This
Post Is Probably Bullshit, Here's Why
This
post is more likely than not bullshit. Let's go through a
variety of reasons why. I can't make a 100% "fool-proof" claim
that it is bullshit, but no one here can 100% prove anything
about this story either because OP did such a shit job proving
anything. I will just be laying out what I know, have learned,
and what about this post smells awful.
What
Do I Know About Google?
(If
you don't care/trust what I claim to know about the internal
workings of Google, then jump to the next section. I also
wouldn't trust the random stuff someone anonymously posts on
the Internet, so why trust me? You can decide for yourself, or
skip it and read where I only address OPs stuff).
First,
I also know Googlers, and one of them presented what they know
what likely happened, and how this post doesn't line up with
what
they
know
about Google.
Damore
claims his phone was slow the day his document went viral, which
was subsequently around the same time he was fired. There is a
more benign reason his "phone was being slow", which was that
Google was doing a standard procedure of wiping the work profile
from his phone. This would cause the apps to suddenly disappear
and the other things Damore described. However, there would have
been a notification on his phone, too, saying this was
happening. Maybe Damore forgot this, or maybe he is purposefully
omitting that fact. We can't know, but here is some technical
information about how work profiles work on Android phones from
a friend I know that works at Google.
enterprise
management on Android is gated by literal app permissions
Just
like an app can request access to your call log or some shit,
enterprise apps request admin permissions
There
are 3: DEVICE_ADMINISTRATOR, PROFILE_OWNER, and DEVICE_OWNER
DEVICE_ADMINISTRATOR
makes it look like you've just got another account on the
phone. It lets the app enforce things like a strong unlock
code and allows for factory resetting the device
PROFILE_OWNER
is weird from a normal Android perspective. It makes a new
"profile" (under the hood, a new Android *user*) where it
keeps work stuff separate.
The
idea here is that the management app controls the entire
profile, so it can do things that cannot be done to the
primary profile
For
example, it works with the Play Store app to ensure that only
certain apps can be installed. This is nice for enterprises
because it can, for example, prevents bad apps from scraping
contacts and calendar.
the
"profile wipe", it's really just a factory reset command (like
what we can give in the DEVICE_ADMINISTRATOR) mode, but it
behaves differently. The platform interprets a factory reset
command from the work profile as "make this profile go away
right now" and so it does the thing.
This
is incredibly noticeable. You get a notification, there's a a
notable lack of briefcase-badged apps suddenly.
As
an implementation detail of work profile, you also get one
Google Play Services instance running per profile, which may
slow you down if your phone sucks.
See:
the Nexus 5X we gave to the whole company a few years back.
DEVICE_OWNER
is weird and probably not worth mentioning, but it gives
admins significant control over a device. The caveat is that
it can only be entered from the setup wizard and the only way
to get out is by factory resetting.
DEVICE_OWNER
enables lots of features customers might not want, which is
why it comes with some scary fucking warnings and is a pain in
the ass to get into.
This
is how profiles work on the phone, and how a work profile is
separated from the user's own profile. That said, my friend
frequently admits the all this stuff really isn't all that
great; it has some bugs and doesn't work smoothly. Sometimes
Google will suddenly deauth your device, and you have to log
back in. It has happened to me, it has happened to my friend,
and it is likely what has happened to Damore. This is why on the
day his phone was wiped of Corporate data, it seemed slow. This
process is supposed to be fast and is designed to complete ASAP.
As a potential side-affect, you may have to log back in.
Furthermore,
such wipes are common and Damore almost certainly got a factory
reset which isn't anything fancy.
it
isn't clear that Damore had a work profile, but if he had one,
then this would be the likely explanation for his phone being
slow/wonky.
Sure,
it is possible that a backdoor exists that my friend, nor
ANYONE, knows about. It is however quite telling that no one has
found one nor claimed to be affected by one until today.
HOWEVER,
even if we ignore all these technical details, his phone being
slow is such a non-event. It is weird that OP would even know
this, or "probably made his phone slow". Why would it "probably"
have made the phone slow? That doesn't make sense. Either OP
knows it was made slow, or not. Maybe OP has heard it "sometimes
makes the phone slow" but it is a really weird thing to claim.
How does OP seem to know this information? Why would they even
know it? Why are they uncertain in knowing? It is just really
inconsistent.
Lastly,
WHY IN THE WORLD would Google make its spying bullshit so slow
as to be noticeable to the victim? We are to believe that Google
is a massive, evil, highly coordinated bully that is super
smart, but it fucks up this part so obviously? Comon. That just
smells like bullshit.
Let's
Go Through All the Claims Made by OP
First
of all, we knew about the memo a month before it went viral
Well
obviously, because Damore sent it to HR. This is a really weird
way to start this whole post, and my guess is it is supposed to
make it sound scary "google knows everything you do/think". I
bring this up because the framing/narrative of the post is
important: it is (ironically) heavily biased to make Damore look
like a hero and Google the big baddie. I am pointing it out to
help emphasize how much of it is just fluff, and not
interesting, unique, or new info.
There
wasn't anything we could do, except admit to wrongdoing and
lying to our employees. We just hoped that no one else would
see his document.
This
also doesn't make sense. The memo didn't expose "wrongdoing", it
tried to say the current practices were not correctly aligned
with the goals of equality, and should be changed to better
include women (if we are being realllllly generous to his memo,
which I normally wouldn't be). As I recall, his memo was not
about calling out Google lying, and wasn't the central focus.
Again, this line is an awkward way to open and makes me think
the author is trying to make Google sound way more evil. It just
doesn't make sense on its face.
told
executives to write to their employees condemning the memo;
Yes,
because Google didn't believe in its contents, and Google wanted
to present a clear front how it didn't align with their
principles. I don't see how this is necessarily malicious. Any
and every company would do this when one of its employees posts
something so obviously damaging that got leaked.
manipulated
our internal Memegen to bias the ratings towards anti-Damore
posts (the head of Memegen is an "ally" to the diversity
cause);
This
is bizarre, but has been mentioned before and isn't "new" or
"insider" information.
gave
every manager talking points on what to tell their reports
about the memo
Yes,
because, again, Google didn't believe in the contents of the
memo and believed it harmful/wrong. Of course they would provide
guidance to managers on how Google perceives the memo. Employees
may feel Google not giving a strong enough rebuttal therefore
agrees with the memo, which would also cause people to quit.
Look at the backlash against Google for Dragonfly and other
secret projects that Googler's don't like: They threaten to
quit. Google knows they need to present a consistent view of
their positions/policies so employees don't come up with random
garbage and quit for nonsensical reasons. It isn't surprising to
me Google knew of this strategy then, and continues to use it.
(Pt
2 coming soon)