I can't understand - where do they find all these people from outside Google willing to sit on a committee for a Google product? Why are people volunteering for this? It sounds like there's two committees?! Why so much bureaucracy and why do people want to take part in it?
I suspect having "Sat on Google Committee" is a pretty nice résumé item.
There's lots of extremely qualified people fighting over working with/for Google, even for free.
Also, there are many idealists, who believe that they, alone, can "bring light to darkness."
I can't really blame them, but I'm old and cynical, with a singed tuchus, from playing that game, so you probably won't find me sitting on these committees.
> I suspect having "Sat on Google Committee" is a pretty nice résumé item
Absolutely. I'd take it. I'd probably try to undermine the effort, but I'd still take the position!
I think the era of subversive engineering is dawning. We've had wave after wave of high-profile resignations and data leaks in the name of ethics, only to see their position filled with two worse candidates: a hydra of corruption!
How soon until ethical engineers realize protests don't work and start to corrode monopolies from the inside out? (like when Agent K jumps down the throat of The Bug in MiB.) Is that in itself ethical? That's a tough question, we'll know it when we see it?
The committees exist essentially as an antitrust defense - "Look, see, people outside Google have an influence on this project!" - we'll see how effective that is. As to why someone would sit on such a committee, that's a much better question. I suppose they might be flattered to be invited. It looks good on a resume and they might get some speaking gigs out of it? But I don't see how someone with the necessary expertise to be considered could also be ignorant enough to take Google at their word.
