Hacker News Reader

Comment by username223 | Hacker News Reader

> He also found a lobbyist and got involved in getting laws passed in Nevada and California to allow the testing of autonomous vehicles. His backroom lobbying did not endear him to some executives at Google.

> “I thought you could just do it yourself,” he said. “Then I found out that there is a team dedicated to that, a process. Got a little bit in trouble for doing it.”

Wow. What world is this guy living in, where he thought he should personally hire a lobbyist to change some laws to make his job easier? Maybe it's the difference between me and a 10x-er, but I just don't understand this.

View on HN

> Q: How are ultra-high-net-worth individuals different from run-of-the-mill affluent individuals?

> A: They have this feeling that rules don’t apply to them, although that mind-set is often the key to much of their success. If they’re told something can’t be done a certain way, they think that doesn’t apply to them and find a way around it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/your-money/inside-the-min...

This explains so much of Silicon Valley and the tendency to try to circumvent or avoid regulations at any cost, like for ride sharing, AirBnB, etc.

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

I think this George Bernard Shaw quote pretty much explains the guy.

Is he naive or is Google overreaching? Going to be interesting watching this one play out.

"Going to be interesting watching this one play out."

I suspect, access of "14,000 highly confidential and proprietary files shortly before his resignation" will play a major role in swaying the deciders. Experience tells us that not all of those 14k were critical, what if it had be 1 or 2 critical design docs? In a different or future case, we may see that happen. Corps have incentive to reduce competitors, but now may start recognizing the potential leverage they have - "Our network logs show Joe accessed our main design doc 1 week before he left for company doing similar work!".

Yeah, so the guy happened to do a git clone a few weeks before he left the company, that may have been related to work, and now gets this. I don't know about the "covering his tracks" part though.

I get the point you're trying to make and Google is rather vague on details, but I highly doubt it was as simple as a git clone. If for no other reason, it's generally considered an anti-pattern to have 10gb of content in a repo (not including revisions, but just content).

They were also very specific in the legal documents about how he "covered his tracks", I'd recommend reading it rather than the cliff notes version linked here.

Would you prefer that he check the regulations, find out that self-driving cars are illegal, and therefore just never develop one?

I don't understand that.

Laws change to accomodate the facts on the ground, as they should. People leading the changes of facts on the ground are in a natural position to push for corresponding changes in law.

How do you think the first human-driven car was permitted to drive on a street?

There was probably no law requiring a license/permit or otherwise to have a motor vehicle, or horse, or age restriction... and likely no sobriety restrictions, depending on location, either.

> Would you prefer that he check the regulations, find out that self-driving cars are illegal, and therefore just never develop one?

Of course not. I'd prefer that he check the regulations, find out that self-driving cars are illegal, and therefore publicly and honestly try to make them legal, in concert with the people who pay him.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com