yes I still use Android phone but mostly as phone, GPS and camera all of which can be replaced.

I do not develop for Android or iOS exactly for the reason of not being in control. Stick to desktops, servers and browsers as deployment platforms

Bluescreenbuddy• 20 days ago

Google never had a moral compass. They went in, got their money, and left when it was easy and barely affected them. They still profited.

goldenarm• 20 days ago

Why post a Google docs copy of the original article?

https://www.mayrhofer.eu.org/post/leaving-google/

jchw• 20 days ago

I think that article is rather a copy of the original Google Doc, judging by the included go link.

layer8• 20 days ago

Discussion of the blog post (284 comments): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48496396

The blog post now also contains a second addendum that the Google doc doesn't have.

guhcampos• 20 days ago

The blog post is from June 19th. Google Doc from June 17th.

My guess? He shared the Google Doc link with his peers, but forgot that Google Docs links are public for anyone who knows the link, so someone just forwarded it to oblivion, and he was forced to publish that as blog post. The addendums kind of reflect that.

That's a great reminded that any Google Doc with a shareable link is basically a public document for all intents and purposes.

echelon• 20 days ago

That's a great reminded that any Google Doc with a shareable link is basically a public document for all intents and purposes.

As per design.

Google gives you sufficient control over access permissions. If you make it public, you have to know anyone anywhere can see it once they get the URL.

I frequently share Google docs and sheets links widely and to entirely unknown readers. That is part of the utility of the tool.

lotsofpulp• 20 days ago

That's a great reminded that any Google Doc with a shareable link is basically a public document for all intents and purposes.

There is also a great reminder next to the button you click to get a shareable link in Google Docs.

falcor84• 20 days ago

This has little to do with shareable links and everything to do with the trust you put in whoever you share it with.

There's not much difference between them ctrl+v-ing the link to a third party, vs them ctrl+a, ctrl+c, ctrl+v-ing the contents to another party. If anything, by just sharing a link, you have a chance to disable the sharing and hope the content hasn't yet been copied.

troyvit2• 20 days ago

That's a great reminded that any Google Doc with a shareable link is basically a public document for all intents and purposes.

I read that as "for all indents and purposes"

zobzu4• 20 days ago

it's typical for googlers to leave a note like this in gdocs when they leave As thats the standard at google. i imagine its the original and google hasnt decided to turn off public sharing on it

bix65• 20 days ago

Google was a different company 9 years ago.

No it wasn’t.

szundi• 20 days ago

16 years ago it was

p-as-software• 20 days ago

Jup! From day 2, the moment when they discover that customer data (yours, mine, everyone's) is more valuable than gold. Also the interaction with government and defense and intelligence is well documented: from google docs to maps and clouds.

I wish people will read "Surveillance Valley: The Secret Military History of the Internet" by Yasha Levine and stop feigning ignorance. I even expect that minimal level of awareness about the real business culture and inherent nature of these internet mega-corps for people in top positions.

"Don't Be Evil" is a psychological machination for people working at google to ease their life in work related cognitive dissonance and marketing speak to the rest of us.

If I were an angel (actual, not fallen yet) I will not tell my self: "Don’t Be Evil". My motto will be "keep being holy" or "be holier" or something that keep me in my angelic state or better.

So even the “Don’t Be Evil” motto by itself already spill the beans!

ThrowawayR2• 20 days ago

Google's purchase and subsequent integration of Doubleclick, reviled industry-wide for their invasive, sleazy adtech, was 18 years ago.

shantnutiwari• 20 days ago

yeah, looks like some history rewriting.

9 years ago was 2017-- and by that time Google was already doing sleazy SEO shit, scanning peoples emails to who them ads, trying to make ads seem like general search results etc etc

Google was *exactly* this company it is today

w4der• 20 days ago

The "Don't be evil" motto was diluted in 2015 when alphabet was formed, and taken down in 2018, so yeah, things were brewing from before.

kelipso• 20 days ago

That’s quite a bit different from helping to kill people.

Let’s not lump every ethical issue into one. And not conflate SEO sleaze with aiding murder.

sillyfluke• 20 days ago

Yeah, I think since it's getting provably worse no matter where you start the clock everyone can claim this whenever they actually do leave.

