[spiralcoaster]

In other words:

All of my stock has finally vested, and I am independently wealthy enough to signal that I'm quitting purely based on my morals, since there's no way anyone could have known Google wasn't some ethical bastion of hope in 2017.

[raffael_de]

there are plenty of people who are financially independent but who don't choose to follow their moral compass.

[paulryanrogers]

I think the implication is that their moral compass was disregarded or non-existent until they gained their independence. Therefore not worthy of serious consideration.

People who don't ever consider or speak of morals or ethics are beside the point.

[trhway]

Being financially independent is the moral compass of the financially independent.

[raffael_de]

"being financially independent" is a state and a "moral compass" is a function or tool. Two different concepts like red and tomato or yesterday and cold.

[alsetmusic]

> Being financially independent is the moral compass of the financially independent.

I mean, I think you meant it somewhat derisively (if not, apologies), but it's absolutely true. I work for two reasons: it gives me a higher quality of living and it anchors my life by creating structure.

I could choose to not work and be very frugal and probably be ok. But I might have to re-enter the job market later in life due to rising costs after my skills have atrophied (been there, it's horrible; no one will consider you). Or I can make certain that when the day comes that I'm ready to be done, it's at a time when making it to death without financial hardship has a much higher probability. I can also afford to enjoy nice things rather than pinching pennies.

I also know that I have a tendency to spin out if I have too much free time and not enough going with routine and a sense of contributing. Combined with the above, this means I am free to work where I want to work, doing the absolute easiest thing I can find that I still consider rewarding. I don't have to chase money or promotions (I want as little responsibility as possible).

I can walk away tomorrow if my org does something I consider unethical. I can hold out for a position that meets the above criteria rather than taking the first job I see because of desperation. When my previous employer had layoffs, I was able to remain comfortable for six months while only applying to jobs I genuinely wanted.

There's no amount of money that a Meta, Google, OpenAI, etc could offer me because even though it'd be nice to own a house in the Bay Area, I'm satisfied renting until death and don't need more than the very nice spacious home I've already got. I hit the jackpot and I'm grateful every day.

[socalgal2]

Maybe he should donate every cent he got through Google and its stock to prove he's serious?

[blastonico]

Back in 2017, I had this theory that Google was run from the Vatican and the Pope himself was the CEO.

[Trasmatta]

Yeah, it's wild to be writing a post like this in June 2026. Even if he thought Google was somehow still salvageable, how did he justify staying there after Google immediately bent the knee to Trump with the $1 million bribe a year and a half ago?

[hiddencost]

You really haven't ever encountered someone who believed in anything, have you?

[hsuduebc2]

I mean, it is quite obvious for years that Google is now classical immoral tech corporation, which now means current administration servant. They changed their code of conduct in 2018 along with they “Don’t be evil” to “Do the right thing” because world is not "black and white". This obvious shift into moral ambiguity with then changed code of conduct should signal the shift in policy. Eight years ago. Not even mentioning their actions.

This is not about "believing in anything" other than a stable job and money. I respect the author that he felt this moral tradeoff was enough.

I'm afraid, we cannot expect anything else from every publicly owned company, because sadly, it's in human nature to be selfish if you are not the one who suffers from your actions.

[DashAnimal]

https://abc.xyz/investor/board-and-governance/google-code-of...

"And remember... don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up!"

Sorry this is one of those things that bugs me - but "don't be evil" was never removed from their code of conduct. It's placement was moved though from the start to the end, and you could argue whether it's less important because of that if you want.. but it is still there.

[inlined]

I think it can at least be said they are amoral not immoral. It’s a very low bar, but still

[hsuduebc2]

Fair. It is still by far not META.

[moomoo11]

I actually did this. And that's why I feel confident calling out people like the guy in the article who enjoyed the upside and then do this performative cringe.

I quit my job working for oil and gas companies, and taught myself how to code and then worked at a company that actually made non-asshole software that went on to IPO so things worked out.

I didn't choose to help oil and gas companies, the company I worked for had them as customers so the work I did helped oil and gas. I chose to give up the money and do something else.

So I don't give a fuck about downvotes. I actually lived it, and I don't give a fuck anymore either to call people out.