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

For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 828 posts

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#701

Post by Throwsfnabf04 »

dheera wrote: post #583
ibudiallo wrote: post #140

I usually choose to believe in "the honest mistake". It happens, two people walk in, one of them is the CEO, you assume it is the one on the right. And then when you realize it is a mistake, you apologize. We are only human. But when it happens over and over and over, you can't help but feel frustrated. You realize that people natural instinct is to think you are the subordinate. One second your are on stage at Techc…

"well-meaning friends—mainly other Black entrepreneurs who faced similar challenges—suggested that Givens add a White man as a co-founder." I'm not black, but I'm also not white, and I've been suggested this numerous times as well by well-meaning people after our startup not being able to fundraise for several months but some of our white-male-founded competitors had successfully raised. One friend was even joking ab…

Yeah this is real man, but products win in the end of the day, beat them, it makes the competition harder, so what? I am in the same boat, work twice as hard, racism won't give you time, this can take decades to fix. Best of luck

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#702

Post by commandlinefan »

DagAgren wrote: post #606
avs733 wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting you choose the word 'explanation' as opposed to 'counter argument'

He also chose the word "kafkatrap", a word coined by a notorious racist.

Ironically, you're employing a fallacious debate tactic (ad-hominem attack) while incorrectly trying to label a different debate tactic fallacious.

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#703

Post by Press2forEN »

taurath wrote: post #437
Press2forEN wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Talking about racism makes white people uncomfortable. When the basic premise of the argument is that white Americans are born irredeemably flawed[1], you're unlikely to win many white supporters other than the most guilt-ridden. I suppose the tactic is to impart as much guilt as possible. But that doesn't make the argument a good one. [1] https://twitter.com/DisrnNews/status/1266857347567190016

I think just about all white people would do well to look around the neighborhood that they grew up in and think about the politics of how it got to be that way. I went to a high school of 1400, and in 4 years there were all of 3 black kids. Turns out this is because no black family was allowed by any bank to get a loan for a mortgage in the area until 1974 . White blindness to their privilege is a huge impediment to…

You identified a legitimate issue that was corrected in your area in 1974. That's good. However that does not impose decades or centuries of penance on an entire race of people, the vast majority of which had nothing to do with it.

To do so is scapegoating and white Americans have every right to resist it.

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#704

Post by undefined1 »

taurath wrote: post #416
Reedx wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your skepticism is well warranted. Unfalsifiable theory, dogma you can't question, purity tests, good vs evil, original sin, heresy, excommunication, self-flagellation and so on... It's a religion and Kafkatrap, but not yet widely recognized as such. Further explanation: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/intellectual-fraud-robin-d... https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/why-third-... https://www.wsj.com/…

Newdiscourses seems to be a website dedicated /entirely/ to taking down the author and the book. A sampling of their articles over the past 2 weeks: "In Defense of the Status Quo" "White Silence is NOT Violence" "A Principled Statement of Opposition to Critical Race Theory" "Eight Big Reasons Critical Race Theory is Terrible for Dealing with Racism" Further investigation shows the site owner, James Lindsay makes his…

Casting those who question dogma as the other (conservative or "alt-right", commonly) is an effective silencing and compliance technique. "You're not one of us if you don't stay in lockstep" has a real chilling effect and is doing serious damage to the left. Obama warned about this too, but unfortunately wasn't well heeded: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaHLd8de6nM

It's also intellectually dishonest. Most (all?) of the cited authors are liberals. James Lindsay, liberal professor. John McWhorter, liberal professor. I'm pretty sure Jon Haidt and Paul G are liberal-minded. For random commenters on HN, you don't know what their leaning is nor does it automatically mean disqualification.

And it's worth noting that John McWhorter specializes in linguistics and has written books on language and race relations. He noticed the religious aspect of this years ago. Here he is on CNN back in 2015 making the point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGJbrLs_8_0

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#705

Post by eyelidlessness »

jlawson wrote: post #463
eyelidlessness wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow you proposed a "double meaning" of racism and missed the actual meaning that's being addressed by our society. Racism isn't about personal prejudice, although it's certainly a participation trophy for them. Racism is not about who is burning crosses, or about who is born into privilege. Racism is a system , a set of rules, rites, privileges and laws that puts 100% of POC at a disadvantage, and 100% of white p…

>Racism is a system, a set of rules, rites, privileges and laws that puts 100% of POC at a disadvantage, and 100% of white people at an advantage, regardless of the rest of their social status. Can you give any specific examples of these rules and laws? I assume you mean rules and laws that are actually written down. I'm interested because while it's easy to find rules and laws that are explicitly 100% to the advanta…

> Can you give any specific examples of these rules and laws? I assume you mean rules and laws that are actually written down.

