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

761–770 of 828 posts

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

#761

Post by triceratops »

Fellshard wrote: post #723
cmdshiftf4 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It doesn't literally mean "shut down the police department and courts". This doublespeak, which reminds me of the whole "Kill All Men" issue, which itself was quickly followed by a rush to say "Noo you stupid man, we don't mean kill all men, just some men", makes my skin crawl. Let's take a quick look at the dictionary : Defund: verb prevent from continuing to receive funds. If you are failing to use the language co…

The Motte-and-Bailey is the ploy of either an intentional deceiver, or a parroting crony. Neither shows sign of arguing in good faith or reason.

Given that this whole thread started with a strawman ("dismantling of police and courts ..., civil rule of law society), a motte-and-bailey seems appropriate. Thanks for introducing me to that term btw, TIL. It's a nice one.

The reply by cmdshiftf4 was an example of tone policing - criticizing the words and attacking a simple slogan, instead of addressing the meat of the issue. You yourself have engaged in an ad hominem argument by calling me (indirectly) "an intentional deceiver" or "a parroting crony", rather than talk about the issue.

(See, I, too, know the names of some logical fallacies. I also like dropping them into online debates to show that I alone have developed my opinions using solely logic, reason, and facts, whereas everyone else is biased and relies on emotion and personal history. :-P)

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

#762

Post by bmn__ »

P-ala-din wrote: post #648
bmn__ wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The very fact they find it necessary to use a different word to describe themselves, "expats", than what they call foreigners who live in their countries, "immigrants", shows that they do not at all consider themselves to be in any way similar. I was taught these are two words for different concepts. An immigrant expects to take permanent residence in a foreign country, an expatriate – temporarily. The former doing…

> I do not have any sympathy for immigrants refusing to integrate? what do you mean by integrate? are immigrants allowed to speak their native tongue, dress differently or act differently? does Integration to you mean the complete erasure of their past identities? because that what the German in the pub seems to think.

> what do you mean by integrate? […] what the German in the pub seems to think

Don't you have sociology classes or political education in school? I just looked up the word to make sure and it turns out its meaning is almost the same to what I remembered, and it certainly is not a complete erasure as you allude to.

Nice straw man, though. Man, must it be satisfying to topple it over!

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

#763

Post by eythian »

buran77 wrote: post #688
eythian wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was addressing the original point which was "Notice how only white people ever choose to consider themselves to be "expats"", which in my experience is not true. > people will most likely first find out where you're from (by asking, or accent, etc.) and that will determine their first and longest lasting opinion. Perhaps. Where I live there are a lot of Turkish immigrants, for example (mostly they/their parents mov…

> there are a lot of Turkish immigrants This exemplifies my point perfectly. Even though you go on to write that some were born in the country, they are still "Turkish immigrants" not "expats" or [that country's] citizens. Some may be considered expats by you now but walking down the street I can assure you people see "immigrants". Say "British immigrants", or "US immigrants", or "German immigrants" and see how that…

> This exemplifies my point perfectly. Even though you go on to write that some were born in the country, they are still "Turkish immigrants" not "expats" or [that country's] citizens. Some may be considered expats by you now but walking down the street I can assure you people see "immigrants".

Yes, they're definitely not expats by the definition I gave earlier - those who move for work. Considering second+ generation residents as immigrants was really a mis-edit on my part, though they are seen by "natives" here as immigrants, often.

But you're kinda focussing on a point I wasn't making - that (in my experience, where I am), it's not only white people who self-identify as expats. Russians, Bangladeshis, Kenyans, USians, etc. are all generally expats if they moved for work.

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

#764

Post by eythian »

joshuaissac wrote: post #692
buran77 wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone self-identifies as an expat Of course they do. The question is how does everyone around you see you. It does make a bit of a difference if the job lead to switching countries (mostly "expat"), or switching country lead to getting a job (mostly "immigrant"). But this detail is buried pretty deep, people will most likely first find out where you're from (by asking, or accent, etc.) and that will determine th…

> It does make a bit of a difference if the job lead to switching countries (mostly "expat"), or switching country lead to getting a job (mostly "immigrant"). Does this distinction actually exist in how people use the words "expat" and "immigrant"? A lot of the time, immigrants will have accepted their job offers already before entering the country, and if they did not switch countries, they would have the same kind…

> Does this distinction actually exist in how people use the words "expat" and "immigrant"? A lot of the time, immigrants will have accepted their job offers already before entering the country, and if they did not switch countries, they would have the same kind of job in their home country anyway (e.g. immigrant nurses recruited by the NHS).

Right, but the point is people who are generally called expats get a job offer in another country, and move because of that job.

People who are generally called immigrants want to move, and so try to get a job in another country (or maybe don't, depends on the relationship between the two countries and the status of the person.)

The expat causality is (typically) "job -> move", the immigrant causality is (typically) "want to move -> job".

The actual ordering of when the move happens and when the job is got aren't that relevant.

Also notable that there are plenty of exceptions, grey areas, regional differences, etc. involved. Which is why I don't like sweeping statements like the one I was originally replying to, because they're invariably wrong in some situation.

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

#765

Post by eythian »

newen wrote: post #714
joshuaissac wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It does make a bit of a difference if the job lead to switching countries (mostly "expat"), or switching country lead to getting a job (mostly "immigrant"). Does this distinction actually exist in how people use the words "expat" and "immigrant"? A lot of the time, immigrants will have accepted their job offers already before entering the country, and if they did not switch countries, they would have the same kind…

Yeah, you don't get a tourist visa and then get a job in a country. That's illegal in almost all countries. Usually, you get a job, get a work visa sponsored by the company, and then eventually get permanent residence, then citizenship.

