• huginn@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s achieved a lot of people talking about it and has achieved damage to the Brand.

    Which is better than nothing.

    • 0x0@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s bullshit the damage will be recovered within a week.

      And some people lost their jobs. then again, if they’re against their employer’s policy maybe they should’ve resigned in the first place.

      • ParetoOptimalDev@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        if they’re against their employer’s policy maybe they should’ve resigned in the first place.

        If they want effective change they should retain their job and tear down the org from the inside.

        Then donate to causes they care about using their income.

        • 0x0@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Laudable, but highly ineffective when the org is Google. A few people rallying in the street against Google are not gonna change it, from inside or out.

    • GarlicToast@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      Oh wow, people are talking about it.

      In the real world, not enough techies are willing to work on solving problems related food shortages (for example), while people are starving to death.

      • huginn@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s because in the real world we’re all fighting to escape the threat of homelessness and starvation which is a constant spectre haunting any “techie” who is paying attention enough to see what’s going on.

        Personally speaking: when me and mine are safe I’ll be dedicating 100% of my remaining life to outreach, teaching and non-profit work.

        But as long as you’re dependant on another man to feed you every week you’re not safe: you’re helpless. That’s true regardless of if that man is a non-profit or if it’s a megacorp.

        • GarlicToast@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m not rich, I chose to earn less money and live a lower quality apartment.

          We don’t have many years to work on solutions. You may never have enough for you and yours.

      • lemmyreader@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        You’re referring to the people in Gaza starving to death because of food shortages, right ?

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Starvation is not the same as Hunger, it’s a significantly more advanced stage of the thing.

            I believe there’s even a 5-level UN scale for it and Gaza is at the worst level.

            PS: Not seeing why it’s not valid to worry and act on both, by the way: doing something about World Hunger is not in any way incompatible with doing something about the Gaza Genocide.

            Your whole point is grounded on the Falacy called a False Dilemma Falacy that you used a few posts ago, hence why it’s not logical - it’s really not an EITHER-OR choice, especially for people working at Google which is a company that does absolutelly nothing at all when it comes to reduce World Hunger.