611–620 of 841 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had much the same thought. It's far easier to death march the youth. Try the same management style on someone older and they'd simply quit.
Are there any avail statistics on their age distribution? Based on what I've read, it seems like people over 30 is in a minority, not to mention the impossibility to find anyone over 40.
I told them "shut the fuck up. You debase yourself by saying shit like that." Look them in the eye, say it with the confidence of the truth you know it is. If HR wants to debate me on cursing my co-workers, I'd be happy to oblige. What are they going to say? Don't tell your coworkers it's wrong to demean women?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AG is not a political office, and he's not a politician. AG is a Presidential appointment with Congressional confirmation. While those appointed are not necessarily politicians, it is most certainly a political position.
It is most certainly not. By your definition any appointee is a 'political position'. That term has a real meaning in the circles which matter (i.e., politics), and AG is not considered a political position. That's not to say an AG is completely separate from political realities, but the office is (supposed to be) non-partisan.
I'm a man, and reading this plus Susan's story shared recently makes my stomach turn. It truly is sickening. I deleted Uber off my phone, I refuse to support a company that runs like a gentlemens club operating in 1955.
The sad thing about all of this is, when women report this kind of behaviour they get told to "report it", but it seems in the case of Uber (and who knows where else) these claims come with a huge cloud of being fired hanging over your head or they're just ignored.
I think Uber needs to be investigated by an impartial third-party and to be honest, the only way this will happen is if the investors step in and do something about it.
Fuck Uber.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fowler's post established that this was happening to many women in the company. If we accept that Fowler is a credible witness, which I think is a fair assessment, we already know that this is a systemic problem. It's safe to assume then that if more women come forward, they are more likely to be telling the truth than not. Additionally, it's in Lyft's or other detractors best interests not to fake additional claims.…
I'd argue Fowler's claims are similarly unchallenged.
These claims can be easily disproven by Uber if they were false, and the fact that Uber hasn't denied them says a lot.
>Besides, men outnumber women in tech by a very large margin. It's on our shoulders to help women fight back. Strength in numbers is a thing, and having men who speak up on their own, and who support and reinforce women who come forward can only a be a good thing. Yes, but the problem is that most men in tech these days are "brogrammers" who approve of this behavior and engage in it themselves. Tech is no longer the…
Yes, but the problem is that most men in tech these days are "brogrammers" who approve of this behavior and engage in it themselves. Citation needed. I haven't yet, in a decade in the tech industry, worked with anybody who would act in this way, to the best of my knowledge. That said, I work in London and not SV, so I can't say if the culture is different. I know for a fact that it wouldn't be tolerated for a second…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My problem with your comment is the entitlement you claim to define acceptable behaviour of those being abused "what I demand from anyone who wants to call themselves a victim". Also people don't want to call themselves victims, they are victims who may feel able to make that known. Letting a bully know that they are having an effect on you is far from risk free. You also seem to believe that people have no responsib…
>You also seem to believe that people have no responsibility for making people around them comfortable unless they are explicitly told it is making them uncomfortable. Everyone has a responsibility not to be ass. I do not believe this. >My problem with your comment is the entitlement you claim to define acceptable behaviour of those being abused "what I demand from anyone who wants to call themselves a victim". Also…
This is the crux of the situation. To be real: your opinion doesn't matter.
No one "wants your sympathy".
The issue with most of your comments is that you seem to think this whole thing relies on your acceptance.
That tone permeats every post.
You have a pointlessly peddled very particular logical arrangements that many think are nonsense.
And that's fine; we're each entitled to our opinions.
Your reasoning doesn't hold up. And whether anyone wants your sympathy for their situation is self-aggrandizement. You're setting up mental hoops for no reason.
The popular meme will get their way regardless of you
I'm aware of multiple issues at Google and issues at Docker (although not the full details of that one). HR being useless and protecting company and senior management is common although they may be less blatant about it than Uber. Google is obviously huge so many areas may be OK.
Those are just issues I'm aware of following a few women on Twitter, they are the tip of the iceberg, some issues never come out at all, others are privately shard between women and others that might be vulnerable (I'm not in that loop).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What specifically is the move forward here, though? I suppose hn as a community has the power to boycott applying to the company, but how else can we drive internal change from an external position? Uninstalling the app and simply choosing to use a competitor's services are another option, but sapping the entire organization of revenue seems like it would hurt drivers and developers at least as much as management, if…
i think public pressure of the board of directors is the right approach here: Shervin Pishevar, John Gurley, David Bonderman, David Drummond, Arianna Huffington, Garrett Camp, Ryan Graves some of these people have reputations that are worth more than their stake in uber. the desire to uphold their reputations may be enough to get them to truly act on this matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was fake. It seemed to hit on too many talking points and buzzwords. It has a "too good to be true" feel to it.
Are there publicly known instances of something like this being "too good to be true", or is your feeling based only on private experience? I have had no private experience with something like this being "too good to be true", and multiple instances of it being all too true. And there is obviously a publicly known instance of something like this that appears quite credible (the Susan Fowler blogpost). So you understa…
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/28/alt-ri...
I could tell it was fake because it hit on so many tropes of the left.
Here's a more directly comparable example (incredibly long winded expose... skimming recommended)
https://contraspin.co.nz/the-weaponising-of-social-pt1-the-c...
It's not about the events, it's about how they are framed and told by the anonymous author.