The 13th Amendment is a pretty big one, worth starting there.

> I'm interested because while it's easy to find rules and laws that are explicitly 100% to the advantage of non-whites over whites (affirmative action, Gladue in Canada, etc), I've not been able to find any that work the other way around.

If your criteria is that it must be "explicit", you're dismissing the entire concept without considering it. These laws and rules take advantage of context and produce predictable outcomes without needing to put on a white robe and state their intent.

> (Also worth noting "more likely to end up dead for no reason at all" isn't actually true[0]; there's no statistical evidence that cops kill blacks more than whites in comparable situations.)

> [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evi....

I can't get past the paywall, but it is actually true. What I can see above the paywall fold doesn't even represent your claim. And even if it did, "in comparable situations" isn't the criteria. Cops can (hypothetically) behave equally violently in all situations, and still be more likely to kill black people because they police black people and communities more.

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#706

Post by textgel »

DagAgren wrote: post #697
textgel wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And at last you've taken my advice > Using a kafkatrap against an opponent you can't beat in debate when they have just pointed out the tactic is probably ill advised; perhaps try something else; Ad hominem or motte and bailey for example. Allow my to quote from one your trusted sources: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/... > Ad hominem: This is an attack on the character of a person rather…

Feel free to provide me wrong by showing a non-libertarian source that takes this term seriously.

Appeal to authority (points for variety at least) is a logical fallacy that I literally pointed out earlier.

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#707

Post by TeaDrunk »

pdonis wrote: post #690
TeaDrunk wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguably, no we haven’t been doing that for more than half a century now. There was a backlash after the initial push in the 1970s that clawed back a lot of gains and several places (Eg New York City) are still highly segregated in its schooling (and gotten more segregated over time).

> There was a backlash after the initial push in the 1970s That doesn't mean we haven't been trying to fix racism for more than half a century. It just means the "fix" hasn't been working.

Fixing racism hasn’t garnered significant traction with significant capital support for a while. Additionally, I would argue that attempting a 50 fix for systems that are multiple centuries old (and have had that much time to work their way into every part of society) seems short sighted.

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#708

Post by cheez »

1123581321 wrote: post #443
cheez wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a friend who runs a team and hires according to these lines: - Management: Europeans - Coding: Russians - QA: Indians He will not consider that he might be wrong here.

There is a somewhat popular, entirely legal version of that created by western companies hiring outsourcing companies for different functions.

haha you're 100% right.

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#709

Post by darkerside »

humanrebar wrote: post #635
darkerside wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those places is a literal requirement for sustenance, but you do need to work somewhere, and for most people, that somewhere is anywhere that will take you.

Pedantically you are mostly correct. Practically I'm not convinced your distinction is useful.

Practically speaking, having freedom of choice is a big deal. And we are free to choose our churches, whether to engage in our PTA, etc.

We're also free to find new jobs if we don't like them, but it sure is harder than those other choices.

Re: For black CEOs in Silicon Valley, humiliation is a part of doing business

#710

Post by swat535 »

tbyehl wrote: post #458
ibudiallo wrote: post #140

I usually choose to believe in "the honest mistake". It happens, two people walk in, one of them is the CEO, you assume it is the one on the right. And then when you realize it is a mistake, you apologize. We are only human. But when it happens over and over and over, you can't help but feel frustrated. You realize that people natural instinct is to think you are the subordinate. One second your are on stage at Techc…

> You wouldn't believe how lonely it is. In my team of 150 people, we were two black people. One of the strangest realizations I've had in my adult life is that when Silicon Valley people talk about improving workplace diversity, they don't mean black people. There are virtually no black people in Silicon Valley. Two on your team of 150 under-represents the population but not nearly as much as in places with a larger…

They also don't mean more Middle Easterners (Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt,..) or Asians or Muslims or Sikhs or Natives, more diversity basically means more white women.

I think it's a noble cause but unfortunately the biases are deeply rooted in SV culture.

Post reply on HN