Googlewhacked

From iGeek
Googlewhacked.png
A Googlewhack was a contest for finding a Google search query consisting of exactly two words that returns only one result.
A Googlewhack was a contest for finding a Google search query consisting of exactly two words that returns only one result. (Finding uniqueness). More and more the term is applicable to finding conservatives in their organization... and then firing them (whacking them) for their uniqueness. Intellectual diversity will not be tolerated.
ℹ️ Info          
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2019-07-25 

Another day, another Googlewhack.

Technically, A Googlewhack was a contest for finding a Google search query consisting of exactly two words that returns only one result. (Finding uniqueness).

More and more the term is applicable to finding conservatives in their organization... and then firing them for their uniqueness. Conservative/Republican seem to be getting purged from Google's employment roles for disagreeing with the corporate consensus.

Of course the gross majority of conservatives never get fired... as long as they know their place and to never openly admit their views.

So while far lefties and extremists can voice their views openly, conservatives are subjugated to social apartheid. As long as they're quiet and oppressed about their beliefs, they will be fine. They might not get promoted due to Google's promotion by herd voting policies, but that's another issue. The point is that if a conservative voices views, they can (and will) be taken out by the flock of angry hate-chickens. The body count is adding up.

Just to name a few that we know of and not counting likely hundreds of persecuted individuals that we don't know about:

  • James Damore - This is the story of Media Lies, Google Hypocrisy, and what happens when someone (James Damore) decides to tell the truth in Progressive America. James committed the thought crime of saying, on an internal forum that inviting people to challenge views, that the forum and Google had become an “ideological echo chamber"... and proving it. Fired for butchering sacred cows.
  • Greg Coppola - Greg Coppola (Sr. Software Engineer @ Google) on Google's intentional bias in search (and thus the testimony to congress by Sundar) was untrue. Greg's a Ph.D. and 5 years at Google, and he doesn't believe it's been scrubbed from bias. 5 minutes searching can demonstrate political bias.
  • Kay Coles James - President of the Heritage Foundation (a black female exec for the interjectionally interested), was appointed to an AI ethics panel for Google (Advanced Technology External Advisory Council: ATEAC). However, once her personal views on gender (that 2 of them exist, and it's not just a personal preference).
  • Kevin Cernekee - Fired by Google, a Republican Engineer Hits Back by documenting the hate and bullying that the management tolerated against him because he's conservative/Republican. In his words, "they treat the two sides very differently"... and that's just not right.
  • Mike Wacker - Mike started the @Republicans group in Google to try to give the company some diversity and conservatism a voice. So he was driven out and fired. He documents the fraud excuses for why he was fired in an article at Medium that includes the show trial they had to drive him out: he was fired for being rude; e.g. not conforming to leftist orthodoxy.


If you can't see that pattern, then I hear Google is hiring self-deluded, intolerant lefties.

🗒️ Note:
For real Googlewhack's, I found 3, back in the day (2005).
  • Tajikistan chlamydia
  • astronaut Ganelogeman
  • frotteur superball

But in 2018 or 2019 Google fixed (e.g. Fucked up) their searching, so things no longer worked as well as they used to. The "+" for require, "-" for exclude, and quotes around a phrase (for requiring the phrase and not the words individually), all stopped working right. And Google whacks now start doing best guesses and stuff, instead of literal matches -- so they don't work.

Conclusion[edit | edit source]

In no company is it a good idea to publicly disagree with the Company, its policies, or the CEO. So a couple are almost understandable. But that's generally on ideas of business, vision, and things like that. On disagreeing with corporate culture? Personal or political beliefs are usually more allowed to have some disagreement. Google blurs the lines between personal and work, then complains when some people don't like the outcome.

I like Google. They've done some shitty things, but they do some good things. I love some of the people that work there, who are friends. I think the world is still net better off with Google than without it -- but I was much more confident of that 10 or 20 years ago, and the trend has been down. If it keeps going, I'm not certain that I'll be able to say that in 10 or 20 more years. I certainly disagree with them when they act like a cult. Some of it is overstated and some of it is real. But I'm complaining about some of the real stuff. Conservatives there are treated like shit, and that's wrong. I'd have the same problem if LGBT's, blacks, Jews or Women were treated like shit in any organization that I worked at. It's a job. If you're not adult enough to separate your work from your coworkers religious or political beliefs, then YOU are the one with the problem, not them. And if HR is militarizing your grievances, then they are the problem. Google HR has a fucking problem.


Google[edit source]

           Main article: Google
GoogleEvil.png
In 1995, two 20-something Ph.D. students from Stanford were looking for something to do their dissertations on, and decided that they should focus on a Web crawler. They found funding, a revenue stream based on advertising, and became a Unicorn (a multi-billion dollar company). Their saga from College Dormitory Culture to anti-American Corporate hate-Cult began.


GeekPirate.small.png



🔗 More

Google
Two 20-something created a Web crawler, then a few OK products sold by an anti-American hate cult.



Tags: Google


Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.