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

Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 241 posts

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#131

Post by Gargoyle »

taneq wrote: post #128
Gargoyle wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is when does he become a liability for the IPO aka VC exit?

Do you really think the Uber board is going to risk bursting that bubble with an IPO? I'd expect them to keep doing funding rounds on the basis of "it's an XX billion dollar company and its valuation is growing at YY billion/year" and try to keep the Ponzi scheme running until they get their self-driving tech working (since that's their only realistic chance of actually becoming revenue-positive).

Sure, they'll keep that going as long as they can. The point is, though, that narrative is slipping away from them. They need to make a convincing case that it's real, and do so soon.

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#132

Post by Anderkent »

ivraatiems wrote: post #113
Anderkent wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Uber breaks the laws because the people making decisions in uber do not see the laws as useful, and I agree with that opinion. And if the fines for breaking the law aren't hurting their bottom line, it's a win-win - presumably the fines are calculated to more than offset any public harm done. When you hear a company break an actually meaningful law, the outrage isn't "X is breaking the law!", it's "X is doing…

You didn't really answer my question, but I think the answer can be inferred: A law Uber finds unuseful is any law that costs them money. Why do you trust Uber with this power? Why would you trust _any_ corporation with this kind of power? They are not and will never be your ally. They are only out for themselves. Laws at least are meant to apply to everyone. You may agree with their individual decisions, or you may…

>A law Uber finds unuseful is any law that costs them money. Why do you trust Uber with this power? Why would you trust _any_ corporation with this kind of power? They are not and will never be your ally. They are only out for themselves. Laws at least are meant to apply to everyone.

But all corporations already have that power. There is nothing you can do to stop someone from breaking a law if they think doing it, even after accounting for any negative consequences the society might apply to them, will benefit them.

> the overall idea of "it's OK for them to break the laws I agree are bad" doesn't work when they start breaking ones you _don't_ agree are bad.

Um, sure does? Just because I'm saying "don't punish people for breaking stupid laws" doesn't mean "don't punish people for doing things that are wrong". Especially if doing those wrong things also broke laws!

I am not saying that Uber should be excused in anything they do. I'm saying that if you're complaining about Uber doing X, you should do it by pointing out how X is wrong, not how X is illegal. There are many things that are illegal but aren't wrong (see for example how Americans treat speed limits); there are many things that are wrong but aren't illegal. You should be outraged when someone does something wrong, not when someone does something illegal.

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#133

Post by rodgerd »

jacquesm wrote: post #93
TorKlingberg wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this clearly looks like Jones getting out before his reputation is sullied by further association with Uber's leadership.

The most likely thing that happened was that Jones said 'you go or I go' and that that ended with him going. Without inside knowledge that's speculative but this is how these things usually play out when founders dig in against a new outsider. The letter feels like spin to reduce the feeling of a fractured company towards the rest of the cadre. Not that they will be fooled (for long, anyway). Anyway, it's Travis Kala…

> The most likely thing that happened was that Jones said 'you go or I go' and that that ended with him going.

It's entirely possible (and more likely) that he said "these people need to go" and got told "no, they're high performers we can't do without."

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#134

Post by M_Grey »

djsumdog wrote: post #118
M_Grey wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the most polite and urbane way possible, he's calling them toxic; in a world full of pretty toxic people and practices, he's calling them out. Until this moment I wasn't sold on the idea that Uber was going to actually die from this, now...

It's dangerous to make predictions like that. We've seen worse companies last longer. In the 2008 financial crisis, people from the bottom to the top committed outright fraud; swallowing up other banks whole (PNC bought National City for $5 billion; then got a $5 billion tax credit .. they bought National City for free .. NC wasn't allowed to apply for TARP). Ford sold tank treads to Germany. IBM made punch cards for…

You still haven't explained why it's dangerous to make this prediction, you've just disagreed with it.

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#135

Post by Anderkent »

ivraatiems wrote: post #122
GauntletWizard wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not both? Do you think that ending segregation wasn't also a major opportunity booster for the african american community? Is it impossible for something in your own interest to also be just?

It can be both, but see my reply to the latest comment in the chain. It's unwise to rely on it being both; you cannot write a blank check to a corporate entity to break rules just because you usually agree with the outcomes of breaking those rules.

But the point is you don't have to write a blank check. You can evaluate the breaches on a case by case basis.

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#137

Post by Anderkent »

ivraatiems wrote: post #114
Anderkent wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kalanick or you don't get to decide which laws are stupid and should therefore be broken. Every person for themselves decides which law they should obey and which ones they should break. > There's an established process for that. And the process pretty much always starts with people deciding to disobey the law, and the law being adjusted later on to match public expectations. > Also, 'jurisdiction' means something…

> Every person for themselves decides which law they should obey and which ones they should break. Corporations are not people. And even if we're only talking about Kalanick, while one may choose what laws to break or not, that doesn't exclude one from prosecution for laws one has broken. You don't get to pick and choose like that. Your basic proposition here is that rules you don't like shouldn't have to apply to yo…

> Your basic proposition here is that rules you don't like shouldn't have to apply to you. Society cannot function that way.

No, I never said that? Obviously when you break a law you should be prepared to face the consequences for breaking that law, as stated in the law. That's the baseline of paying fines. (And then possibly contesting the fines in court or building a public case for changing the law based on being fined for something really silly).

What is not necessarily good is the additional public punishment for breaking a law; whether in form of bad PR, people boycotting them, protests, etc. That outrage should not be encouraged based on legality of actions, but only based on their morality.

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#138

Post by bogomipz »

icelancer wrote: post #98
bogomipz wrote: post #95

What is the role of "President" of the company? Where does that title fit in to an org chart or relate to the C-level execs? I am not familiar with this title in tech companies.

I am the President of my company, and the founder. I gave up the CEO title to someone who bought a piece of my business. The way we split it is: President (me): Head of corporate strategy, networking, and vision. (I also am the acting CTO but that's kind of not relevant here) CEO (him): Fiscal policy, hiring planning, org chart projections, etc. He is the main executor of plans and also somewhat the Chief Revenue Off…

Thanks, interesting division of duties. I think as a title it's certainly more common in non-tech companies. Oddly though the VP title seems to be a dime a dozen. I have worked at many places where there was department with one or two people and one of them was the VP.

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#139

Post by aianus »

CydeWeys wrote: post #124
aianus wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it makes sense, they would be more desperate to hire and you would have less competition from others who have ethical problems with Uber.

How are you so blase about jumping into a toxic work environment? A little bit more money isn't worth those conditions, assuming you could even get it. And keep in mind that a lot of the compensation is going to be in Uber equity -- which is affected by this scandal.

The people I know at Uber don't think it's a toxic work environment and I have no reason to distrust them in favor of a couple of accusatory blog posts from disgruntled ex-employees that I've never met.

Re: Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

#140

Post by robg »

djsumdog wrote: post #118
M_Grey wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the most polite and urbane way possible, he's calling them toxic; in a world full of pretty toxic people and practices, he's calling them out. Until this moment I wasn't sold on the idea that Uber was going to actually die from this, now...

It's dangerous to make predictions like that. We've seen worse companies last longer. In the 2008 financial crisis, people from the bottom to the top committed outright fraud; swallowing up other banks whole (PNC bought National City for $5 billion; then got a $5 billion tax credit .. they bought National City for free .. NC wasn't allowed to apply for TARP). Ford sold tank treads to Germany. IBM made punch cards for…

Let's not forget Bayer... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer#World_War_II
Post reply on HN