News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by tptacek on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @08:15PM (#26733374)
I know that this isn't skilled labor at the level of systems or network administration, but $15/hr sounds low for data center techs swapping out hard drives. I'm sure it's all very scripted, but still, I'm surprised to learn that the grunt labor in the cages is making something resembling the Seattle minimum wage.
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by naikrovek on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @08:26PM (#26733475)
it is low. over the course of my career I have witnessed skilled people earn less and less, almost always for the sake of "shareholder value" (more generally called "profit" at smaller places) and it is sickening.

when I was very young, one could be promoted simply by demonstrating a willingness to learn and be better when others were not. now, if you are not doing at least that, you are not considered for a raise.

last year I got a perfect yearly evaluation, and a 0.6% raise, which equaled inflation for the same year.

a raise is supposed to be a raise. a reward. incentive to continue the good work.

it used to be that if you could perform well that you were rewarded. now, if you perform well, you stay afloat. that's it.

I really hate this planet because of things like this. if humans were a decent species, money would not work it's way toward people who already have more.

honestly, I can't wait to be done with this life. the black abyss is better than working harder than anyone else simply to keep your head above water.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by iliketosleep on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @10:06PM (#26734264)
Under the thin veneer of civilized society it's still the law of the jungle; while our civilization may have become advanced, our DNA hasn't caught up. We are programmed to blindly accumulate as much as possible, because for most of our evolutionary history scarcity and disaster was always just around the corner. In modern times, it translates into those who already hold positions of wealth and power going for even more, at the expensive of everyone else. This has in turn been amplified by technology and globalization.

Having said that, historically we're still at a "high point". It's a cold comfort, but still..

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by regextegrity on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @11:22PM (#26734759)
Seeing how wages adjusted for inflation have stagnated while productivity has nearly doubled in the past 40 years and the impending climate catastrophies, I don't see how we're at a high point. Although, I guess if some kind of climate catastrophe occurs, we could consider ourselves in one of the luckier generations https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/11/productivity-workforc....
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by xyzzy21 on Thursday April 08, 2021 @02:16PM (#26741971)
Actually I think we peaked 10-20 years ago. My father experience most of the peak 50-odd years - thankfully he didn't live to see what the world has become.

The sobering reality once you understand things is that we are never more than 1 generation away from living in caves and losing all civilization. The delusion of durability of The Cloud (compared to physical books) is one of the saddest things.

I used to be a vendor for both Seagate and WD - and they'd regale us about how NO HDD can store data forever even if it's not running. Everything fails as long as it at 300K rather than 0K. And the lifespan of most electronics and computer is FAR shorter than most people imagine.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by gruez on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @10:30PM (#26734431)
>while our civilization may have become advanced, our DNA hasn't caught up. We are programmed to blindly accumulate as much as possible, because for most of our evolutionary history scarcity and disaster was always just around the corner.

Yes, we'd be much better off if we'd just stop progressing at some arbitrary point, and just accepted:

- 35 years of life expectancy

- no running water

- famines every decade

- zero modern technology, like electricity or even healthcare

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by novok on Thursday April 08, 2021 @12:58AM (#26735234)
35 years of life expectancy was not reality. If you lived past childhood you usually lived until your 50s or 70s. There are tribal villages in africa today that barely have modern anything and have many people in their 90s. Human life expectancy decreased with the transition from hunter/gatherer/herder tribes into agriculture with a few crops, due to relative malnutrition. It's only recently in modern times that we have started matching hunter gatherer life expectancy with our knowledge of nutrition and 120 year old medical knowledge.
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by gruez on Thursday April 08, 2021 @09:29AM (#26738442)
>35 years of life expectancy was not reality

So? That's still the definition of life expectancy. Moreover, being able to live to 90 if everything went right doesn't mean much when you die at 20 because of a treatable illness/injury, or seeing your wife/kid die in childbirth.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by naikrovek on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @11:48PM (#26734905)
> Under the thin veneer of civilized society it's still the law of the jungle

that "law of the jungle" thing is a myth. people believe it because it makes sense, but it isn't real for humans or almost any animal species.

what really exists is that people feel very good when they view themselves as superior to others, and they come up with an insane amount of mental gymnastics to justify what they do to attain that feeling.

one of the great myths of nature is that predators have some sort of instinct to screw over their social group at every opportunity. even most animals know that there is strength in numbers and in fairness. we humans have taught ourselves that fairness and consideration of others are weaknesses and that feeling like a badass at the expense of others is very positive.

humans are literally an irredeemable species at this point, because all of the evidence of what I say is available to anyone with an internet connection, but it's easier and more fun to feel like a badass occasionally than it is to change your view of society, so the facts get ignored and humanity continues to destroy itself over smaller and smaller things.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by donw on Thursday April 08, 2021 @03:13AM (#26735968)
> One of the great myths of nature is that predators have some sort of instinct to screw over their social group at every opportunity.

Speaking of humans: Their social group, no. Other social groups, absolutely.

We know this as "ingroup bias".

Pre-internet, your ingroups and outgroups were largely restricted by geography. Moreover, you got this sort of "ingroup boosting" effect by being part of a town, county, state, and country, so you had a lot of overlaps with other people.

