A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company • Hacker News Board

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#281

Post by throwaway894345 » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:38 PM UTC

yokaze wrote: post #188

redm wrote: post #82

I feel like this is the start of a rising tide. I think Brian's stance is great, companies have missions, they should focus on those missions. Everything has become so political that your work, which occupies a large portion of your life, should not be divisive.

I see it the other way around. (Almost) everything is political. The mission of the company is not disjoint from the society it is embedded in. Things have become divisive by being able to ignore and blend out the opposing views. By not talking and listening to one another. This is just one more step in that direction. Funnily enough, I think it has been extrapolated by Neal Stephenson in Diamond Age. We will end up…

The mission of the company isn’t completely disjoint from the broader political context, but relevance isn’t a binary proposition. If Google’s mission is to make the world’s information more accessible, and it stopped everything and put all of its efforts toward (for example) minimizing unjust police killings, how much closer to its mission would it be than if it focused on making search better (even if we assume all Google employees have exactly the same idea about how to achieve it)? I would argue that investing in search is an astronomically better investment with respect to Google’s mission. Never mind how unproductive that effort would certainly be, considering how divisive this topic has become (to be clear, the division is about whether or not unjust police killings are strongly racially biased, not whether or not unjust police killings are ideal).

I agree that our divisiveness is caused by an unwillingness to listen to one another, but I don’t think avoiding discussion in the workplace is making us less willing to listen. People have lots of opportunities to listen to opposing views outside of the workplace, and yet many positively pride themselves on ignoring dissenting opinions—ostracizing one’s family for wrongthink is a veritable badge of honor in certain ideological communities. I don’t see how bringing that divisiveness into the workplace is going to soften those people.

If someone is deeply committed to ignorance and divisiveness, allowing them to proselytize at work doesn’t seem fruitful (everyone who is not committed to ignorance has likely already considered their views) and is very likely going to be harmful. On the other hand, there is a chance that by ignoring politics at work, people might have a chance to build relationships with reasonable people (who they otherwise would have written off or persecuted for heresy) which might have a deradicalizing effect (if you look up to someone who is charitable, honest, and open minded, you are probably more likely to emulate those qualities yourself).

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#282

Post by knorker » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:39 PM UTC

yokaze wrote: post #188

redm wrote: post #82

I feel like this is the start of a rising tide. I think Brian's stance is great, companies have missions, they should focus on those missions. Everything has become so political that your work, which occupies a large portion of your life, should not be divisive.

I see it the other way around. (Almost) everything is political. The mission of the company is not disjoint from the society it is embedded in. Things have become divisive by being able to ignore and blend out the opposing views. By not talking and listening to one another. This is just one more step in that direction. Funnily enough, I think it has been extrapolated by Neal Stephenson in Diamond Age. We will end up…

> (Almost) everything is political.

Only in a world where words have no meaning.

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#283

Post by bluntfang » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:40 PM UTC

dingaling wrote: post #231

ketzo wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...your work, which occupies a large portion of your life, should not be divisive. I get that desire, I really do, but I think it's so important to recognize that your work is not apolitical. It doesn't matter what you're building. What you build does not exist in a vacuum, and the decisions you make around politics at work are themselves political decisions.

> work are themselves political decisions But those political decisions are ones relevant to the mission of the company. Coinbase probably shouldn't be involved in politics around police reform, fracking, climate change or the Second Amendment because they are orthogonal to its mission. Insert other topics as you see fit. And hence its employees should leave their opinions of such matters at the door. Coinbase should…

>Coinbase probably shouldn't be involved in politics around police reform, fracking, climate change or the Second Amendment because they are orthogonal to its mission.

It's impossible to not involve yourself in politics that effect your employee's everyday lives.

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#284

Post by knaq » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:40 PM UTC

mtalantikite wrote: post #235

thedevil wrote: post #11

One thought: If you see a resume with Coinbase until October 2020, that's probably someone who prefers political activism in the workplace. That might be seen in a positive or negative light, depending on your stance. I personally am afraid to associate myself too publicly with a political stance, lest I be wrong and/or the environment changes.

