111–120 of 577 posts
One thing to remember: it's only one side of the story from somebody who had/has serious financial interest depending on the outcome of the scandal. It kind of worries me how most comments take the allegations for granted.
Sure, maybe she believes her book will earn her more. But she'd need to write the #1 or 2 non-fiction book of the year to get there.
Aside from a workplace fling with one sleazeball, apparently there's a seedy pleasure trip she didn't get invited on and a plate of cookies. Then the corporate ass covering when she started making a fuss in a company handling millions of dollars.
However, let's face it, competing at that level requires a certain kind of drive and ruthlessness, and it'd be naive to assume Pao is somehow exempt from this.
It's an excerpt from her book, published to promote said book. Of course it's going to be 100% sympathetic. Here's a more neutral take on things, which includes the portion conspicuously omitted here: the lawsuits her husband's embroiled in, and the plus hundred of millions he potentially defrauded pension funds of, which incidentally lines up with Pao's sought damages.
They sound like they deserve each other, and are eminently capable of playing their victim cards for full effect to paper over their own mistakes.
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-fletc...
I think that it's really interesting that conversations about venture capital and conversations about engineering both get to be lumped into a more general conversation about sexism in Silicon Valley. A lot of engineers have a good bit to say against the existence of widespread sexism in engineering, myself included. Engineering in computer science has long been represented by a nearly nonexistent barrier to entry ou…
Really interesting glimpse into this world. It's unfortunate that this article is getting negative feedback on HN. I think we all need to be careful not to belittle/condemn issues that don't personally affect us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Subsequently she fired Victoria Taylor, an incredibly popular moderator at /r/ama. She didn't. Alexis Ohanian did: https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/07/13/details-emerge-abo... She actually did very few of the things the Reddit witchhunt accused her of. The whole Pao affair was just another dark period that showed how insane online communities can really be.
Pao's appointment at Reddit always struck me as odd. Was she really the best person they could find?
For a fairly interesting summary of KP's replies / defense, see this article [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pao_v._Kleiner_Perkins
This bit is interesting: > The defense also argued that Pao was paid more than most of her male colleagues. While salaries had previously been redacted from legal documents, the trial revealed that Pao's salary after bonuses eventually reached a peak of $560,000. It would be interested to know the salaries of people who had the exactly same position before and after her. If the salaries are at the same level, it's di…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's clear that the other side of the story is a concept that applies chiefly to controversial stories. And this story is extremely controverial. No wonder people rightfully remind there's another side.
Person sues powerful firm for rightful reasons → powerful firm hires people to stir the mud → mud-stirrers create controversy → story now has "two sides" → balance fallacy causes powerful firm to come out on top in the public eye. I think it's also important to remember this pattern. It's been coming up a lot in recent years.
Not according to the judge.
You may say they were rightful, and many people are discussing it.
But at the same time you have to understand that a person trained and appointed to determine if the reasons are rightful, said they are not.
That's were the story started to have two sides.
It's easy to get hung up on the particulars of Pao's story and get sidetracked into defending or judging her, but I feel that is besides the point. I am more interested in the wider notion of why she wrote this article: to point out that sexism in tech is a thing, and that it shouldn't be. I'm wondering though: is this just about sexism, or is it about professionalism and maturity? Getting hit on by someone higher up…
Doctors have them, lawyers have them, civil engineers have them.
Lots of software written is at least as critical as what the above professionals do.
But software is a young field compared to all the above so I think it'll take time (or several really serious disasters...which is how the civil engineers got theirs).
Yes. But as a man you're not allowed to complain about that. Men cannot be discriminated against or harassed. /S
You mark your comment as sarcasm, but that point has been made seriously many times. There's no discrimination if you're part of the powerful majority, even if as an individual you're powerless. It's fair or it isn't, IDK, but it's no joke, that's for sure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "paid army of trolls" would definitely explain the campaign against her. She banned a number of subreddits, including /r/fatpeoplehate and revengeporn. A move that strikes pretty deep at what people consider to be an open platform where votes define everything. Subsequently she fired Victoria Taylor, an incredibly popular moderator at /r/ama. This combined with the perceived idea that threads discussing these issue…
As others have pointed out, none of this is particularly accurate. It is, however, true that a) she was a high profile woman due to her court case b) there exists a misogynistic troll army* that targets high profile women especially in tech c) all that you describe gave them ammunition. What it didn't do was make her a target, she already was. *Someone else took issue with the phrase "paid army of trolls". The existe…