Interestingly enough, each of those geographic entities actually occupies a "slot" in your social graph -- unconsciously, you think of them as people.

Without a forcing function providing behavioral moderation through discordant groupings, ingroups and outgroups become increasingly monocultural, tribalistic, and behaviorally extreme.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by gruez on Thursday April 08, 2021 @12:28AM (#26735083)
>one of the great myths of nature is that predators have some sort of instinct to screw over their social group at every opportunity. even most animals know that there is strength in numbers and in fairness.

Citation on this? Your claims are contradicted by wikipedia articles like: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide_(zoology)

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by regextegrity on Thursday April 08, 2021 @01:50AM (#26735494)
The big ideological thing that both these comments miss is the they don't question the presupposition that we need to be 'natural'
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by pmiller2 on Thursday April 08, 2021 @02:30AM (#26735737)
Oh, but what is "natural" is not "coercive," at least according to capitalists.
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by ZephyrBlu on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @10:33PM (#26734444)
> if humans were a decent species, money would not work it's way toward people who already have more

We are a decent species, that's why we've survived this long.

There is also more at play than just humans being "decent". I recommend this short (3min) video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k_FfS1kHfY

TL;DW it's almost a natural law that things accumulate in a pareto distribution.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by mleonhard on Friday April 09, 2021 @08:56AM (#26749941)
Would you be interested in moving to and working in a town where everyone earned the same salary?
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by singron on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @10:37PM (#26734473)
I think the labor has also required less skill over time or at least compared to other companies. Google has very uniform custom hardware. Usually they only produce a few configurations of a particular platform at any time, and there may only be 1 or 2 platforms in a building. They build the racks in assembly lines before they are shipped to datacenters. Software detects problems with hardware, often diagnoses the issue automatically, and schedules it for service.

I think they even used to have a patched kernel that would disable faulty RAM so that they wouldn't have to replace single DIMMs.

I think it follows a common pattern of replacing medium skilled labor with low skilled laborers augmented with very few high skilled laborers.

Also the biggest DCs are in low cost-of-living/cost-of-labor areas. E.g. South Carolina, Iowa, and Oklahoma have the federal minimum wage ($7.25).

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by AmVess on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @09:12PM (#26733873)
20 years ago, the local pay for that type of work was $17.50 including benefits. This was in a not very high COL living area relative to Silicon Valley or the like. I look at the pay over there every few years and it has always gone down, while the benefits and career advancement have vanished.

It has always been a PITA to be the low person on the totem pole, but these days the pay isn't there, the benefits aren't there, and the treatment can be rather appalling.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by jeffbee on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @08:20PM (#26733418)
According to Wikipedia, $15/hr full time amounts to the median wage in Berkeley County, South Carolina, and it is more than double that state's minimum wage.
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by gowld on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @08:31PM (#26733522)
Median housing costs are also less than 1/3 of median in King County, WA (Seattle's county).
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by jariel on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @08:34PM (#26733559)
This doesn't bode well for Google, but rather, is damming for what is supposed to be one of the richest places on Earth. Just image trying to live on less than $15/hour.

The story is full of the standard paradoxes: a) She's being paid 'reasonably' but probably not for such a rich company/area b) She's entitled to 'talk about comp' but people slamming the company publicly on Facebook posts are not going to last, it's reasonable that the company wold be upset buy that c) Google is full of actually quite nice people wanting to make a difference, there's a lot of moralizing about 'equity and diversity' but in their relentless pursuit of profit they create a 'tiered class system' of people, of completely secondary status and they grind them with every bit of the massive power they have.

Google is not rich because they 'nickle and dime' people, they're rich because they create a globally useful product, and have enormous market power.

Some things Google could do:

1) They're stinking rich. Pay good wages and give awesome benefit packages.

2) Don't intimate people but let them know if they're leaking information to the press or posting publicly that they're going to be let go.

3) Make every single person from CEO to the servers at lunch 'part of the company' and let them come to company events, and see the 'invited speakers' etc. if they want.

The reason they should do that is because their supposed to be 'good people' i.e. communitarians first. It's hypocritical to virtue signal publicly if they can't make their own beds.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by dfadsadsf on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @11:53PM (#26734929)
$15 is livable wage in that county though. I checked Zillow and there are ok looking houses starting at 100k ($450/month mortgage = 20% of income). Most expensive house in the county is $2.5M and it's actual lakefront mansion on 10 acres with swimming pool and private pond.

$15/h is unlivable wage in Bay Area or Seattle but actually ok money in many parts of the country.

Re:A woman who took on Google and won by regextegrity on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @11:26PM (#26734790)
While corporations are somehow considered people, they can't be expected to be good.
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by oh_sigh on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @11:15PM (#26734714)
An important distinction being that this was in South Carolina, not Seattle. And presumably Google's data center isn't in the middle of the expensive parts of South Carolina...
Re:A woman who took on Google and won by mleonhard on Friday April 09, 2021 @08:53AM (#26749910)
$15/hr is a living wage in the mountains of North Carolina where that datacenter is located. It is $30k/year. A house in that area costs about $100k. The median income in the area is $17/hr. Minimum wage is $7.25.