> non-profits

I think those are pretty problematic. They can't pay well (no profits...), and/or they may be politically motivated such that working for them would mean a worse compromise.

> open source foundations

Those dreams end. (Speaking from experience.)

> education, healthcare tech

Not self-sustaining. These sectors are not self-sustaining anywhere, and therefore are highly tied to politics.

> small companies solving real problems

I've tried small companies. Not for me. In my experience, they lack internal cohesion and resources for one associate to effectively support another.

> The "we all have to" framing is a convenient way to avoid examining your own choices.

This is a great point to make in general (I take it very seriously), but it does not apply to me specifically. I've examined all the way to Mars and back.

> And it's telling that this framing always seems to appear when someone is defending their own employer.

(I may be misunderstanding you, but in any case: I've never worked for Google, and I don't have great feelings for them.)

> You've drawn a clear moral line between Google ("mixed bag") and AI companies ("unquestionably cancer")

I did!

> so you clearly believe these distinctions matter even though Google itself is an AI company

Yes, I do believe that.

Google has created Docs, Drive, Mail, Search, Maps, Project Zero. It's not all terribly bad from them, there is some "only moderately bad", and even morsels of "borderline good".