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

Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 110 posts

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#11

Post by thanksgiving »

jeffjose wrote: post #7
product50 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe. What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? Also, it is…

> What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? At the risk of going on a tangent - isn't this ad hominem? Imagine for a second, someone profoundly successful made the statement OP made. Does your outlook change then?

I'd say no because nobody, not even Sergei and Larry, not even the devil incarnate at the database company, not anyone in silicon valley has done what Travis and his team have done.

I was never a fan of ubers because like Dropbox I thought it was too simplistic and too easily replaceable. I've become more wary of the anti uber propaganda lately. I'm more suspicious of the press than ever. When I read some news all I can think of is which ax are they grinding there. The constant onslaught of anti uber propaganda makes me think something is wrong here.

If Travis loses, it will be a teachable moment for other unicorns. What lessons can we learn about what he did incorrectly in stacking the board? How can a CEO/founder prevent a coup?

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#13

Post by watwut »

product50 wrote: post #5
dboreham wrote: post #2

Something wrong about this: someone in power being held accoutable for their incompetence and bad behavior. Or did he just loose some rich people too much money?

What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe. What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? Also, it is…

I would much rather celebrated people who having choice between gain and morality choose morality. Uber behavior made it harder for less law breaking less immoral to succeed for a time.

"Being ruthless" is not double edged sword - it is simply unethical behavior that gives you advantage. That is all there is to it. More ethical CEOs face challenges too, pretty much the same challenges.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#14

Post by icebraining »

golemotron wrote: post #6
jeffjose wrote: post #3

Travis Kalanick's rise was the result of Silicon Valley's sincere yearning for an irreverent CEO when Steve Jobs passed away. We were collectively willing to overlook any blemishes in the young company, which set up for failure in the long run. I sometimes wonder if Steve Jobs had still been alive, would he have been revered as much as he was in the 2010s? His management style would have sooner or later caused perman…

I think it's important to notice that what you are talking about is a zeitgeist change. In the time that Jobs was building organizations the consensus was that work (particularly work by engineers with options) was a voluntary contract and if you didn't like how you were being treated you moved to another job. The flip side to your point that no one articulates today is that some people with thicker skin like very ch…

a Jobs-ian company that makes them feel like they are part of a a group of with real intensity that is changing the world, and Apple surely did.

Yeap, it sure did:

We were reluctant to show it to Steve, knowing that he would want to commandeer it, but he heard about it from someone and demanded to see it. We showed it to him, and, unfortunately, he loved it. But he also insisted that Apple owned all the rights to it, even though we had developed it in our spare time.

Steve couldn't insist that Apple owned all of it, because Bill Budge wasn't an Apple employee at the time. But Steve could claim complete ownership of the interface card, which he said was developed with Apple resources. Burrell and I were pretty upset, because we did it on our own time and thought that we should be compensated, but it's really hard to argue with Steve, especially about money.

Can't you just feel the unity of the group? /s

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Apple_II_Mouse_Ca...

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#15

Post by DavidFlint »

product50 wrote: post #5
dboreham wrote: post #2

Something wrong about this: someone in power being held accoutable for their incompetence and bad behavior. Or did he just loose some rich people too much money?

What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe. What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? Also, it is…

While yes, he achieved a lot, I cannot agree on praising him. This reminds me of all the marketing gurus from 5 years ago that were selling rich quick schemes. They sold a product, they got rich, but in the end they were scamming regular people.

While Travis is not scamming anyone, the methods are similar. Get rich by exploiting barely legal methods, unethical ways and ride to the fame using someone else money.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#17

Post by _Codemonkeyism »

product50 wrote: post #5
dboreham wrote: post #2

Something wrong about this: someone in power being held accoutable for their incompetence and bad behavior. Or did he just loose some rich people too much money?

What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe. What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? Also, it is…

"[...] in markets which had regulations [...]"

Sounds like some guys during the prohibition if they could have filed for an IPO.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#18

Post by watwut »

golemotron wrote: post #6
jeffjose wrote: post #3

Travis Kalanick's rise was the result of Silicon Valley's sincere yearning for an irreverent CEO when Steve Jobs passed away. We were collectively willing to overlook any blemishes in the young company, which set up for failure in the long run. I sometimes wonder if Steve Jobs had still been alive, would he have been revered as much as he was in the 2010s? His management style would have sooner or later caused perman…

I think it's important to notice that what you are talking about is a zeitgeist change. In the time that Jobs was building organizations the consensus was that work (particularly work by engineers with options) was a voluntary contract and if you didn't like how you were being treated you moved to another job. The flip side to your point that no one articulates today is that some people with thicker skin like very ch…

Part of that choosing company process, if it has to work, is that people criticize and talk openly. Like instead of using euphemisms like "challenging" when what they mean is "easy work but backstabbing culture" or "passionate" when they mean "a lot of signaling required". It may mean that yes, some companies are sexist and others are cringy ridiculous sjws, but now the moment you openly talk about either heaven help you.

Collectively, we don't openly criticize or nor attempt to fairly characterize cultures. We talk in euphemisms, like "alpha" when we mean "overbearing narcissistic jerk" or "laddish" when we mean "lazy jerk". We talk about "meritocracy" when number one advice for job seekers is "networking", whether you appear confident matters more then whether project you are responsible for is mess and who you are friend with matters more then anything in that company.

If people have to have fair chance to choose companies, then it needs to be fine for people who work or worked in those companies criticize without being punished for it. That is not exactly the case now - now you need to have good friends in that company to figure that out.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#19

Post by mft_ »

product50 wrote: post #5
dboreham wrote: post #2

Something wrong about this: someone in power being held accoutable for their incompetence and bad behavior. Or did he just loose some rich people too much money?

What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe. What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? Also, it is…

I agree that what Uber have done --and are still doing-- is particularly impressive, and took a particular type of leader and team. There is no current comparison I can think of.

I also agree strongly with another poster that the current vein of media focus on Uber is suspicious. It makes me worry about lazy reporting --any story about Uber gets noticed, no matter how irrelevant-- and also about who is actively funding an anti-Uber PR campaign - big established taxi companies, possibly? As time goes on, the media's approach makes me more and more sympathetic towards Travis and Uber, not less.

However... everyone should have some standards. It should be possible to run a high-achieving company without requiring or tolerating behaviour ranging from sexism to overt harassment. And the recent example of a rape victim's medical records being acquired and shared is particularly egregious - irrespective of their suspicions, that was well beyond a line, and the perpetrator should have been immediately fired.

I'm always a fan of the newspaper test - don't do anything you'd be ashamed of appearing on the front page of a major newspaper. Many of the things that Uber are criticised for, they'd probably be (rightly) proud of being publicised. But not all.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#20

Post by noway421 »

watwut wrote: post #13
product50 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe. What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? Also, it is…

I would much rather celebrated people who having choice between gain and morality choose morality. Uber behavior made it harder for less law breaking less immoral to succeed for a time. "Being ruthless" is not double edged sword - it is simply unethical behavior that gives you advantage. That is all there is to it. More ethical CEOs face challenges too, pretty much the same challenges.

It's not necessarily that Travis acknowledges that he acts immoral. After all, he was always talking about fighting unjust and greedy taxi companies who are robbing their customers. Surely he slipped with the whole UberX and driver's pay going way to low, but that was a necessary measure against Lyft taking up the untapped market. Would be interesting to hear how he feels about that whole thing and whether he regrets doing the thing which he essentially had to do.

In regard to self-driving, Google would have taken the place and drove Uber out of business if Uber didn't start getting on the same train. In that regard, there's not much empathy you can hold for drivers as their profession becomes a thing of the past.

Post reply on HN