Just to give one example, you have the Google founders bending the knee to Trump these days whereas when Trump started his first term you had articles like this:

"Google co-founder Sergey Brin joins protest against immigration order at San Francisco airport" (2017)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13512063

skeeter2020• 20 days ago

"Google was a different company n years ago" where n is how long they've been there + ~6 to 12 months

bsimpson• 20 days ago

The employee experience was very different 9y ago.

greenleafone7• 20 days ago

Truer words have never be told. It truly wasn't. Google had been rotten for a very long time.

zobzu4• 20 days ago

actually it was. they were no angels. but a majority of devs wanted to do good. now everyone wanta to make a quick buck no matter what.

im surprised dave is still there too. probably can't let it go...

thayne2• 20 days ago

I think a big difference is the majority of developers knew they could find employment relatively easily elsewhere, so they felt comfortable protesting things they didn't feel comfortable with, and google leadership had some level of accountability to employees. Now though, if you speak up you might get targeted for the next round of layoffs, and the current job market is a lot tougher, so you could end up unemployed for quite a while.

tzs4• 20 days ago

The article clearly lists at least two ways they are significantly different now.

bix65• 20 days ago

Great, two whole ways!! Totally a different company.

thayne2• 20 days ago

It is worse now than it was 9 years ago, but it even then it was clearly moving in the wrong direction. And the current google is the result of trends that started long before 2017.

cynicalkane3• 20 days ago

I worked at Google for a similar span. It was different 9 years ago, in ways that are specifically described in the blog post you're ignoring, which I and many other Googlers would confirm are true.

Teever3• 20 days ago

Was it different or are the people who voluntarily started working for Google around that period unable to admit to themselves and others that it was always questionable to work for a entity like Google?

To certain observers this was obviously the direction tech monopolies were going to go.

What have those people always seen that you're only now beginning to admit is an inherently defective aspect of these organizations?

throwawaypath• 20 days ago

It's different now because his stocks have vested.

_3u10• 20 days ago

Yes but now they have a moral imperative to collect their ad money and aren’t a vested interest.

“I’m shocked shocked to find out my pay cheque and stock money came from selling ads.”

“here are your winnings sir”

shuwix• 20 days ago

Exactly. Google's "don't be evil policy" was never applied on Google itself. It was enforced on users, advertisers and publishers. Roughly 15 years ago, it no longer applied to advertisers. 50% of ads (if not more) are utter scams.

Noone cares, money talks.

topgrain2• 20 days ago

Good Google was functionally gone when Doubleclick took them over. That was a loooong time ago.

They gave up trying to fight search spam and just permanently broke their search in like 2008.

Not long after that (IIRC) they started serving the same obnoxious ads as everyone else instead of their “nice” text-only ads, and stopped clearly marking inline ads in search results, so they could trick users and better-run their extortion racket (“pay us to advertise for your own company name or who knows where the people who are definitely trying to find your website might end up?”).

The notion that they were notably better in 2017 than today reads like some kind of joke.

cmrdporcupine4• 20 days ago

I came to Google via acquisition end of 2011 and left end of 2021. Google bought my employer so it could further cement its display ads monopoly. They never had a moral compass, they just wore one in a costume so that nobody would dig too closely into their business practices.

We got to wave pitchforks and ask tough questions at TGIF for a while, and march in pride parades under a Google banner, and get fed nice treats and the like but under it all was still just an old fashioned railway monopoly.

A huge fire hose of cash that let it play in all sorts of domains and espouse some vaguely California Ideology liberal/libertarian ideals while doing it.

But the moment that monopoly came under threat and the moment they felt they no longer needed the costume, it came off.

Google never had a moral compass. Anybody who thought it did was naive. It's not possible for a corporate entity to have one.

lokar5• 20 days ago

I could see some of that in 2011 (I started before the ipo), but it was almost all from ads. People in other parts of the company had a very different experience.

cmrdporcupine4• 20 days ago

Oh absolutely, I transferred out of ads as soon as I could and of course it all seemed different.

The reality is that ads was 95% of the company revenue though, so it was all fantasy.

gniv• 20 days ago

It's not possible for a corporate entity to have one.

Is it really not possible? Lots of corps are controlled by one or two people. They can decide what the company espouses, no?

cmrdporcupine4• 20 days ago

If you want profits, the market tells you what to do.

bparsons• 20 days ago

I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

innagadadavida• 20 days ago

When Google offered me the job of Director of Android Platform Security in 2017, it was impossible to refuse. Yes, Trump was already president—my family and I had qualms—but he seemed contained, even ineffective.

Why make this about trump and politics. It’s just a job.

ethagnawl• 20 days ago

Why make this about trump and politics.

They go on to explain exactly why in the fifth paragraph.

It’s just a job.

Nobody operates in a vacuum.

tzs4• 20 days ago

He's Australian. Taking the job meant moving to the US. To do so without considering Trump would have been insane.

ausernamethisis2• 19 days ago

Cue the jokes about people ignorant of the difference between Austria and Australia.

nekusar• 20 days ago

Uh, its a company. It never had a "moral compass". And if companies had any attributes at all, it would be a Psychopath.