It's not that uncommon to get a tourist visa to scope out a country, apply for a fixed term working visa to get a job, and then where possible transition that into residency and onwards. It's definitely not an easy path, but I know people who have done it.

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

#766

Post by taurath »

undefined1 wrote: post #704
taurath wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I don’t necessarily think that everything needs to be put on a left to right scale. But you’re also ascribing things to me that I haven’t said.

Conservative just means you want things to stay the same or have things to back to how they were when you decided it was good enough to “conserve it”. In this case the fight is about frustration over lack of progress and lack of acknowledgement that police violence and systemic discrimination both very much exist and are actively harming black people. Most of the working world just sees it through a tiny keyhole in that there’s maybe 1 or 2 black software developers in a company of 1000. We need to get better as stewards of society and the companies we work in.

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

#767

Post by taurath »

blub wrote: post #585
taurath wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not even sure what you're saying here. The US literally imported slaves against their will from Africa and had slavery endowed into the constitution via the 3/5ths compromise. Then for literally 4 centuries they were beaten and oppressed and denied rights - literally jim crow laws were taken down only decades ago. Its literally just talking about the US here. There's no projection elsewhere - this isn't just "min…

You said "most of it is showing white people that all the things that we've tried over the past 10, 20 years are clearly not working. There's little improvement in inclusiveness in traditional white/male dominated cultures, such as the engineering teams at FAANGs for instance." The US is an immigration society where many white people from countries which weren't involved in US slavery and now they're all painted with…

We as Americans live in a society were responsible for. We as managers, owners and employees are responsible for the culture of the companies we own.

A Russian who moved here in 1998 certainly didn’t have anything to do with racism. But he is participating in a society that claims to be a just one, in which he will get preferential treatment over a Black person just because the color of his skin. Is that his fault? No. Is it his moral responsibility as a participant in society to help create a more just society? Yes.

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

#768

Post by [deleted] »

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #716
buran77 wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general people who never suffered from this kind of profiling have a hard time understanding what's the problem. "I just called him a rapper". No, you just profiled someone who is sick and tired of being profiled. So the examples meant to convey the message better have to be a bit exaggerated. Imagine calling every white, bald guy "a neo-nazi". A reasonable person who just didn't get the problem suddenly finds the…

> In general people who never suffered from this kind of profiling have a hard time understanding what's the problem I'm assuming you're directing this towards me since you mentioned my example. I am myself a minority. Do you realize that you just racially profiled me based on my opinion?

[deleted]

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

#769

Post by buran77 »

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #716
buran77 wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general people who never suffered from this kind of profiling have a hard time understanding what's the problem. "I just called him a rapper". No, you just profiled someone who is sick and tired of being profiled. So the examples meant to convey the message better have to be a bit exaggerated. Imagine calling every white, bald guy "a neo-nazi". A reasonable person who just didn't get the problem suddenly finds the…

> In general people who never suffered from this kind of profiling have a hard time understanding what's the problem I'm assuming you're directing this towards me since you mentioned my example. I am myself a minority. Do you realize that you just racially profiled me based on my opinion?

> you just racially profiled me based on my opinion

This argument makes no sense. I based my words on your statement not your person and it wasn't even addressed to you. I picked up your argument and from personal experience explained why those people that you described see it like that. Making a very wobbly assumption based on criteria that puts one in a protected group is profiling and it gets old when you keep hearing it again and again. Moreover the same reasoning can lead to far more offensive conclusions then calling someone a rapper.

I never mentioned your race and it would make no difference to the argument: a black person in Africa will have just as little experience being profiled as a white person in the US. My "prejudice" wasn't towards you but towards the people who think making such assumptions is normal. Pulling this absurd "you racially profiled me based on my opinion" card now suggests to me that minority or not perhaps you also do not understand the real issue.

I would have thought that people who suffered this kind of profiling understand why it's a problem and actively steer away from doing it or even condoning it without the need for further explanation. And I get it that some are doing it without realizing it's a problem. I'm not assuming bad faith, just lack of understanding.

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

#770

Post by the_omegist »

evrydayhustling wrote: post #623
read_if_gay_ wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a huge part of the problem isn't it? I think this is the problem. Say a black guy with gold teeth, tons of tattoos and colorful dreadlocks and a middle aged white guy walk in. One of them is a rapper. Who is it? Based on experience, most people will certainly assume the black guy is. What if it turns out it’s the white guy? Are they unconsciously racist against white people or are they just following experi…

> Are they unconsciously racist or are they just following experience-based heuristics? Both! Today's discussion about racism isn't (mainly) about critiquing the motivations in peoples' deepest heart. It's about acknowledging that the outcomes of this kind of assumption can be racist, regardless of whether any harm was intended. The person who is assumed to be subordinate, or less educated, or more prone to criminali…

> Today's discussion about racism isn't (mainly) about critiquing the motivations in peoples' deepest heart. It's about acknowledging that the outcomes of this kind of assumption can be racist, regardless of whether any harm was intended.

Words have meaning. If an act wasn't done with a racist motive then it isn't racist. As the previous commenter said, it's just heuristics : they can be more or less in tune with reality. The only way to make someone change his heuristics is when reality and his map of reality become too different from one another.

> Acknowledging your potential to participate in racism doesn't mean admitting you have a cartoonish hatred. It means recognizing that it requires a proactive effort to keep assumptions from becoming self perpetuating in harmful ways.

So now people have to go against an evolutive and efficient process that enables them to not spend 1h thinking about how to behave in front of a lion or a boss ? The self-perpetuation will stop by itself when people's experience will change.

With such wishful thinking are you conscious you could then ask people to believe anything you want, regardless of reality?

Post reply on HN