“I personally am afraid to associate myself too publicly with a political stance, lest I be wrong and/or the environment changes.” I can understand this fear, but generally if you choose a stance based on compassion for all beings you’ll be in the right in the long run. This particular issue was sparked by Coinbase not taking a stance on Black Lives Matter, which they are wrong about. Standing for dismantling racism…

Standing for dismantling racism might always be correct, but burning down predominately black neighborhoods doesn't seem to relate to that in a positive way. You can't dismantle racism by causing devastation in the name of black people.

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#285

Post by Spivak » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:41 PM UTC

cltby wrote: post #108

Spivak wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stance "I am now and forever apolitical regardless of the state of the world or how political decisions affect me or others" is true no politics. The stance "I am avoiding politics because there's nothing worth my time to be an activist about but I would if that changed and political decisions started seriously affecting me, my family, or my friends" is "the status quo is fine." The stance "I'm avoiding politics…

There are lots of reasons, good and bad, to avoid politics. But to claim that doing so is inherently political... isn't saying anything. To the extent it's true, it's trivially so. And to the extent it's non-trivial, it's completely false.

The reason that you can't require people to vote in the US is because the act of not voting is considered protected political speech. Why is not participating in politics any different?

Hell, refusing to engage with certain types of politics isn't just political, it's an act of protest!

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#286

Post by slow_donkey » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:41 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #243

slow_donkey wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you be obtaining the equivalent amount of options at the next job? Let's say your vesting schedule is 4 years w/ 1 year cliff, it's only necessary to stay 1 year. Thereafter you're not 'losing' options by leaving.

You're forgetting the options gain value as the company grows (due to your own hard work which is the whole point!) You're awarded $100k but then it grows to $200k by the time you start cashing it in. When you switch company you get $100k again, not the $200k you threw away.

That's a fair point, we'd have to compare projected growth vs. expected salary of new job. Certainly the benefit of working at large tech companies or rocketships.

My experience with smaller startups, was that it's impossible to determine if the options would be worth $0 or $$$.

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#287

Post by throwaway894345 » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:42 PM UTC

zorpner wrote: post #280

yeetawayhn wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If everything is political, then nothing is.

Could you clarify what you mean by this?

If you define “political” in such a way that nothing can be “apolitical” then the word “political” completely loses its meaning. The whole point of any adjective is to distinguish between things. It’s a tautology.

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#288

Post by chrisseaton » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:42 PM UTC

slow_donkey wrote: post #286

chrisseaton wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're forgetting the options gain value as the company grows (due to your own hard work which is the whole point!) You're awarded $100k but then it grows to $200k by the time you start cashing it in. When you switch company you get $100k again, not the $200k you threw away.

That's a fair point, we'd have to compare projected growth vs. expected salary of new job. Certainly the benefit of working at large tech companies or rocketships. My experience with smaller startups, was that it's impossible to determine if the options would be worth $0 or $$$.

Ah right - I'm used to public companies where stock options are cold hard cash as soon as they vest.

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#289

Post by dmurray » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:43 PM UTC

RangerScience wrote: post #274

dmurray wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asking specific people about their political views during the hiring process (even general questions like "do you think tech workers should be politically active in the workplace?") is dangerous even if not necessarily illegal. Making hiring decisions based on the applicant's experience and employment history is pretty much best practice.

I mean - If it's a problem that they're political or apolitical, then it's already a part of your hiring process. Whether you talk to them (or not) about it doesn't change that - just means you're hiding that part of the process or including them in it.

> If it's a problem that they're political or apolitical, then it's already a part of your hiring process.

Definitely not. Unconscious bias is a huge issue in interviewing. Blinding your interviewers to political orientation, or any other factor, is far more effective than telling them just to ignore it.

Re: A follow up to Coinbase being a mission focused company

#290

Post by djsumdog » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 8:44 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #175

djsumdog wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My longest stay at one job as been 2.5 years. By changing jobs, I get a lot more experience in a lot of different things. I've worked in five different markets: https://battlepenguin.com/tech/tech-culture-shock-from-ameri... I know people who've been at the same job for 6~7 years and they are totally getting paid way under market. A company might give you a 2~3% cost of living increase, or a $5k promotion every few y…

> but switching jobs let's you ask for $10k or more Right... but aren't the options you're throwing away worth 10x that? How can it possibly be worth it?

I've never worked at a place that gave me stock options.