Maaaaaybe when Dunbar's lower number was 13, the people working did. When Dunbar's 150 was hit, sure they had " do no evil" but that was just marketing spiel.

When they bought Doubleclick, that coffin was welded shut and thrown in the ocean. Only the rubes believed the adtech marketing shit.

Alien1Being• 20 days ago

A typical case of false nostalgia for something that never existed .

tpoacher• 20 days ago

Google Management Has Lost Its Moral Compass

This needs a "2004" date.

kyleblarson• 20 days ago

"Enough of my equity has vested, virtue signal engage."

1-6• 20 days ago

Biting the hand that fed you... on your way out.

lokar5• 20 days ago

That’s not really how RSUs work in that situation. The number outstanding and vested each year stays pretty steady.

groundzeros20154• 20 days ago

Yeah what he means is he got enough money over a decade and then waited until a vest day to decide it was immoral.

ryandrake2• 20 days ago

Only if you are getting refreshes.

groundzeros20154• 20 days ago

There is some weird psychology going where the most morality posting is from people quitting Google or being unemployed.

rirze3• 20 days ago

Au contraire, Googlers have always been strangely academic brained and stuck in niche moral echo chambers.

This is par for the course.

troyvit2• 20 days ago

And good for them. If you have the freedom to follow your virtue, no matter how you gained that freedom, why not follow it?

If it sounds like hypocrisy, why? They gained the freedom from the grind and would have stayed if they believed in what they were doing.

felooboolooomba2• 20 days ago

Google: We're not evil.

Also, Google, later: No comment.

Like a slap in the face from a psychopath. It's not about "good", "bad", "honest", etc. It's literally the world EVIL that they no longer want to swear off. Astronomically monumentally fucked up psycho shit.

Dictionary:

  *EVIL*
  : morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked
  an evil impulse
  an evil tyrant
  evil deeds
  the evil institution of slavery
  : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct
  a person of evil reputation

Google: no comment.

felooboolooomba2• 20 days ago

And I'm getting downvoted. Make of that what you will.

jszymborski• 20 days ago

Then there were the people. Larry and Sergey were still answering some tough leadership questions every week, and “Don’t Be Evil” wasn’t just a slogan of often-referenced Googliness—it was a north star for teams making hard calls.

I'm sorry, but this is very hard to believe. I get 9 years is a lot of time, but Google has been awful for much longer thant that. In fact, 2018 was the year the motto was removed from the handbook, which certainly indicates it wasn't anything like a "North Star":

https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-dont-be-evil/2540...

khurs• 20 days ago

tl;dr : Android head of security has quit on principl as he is a pacifist and Google are now working with USA department of war. And also as they scrapped the carbon neutral promise due to the AI Datacentre race.

reenorap2• 20 days ago

Translation: “My GSUs that I received at $35 and upwards for the last 10 years have made me enough money such that I can now finally make the “moral” decision that I’ve always wanted to do but was willing to swallow until I made enough money. Now I can pretend I was always the moral person that I purport to be, even though not much has actually changed except my financially-improved courage.”

jadbox• 20 days ago

This is needlessly cynical. Everyone has thresholds, and it may not be tied (at least exclusively) to money. Those that _assume_ that the morals of others are always at whim of financial gain are those that I trust the least.

reenorap2• 20 days ago

He is worth well over $20M given his title and the skyrocketing of Google stock since 2017. He could have left years ago if he were really so morally outraged.

There’s nothing more useless than a multi-millionaire “finally” taking a moral stand on something. I guarantee that this same person without the money would not have posted this ridiculous manifesto declaring his moral piety.

If he donates all his wealth away because it was made “immorally” then I will change my stance. We both know he won’t and that’s how we know his courage is really just because he’s rich.

dang• 20 days ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48496396

1vuio0pswjnm7• 20 days ago

The title is comical

Google's founders never had a moral compass, at least not one that ethical people would understand

Perhaps some employees thought they could make one up. It didn't last long

aliasxneo• 20 days ago

I left Google four years ago after being there for a decade. It was really obvious at the time of my leaving that the moral compass was _long_ gone and that no one internally could even define what "evil" was anymore (I'm sure the prevailing post-modernist view that seem to come from the top didn't help). But it was when I started spending time in mandatory compliance meetings where moral preaching was becoming the norm that I really lost all love for the company. My mental health has jumped leaps and bounds since leaving that place.

sharts• 20 days ago

They lost their moral compass over a decade ago. Perhaps the blinders slowly eroded from inflation and salary stagnation

Why I'm Forced to Say Farewell: Google Management Has Lost Its Moral Compass

Related Stories