News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by khazhoux on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @03:28PM (#35718733)
> Do you have knowledge of the employment contract, can you share the relevant language with us?

I actually could dig up my own contract from years ago (ugh, the effort though) but Confidentiality clause is in there, and it was made clear during on-boarding what is expected from employees: don't share any internal info unless you're an authorized company representative.

Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by confounded on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @04:12PM (#35719335)
You should write to to the author, to scold them directly!
Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by khazhoux on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @04:33PM (#35719554)
Thanks, I didn't realize he was here. Just replied to him directly.
Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by anonymouskimmer on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @04:24PM (#35719467)
General working conditions are not "internal info"; it is beneficial to society to discuss working conditions (which can be pretty detailed), and is thus a protected activity under various laws. Nothing in any contract can obviate this lawful right (and, to some, a basic duty of citizenship, since the country is more important than any single company within the country). At best contracts can highlight what is privileged information that there is a duty to keep secret.
Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by iamdamian on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @05:47PM (#35720478)
Now you have me curious. Which laws, specifically?
Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by vore on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @06:08PM (#35720666)
Broadly, section 7 of the NLRA, but it is not spelled out in the text of the act. Instead, Quicken Loans, Inc. v. NLRB established the precedent that discussing working conditions is not a violation of confidentiality: https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-q...
Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by anonymouskimmer on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @06:33PM (#35720894)
The big one in the USA is the National Labor Relations Act, but this generally applies to group action. However, such group action can be literally publically posting about a job's work conditions.

Here's a list of recent state laws in Washington, Oregon, and Maine, which prohibition certain kinds of NDAs (oriented toward unlawful activity, not general speech rights): https://www.foley.com/en/insights/publications/2022/07/sever...

Contracts are required to be 'reasonable' for both parties. This puts limits on the ability to constrain in a contract. I don't know how much this reasonableness standard is statutory or judicial.

For public-sector employees there's some protection under the first amendment. https://www.workplacefairness.org/retaliation-public-employe...

And in Connecticut this free speech protection transfers to private-sector employees too: https://law.justia.com/codes/connecticut/2005/title31/sec31-...

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/free-speech-and-express...

https://www.pullcom.com/working-together/there-are-limits-to... > there is no statutory protection if the employee was only complaining about personal matters, such as the terms or conditions of employment. The employee has to show that he was commenting on a matter of public concern, rather than attempting to resolve a private dispute with the employer.

Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by iamdamian on Saturday April 29, 2023 @07:10PM (#35758195)
Excellent, thank you.
Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by astrange on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @07:52PM (#35721503)
https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-right...

"Workplace conditions" is protected similarly to wages.

Re:Why Did Google Brain Exist? by colonwqbang on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @05:35PM (#35720333)
So only people who never worked at Google are allowed to criticse Google?