Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I am an Uber survivor

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 841 posts

Re: I am an Uber survivor

#741

Post by CaptainZapp »

Justsignedup wrote: post #563
_yosefk wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK Cupid blocked Firefox, a non-profit with less questionable business practices than most tech companies and certainly Uber, over Eich's quiet private donation which ought to be a smaller deal than systematic sexual harassment with consequences for victims instead of perpetrators (although the donation was proven while the harassment is alleged; I doubt this tips the scales of public sentiment though.) The overall r…

an interesting debate. if i build my company on abuse and shady tactics, but i now employ 10,000 employees, is it okay to let me get away with it because so many depend on me? This is the too-big-to-fail issue.

This whole too-big-to-fail reasoning really galls me.

When a company is too big to fail it means that if it fails there's a systemic risk for an entire economy. Banks (and it's mostly banks), which are too big to fail are so interewoven with other banks, multinational companies and the economy as a whole that a failure can bring other institutions to the brink of exctinction and by extension wreck havoc on the entire economy.

Thousands of people out of a job does not mean too big to fail. No more being able to hail an Uber may be inconvenient, but it's no systemic risk to the economy.

Look at Enron. They had north of 20'000 employees when they imploded. And they where in a far more critical sector of the economy than Uber can ever dream to be. While it was brutal for the employees (who partially lost their life savings) and while I think there should be a special place in hell for the responsible executives Enron's demise had hardly any effects on the economy as a whole.

I'm not jumping on you personally. It's just that this too-big-to-fail nonsense in combination with Uber is thrown around an awful lot recently.

And it's utter bullshit.

Re: I am an Uber survivor

#743

Post by marcus_holmes »

kbenson wrote: post #450
ogezi wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want them to change instead of ending up like Theranos. If Uber went down, a lot of good people would be out of a job (both employees and drivers) and it would burn a lot investors, thus negatively affecting the funding landscape for years to come. To reiterate, I wish Uber to change. I don't wish them to fail.

> If Uber went down, a lot of good people would be out of a job (both employees and drivers) Employees yes, drivers not so much. There's plenty of competitors that would love to fill that hole. > and it would burn a lot investors, thus negatively affecting the funding landscape for years to come. Maybe letting investors know that company culture of how people are treated has real negative consequences would signal to…

It's not so much pressuring founders to behave better, as choosing better founders. The "play hard", "meritocratic", "hashtag winning" douchebag seems to be a good choice because they work hard to appear to be a good choice and seem to have the drive to do big things. But if it all falls apart before they can achieve greatness because of the inherent douchefail, then that's a lesson investors need to learn. Don't bet on douchebags.

Re: I am an Uber survivor

#744

Post by dang »

jellicle wrote: post #90
huac wrote: post #30

This is one of the most heavily flagged submissions I've seen in a while - hit #2 with 70 points, and now is at #6 with 174 points in 40 min, while the new #2 is 124 points in 2 hours.

HN hates anything that bashes the misogynist culture of Silicon Valley. This story will be flagged dead shortly.

Ideologues of all flavors frequently diss HN like this. Someone needs to stand up for the community, so I guess I will. This was a slur, and your prediction turning out consummately wrong illustrates this nicely.

I think it's in poor taste to diss a group with grand rhetoric whilst participating in it, since you're as much a part of it as anyone else. If you think so poorly of your community, perhaps find a different one and post nastily there. I hear Twitter is good for that.

The reality of the HN community is that it's divided much the way that society at large is. The comments here inevitably reflect that. It's a mixed bag, a lot of what's in that bag isn't great and a small portion is awful, but (a) this community does manage somewhat better than most of the rest of the internet and (b) far more of the participants here are thoughtful and decent than otherwise.

Re: I am an Uber survivor

#746

Post by gaius »

tanderson92 wrote: post #735
gaius wrote: post #732

This is the part that really hits me. When, in a meeting, Mike#2 says to "stop being a whiny little bitch" Yet Torvalds says worse all the time, and he's a geek hero. I sense a double standard here, and I'm not sure why.

Linus has made demeaning, sexist remarks to a woman to lower her self-worth and value, in a way worse than (or even similar to) "whiny little bitch" ? Please provide sources, I'm genuinely interested.

You really need a link to Torvalds abusing people? Here's kernel dev Sarah Sharp https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/linus...

Re: I am an Uber survivor

#747

Post by watwut »

leggomylibro wrote: post #132

>Travis is well known to protect high performing team leaders no matter how abusive they are towards their employees. The HR team was known to be deftly[sic] afraid of Travis’s tendency to blame and ridicule the women and yell at HR whenever they went in with complaints of abuse. I heard about Travis personally congratulating Mike#2 for meeting strict deadlines months after I complained to HR about my abuse. This is…

It seems that Uber has strong correlation between "abusive" and "seen as high performer".

Re: I am an Uber survivor

#748

Post by arthur_pryor »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #743
kbenson wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Uber went down, a lot of good people would be out of a job (both employees and drivers) Employees yes, drivers not so much. There's plenty of competitors that would love to fill that hole. > and it would burn a lot investors, thus negatively affecting the funding landscape for years to come. Maybe letting investors know that company culture of how people are treated has real negative consequences would signal to…

It's not so much pressuring founders to behave better, as choosing better founders. The "play hard", "meritocratic", "hashtag winning" douchebag seems to be a good choice because they work hard to appear to be a good choice and seem to have the drive to do big things. But if it all falls apart before they can achieve greatness because of the inherent douchefail, then that's a lesson investors need to learn. Don't bet…

here here.

maybe voters will learn this too?

i was about to say that these events could make for a great teaching moment, but these are lessons we've been given many many many chances to learn. i'll settle for us once again avoiding eating ourselves alive as a species, and hopefully we avoid eating some scapegoat subset of us alive while we're at it.

Re: I am an Uber survivor

#749

Post by ismail-khan »

deanCommie wrote: post #228
antisthenes wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a problem at all. People should always question credibility of random things on the internet. Even though you just tried to #identity_politic someone with blind belief, I'm not going to say people like you are the problem. Just tone down your zeal a bit and approach the problem rationally.

Branding someone's concern for the well being and liberty of others as "identity politics" (or in other context "political correctness") suggests an interpretation of the world where the only reason anyone would empathise with others is to win credibility and acceptance from peers. It's a very cynical worldview.

That's not remotely close to what the parent comment was saying...

Re: I am an Uber survivor

#750

Post by tanderson92 »

gaius wrote: post #746
tanderson92 wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linus has made demeaning, sexist remarks to a woman to lower her self-worth and value, in a way worse than (or even similar to) "whiny little bitch" ? Please provide sources, I'm genuinely interested.

You really need a link to Torvalds abusing people? Here's kernel dev Sarah Sharp https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/linus...

Sorry, that doesn't prove what you claimed. In fact every piece of evidence appears to be him yelling at males.

(And I'm also not sympathetic to Sarah here given the clearly joking nature of Linus' reply about Greg -- notice how others took it. See also http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137391528412980&w=2

See also one of the supposed receivers of abuse on the supposed abuse: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137401130111098&w=2

Here's another supposed victim on the "abuse": http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137410815810454&w=2 Notably:

" If you can point me to a single instance of Linus "abusing" someone who is not one of his trusted persons, who really should be able to deal with that, or someone who did not provoke him to go into rant mode, then I'm all on your side.")

Post reply on HN