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

Interview with Susan Fowler

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 130 posts

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#71

Post by linkregister »

abalone wrote: post #63
fpoijasw wrote: post #56

Hey engineer at Uber here. I'm a male engineer started working at Uber two years ago. I'm seeing a lot of comments here that is discrediting Susan Fowler's accomplishments in taking TK down, and I would like to correct the notion that the culture/TK himself/Waymo is what brought TK down. To preface I've work both at Google as an engineer, and frankly speaking the engineering culture at Uber didn't differ all that muc…

> The Waymo lawsuit only happened when it did and only effective as it was because of the chaos Susan Fowler initiated. This seems a bit much. Why on earth would Google wait to sue? Their case was not at all dependent on internal turmoil at Uber. Fowler deserves a lot of credit but there was significant chaos pre-blog-post (#deleteuber) and after (Greyball). Uber was having a new crisis every other week it seemed, al…

I think that Susan Fowler is the single most influential individual in Uber's history, even more so than Travis Kalanick.

1. #deleteuber was a flash in the pan. It fizzled because it was based on a falsehood, that Uber had broken an airport strike by cancelling surge. Uber cancels surge for all notable events. Lyft somehow avoided judgement, despite also failing to honor the strike. The impetus behind the campaign was a combination of that strike action and Kalanick's presence on President Trump's ill-fated executive council.

2. Greyball is a multi-million dollar suit, it will likely be settled for less. Because Uber was only foolish enough to abuse it in a couple of cities (according to news stories and law suits, who knows what legal discovery will unearth!), the scope is limited. Furthermore, the cities that ban Uber also ban Lyft.

3. Lyft's meteoric growth in 2017 can be primarily linked to the sexual harassment stories about Uber. They even based their entire advertising campaign on it, "how you get there matters," emphasizing the moral superiority of using Lyft over Uber. The ad campaign is incredibly poignant and effective. Lyft has deftly turned the fiasco to its advantage.

Susan was able to accomplish what no person had successfully done by publishing an account on her blog of what happened. Because she had not sued the company for damages, she was not held to silence from a legal settlement. Any opponent claiming she was an opportunist had no evidence, because she didn't file suit nor was seeking damages.

Because of her, an entire chain of events was set off. The intense public pressure, that slammed customer growth, hampered recruitment, and impacted Uber investors' social lives (yes, that was a major factor!) was primarily from Fowler's revelation of the company's indifference to sexual harassment.

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#72

Post by [deleted] »

meddlepal wrote: post #39
6841iam wrote: post #3

While her post did send shockwaves inside Uber and the Silicon Valley at large, I think, it was Mr. Kalanick's incriminating involvement in the Waymo - Uber lawsuit that ultimately sunk Mr. Kalanick. He simply had to go.

Susan's a great mind and I have had the pleasure of chatting with her in person, but there is definitely some historical revisionism going on here. Travis created a bad Uber culture in general. He was done in not by Fowler specifically but the fruits of his failures as a leader blossoming into several parallel disasters of which Waymo was probably the major major fiasco of the bunch.

[deleted]

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#73

Post by org3432 »

I don't see why teaching that ethics comes before career isn't a priority. There's a validation that either the victim or the enablers are put into a morale delma to worry about their career over ethics. Shouldn't we be addressing that too? That there is no dilemma, it's just a regrettable mistake to do that.

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#74

Post by [deleted] »

org3432 wrote: post #73

I don't see why teaching that ethics comes before career isn't a priority. There's a validation that either the victim or the enablers are put into a morale delma to worry about their career over ethics. Shouldn't we be addressing that too? That there is no dilemma, it's just a regrettable mistake to do that.

[deleted]

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#75

Post by linkregister »

mirimir wrote: post #68
linkregister wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not skeptical about her physics achievements, so I don't agree with your opinion. I don't understand why this post was flagged. Down votes are for communicating "I don't like this post." Flagging is for violation of community guidelines, or just plain abusive comments. To respond to your claim, I'd like to point to you her blog post on the subject. She does a good job of explaining how she went from zero to being…

It's my understanding that down votes are for posts that are off-topic, or don't contribute to the discussion. And flagging, as you say, is for violating community guidelines. But sadly enough, people do use down votes for posts that they don't like, and flagging for posts that they really don't like. So it goes.

