I like it when people disclose that they have a deeper connection to a company being discussed than most people. It's fair disclosure, especially because it indicates where their biases may lie (and we all have biases).

But once someone says "I work for X", they must also say that they're not representing the company. Companies get a bit upset if their employees appear to be representing company positions without authorization, even if no reasonable person would thing they were.

Google requires this disclaimer when you talk about the company publicly, probably for legal reasons

Source: I work at Google

Disclaimer: Googler, opinions are my own.

Perfectly sensible policy and I for one appreciate insiders clarifying misinformation especially on such issues, while still notifiying their potential conflicts.

Disclaimer: I am not a googler, opinions are what google tells me to think.

wonder how well this really works.

Some comments I see (not speaking of this thread per se, but in general on HN) are really close to conveying internal company information. Which is beyond mere opinion and only available to someone inside the company. Some people clearly use the disclaimer to elevate their "opinion" to the level of authority.

It's not about access to information. It's about removing the possibility of being confused for a spokesperson of Google's.

This is in contrast to comments you see here like "hi, Ben Foobar from [company being discussed] here", where the company is being formally represented and communicating with HN.

Naturally Google doesn't engage this way on HN, but the disclaimer is written out of habit and an abundance of caution.

It's less a disclaimer of being an official response, I think, and more a case of pointing out a potential bias.