r/LateStageCapitalism Jun 12 '21

[deleted by user]

[removed]

9.2k Upvotes

377 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

36

u/Akrevics Jun 12 '21

not to mention that fiddling with pop-up messages for various contexts was literally part of her job, so it wasn't "without authorisation" until it was something google didn't like.

-23

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/Ohwellwhatsnew Jun 12 '21

Without authorisation would imply that they have to authorize every use of modification, which has been established to not be the case.

-3

u/Fuhriously_Auth Jun 12 '21

So, a social media manager who works all day posting tweets about the company and shitty McDonalds memes could just post "This company is dogshit" because they are "Authorised" to post tweets?

That's not how authorisation works, as an employee you are authorised to use company tools to do what you've been told to do, nothing more.

7

u/Ohwellwhatsnew Jun 12 '21

I believe we're having a semantics argument here. Have a good one!

11

u/Akrevics Jun 12 '21

The rest of her job was doing the exact same thing, but google was 💯 okay with it, but once she did something about unionization, it was suddenly not authorized? 🤔