I used to share your opinion about down votes, until I read in the HN guidelines that there was no explanation for what down votes really were for, while flagging was explicitly defined.

It seems the HN cultural practice is to down vote posts people don't like or just disagree with. I would rather people reply, but I can't do anything except for practice what I believe is right: I'll down vote a post that doesn't contribute to the discussion, as you do.

Since "doesn't contribute to the discussion" is vague and subjective, I can't claim particularly high moral ground.

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#76

Post by conradfr »

combatentropy wrote: post #33
baron816 wrote: post #16

> “Did you read that interview with the C.E.O., Travis, where he talked about how Uber helps him get girls? He’s a misogynist. I could never use his product.” I know nothing of the interview he’s referring to here, but how is it misogynistic to use your company to get girls? Was he picking up Uber employees or potential hires?

It's the difference between loving someone and using them.

Yes that's all there is to human interactions, either love or objectification.

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#77

Post by smnscu »

linkregister wrote: post #61
fizixer wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel for what happened to her at Uber but, no offense, her description of her physics achievements appeared to be borderline bullshit (e.g., things like studying for quantum field theory exams a year and half after getting introduced to college level physics and math for the first time, after picking philosophy as a major originally. And then proceeding to blog about how everyone can do this because she can).

I'm not skeptical about her physics achievements, so I don't agree with your opinion. I don't understand why this post was flagged. Down votes are for communicating "I don't like this post." Flagging is for violation of community guidelines, or just plain abusive comments. To respond to your claim, I'd like to point to you her blog post on the subject. She does a good job of explaining how she went from zero to being…

I generally am against rallying against people with more "out there" opinions, like in this case, as I think it's toxic to establishing common grounds for a healthy discussion with people we fundamentally disagree with. Even so, I'm myself guilty of this knee-jerk reaction to downvote/flag stuff I disagree with. I believe this is how you get to the incredible tribalism-fueled divide between "the left" and "the right" in the US right now, and what pushes moderates into supporting people like Trump (not that dissimilar to how many dictators got to power in the past).

That being said, in this particular case I have to wonder, what the fuck is the relevance of her physics credentials in this story? For one, she worked as a SRE and got hired based on her capability to do the job (whether you think interviews are a good gauge of job performance or not should be irrelevant), but more importantly does her being a good performer or not have __anything__ to do with how much she should be valued as a human being? Is blatant sexism and trampling someone's fundamental rights OK if said someone is low on the social hierarchy or meritocracy? The mere way this argument seems to be formed is fundamentally strange to me.

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#78

Post by EvanKelly »

philsnow wrote: post #13

Susan Fowler's narrative is sort of the "dual" of the myth of the "little dutch boy" who stuck his finger in a dyke, preventing disaster through a very small act. [0] http://www.pantheon.org/articles/l/little_dutch_boy.html

I'm glad the website you linked credited that "myth" correctly. I was surprised when I moved to the Netherlands that no one had ever heard of this child with his finger in the dyke to save the town.

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#79

Post by chinathrow »

fpoijasw wrote: post #56

Hey engineer at Uber here. I'm a male engineer started working at Uber two years ago. I'm seeing a lot of comments here that is discrediting Susan Fowler's accomplishments in taking TK down, and I would like to correct the notion that the culture/TK himself/Waymo is what brought TK down. To preface I've work both at Google as an engineer, and frankly speaking the engineering culture at Uber didn't differ all that muc…

> Ubers a great place to work now.

Any troubles in recruiting since then?

Re: Interview with Susan Fowler

#80

Post by [deleted] »

mirimir wrote: post #68
linkregister wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not skeptical about her physics achievements, so I don't agree with your opinion. I don't understand why this post was flagged. Down votes are for communicating "I don't like this post." Flagging is for violation of community guidelines, or just plain abusive comments. To respond to your claim, I'd like to point to you her blog post on the subject. She does a good job of explaining how she went from zero to being…

It's my understanding that down votes are for posts that are off-topic, or don't contribute to the discussion. And flagging, as you say, is for violating community guidelines. But sadly enough, people do use down votes for posts that they don't like, and flagging for posts that they really don't like. So it goes.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN