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

An upcoming story about Coinbase

blog.coinbase.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 320 posts

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#171

Post by AnimalMuppet »

oh_sigh wrote: post #162
doublekill wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I learned from diversity training is that you need to accept the fact that society is systematically racist, and as a white person you benefit from this. So all whites are profiting from racism already. They have to come to terms with this, acknowledge the role that their ancestors played in furthering or creating racial inequality, and do everything in their privileged power to right this wrong: hire more black…

I'm a white american, and my ancestors had nothing to do with american slavery and were in fact slaves themselves in the ukraine.

I'm a white American, and at least one of my ancestors died to end slavery. My father was named for him (middle name).

Now, it's also true to some degree that I benefit from society in a way that blacks don't (at least not to the same degree). And the right thing to do is to work for a world where blacks share in the benefits of society to the same degree that I do. (Where they don't have to be any more careful in a traffic stop than I do, for example.) But "acknowledging the role that my ancestors played"? I do, with pride.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#172

Post by drewbug01 »

ericpauley wrote: post #140
drewbug01 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you’ve said and what I’ve said are not in conflict. Coinbase clearly states that they believe there to be three complaints and that they’re generally in the clear. My point about reading between the lines is that the explicit, specific repetition of the claim and the way they’re saying it implies that the NYT is going to allege there were more complaints. So then: what of the missing complaints? What Coinbase is…

It seems plausible to me that The Times could use very similar language to "a number of people," and giving 3 examples while implying that the number is far more.

That’s a fair point, and it’s definitely possible. We shall see, sometime before Sunday!

That implies a high level of intentional deception on the part of the NYT, though. It has certainly happened, of course; and the opinion columns are full of it (like they are at all papers).

I don’t believe that the NYT generally engages in intentional deception, however - so I’m inclined to believe that they aren’t intending on it now.

But as you said, it is possible. And a healthy skepticism of the papers is not bad.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#173

Post by muglug »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #145
drewbug01 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> race-baiting propaganda I think it’s reasonable to debate the quality of the NYT (and I have serious issues with a lot of what they publish - and dear lord, don’t get me started on how I feel about their opinion columnists). But I do think that calling the NYT “race-baiting propaganda” is a gross mischaracterization of what they do.

It's a bit melodramatic to characterize their primary output as race-baiting propaganda However I think it's interesting to compare and contrast how they handled Andrew Sullivan's racist comments from 26 years ago, Sarah Jeong's racist comments from 5-8 years ago, and Quinn Norton's use of slurs around 8 years ago.

I think context is quite important.

Andrew Sullivan is notorious for believing in some version of The Bell Curve theory — that differences in academic achievement can be at least partly explained by measurable differences in average intelligence between different races. He promoted that view in his role as editor of a major news magazine in the early 90s.

That sets him apart from Quinn Norton, who nevertheless used some racial slurs on early internet message boards. I think her article discussing her friendship with a neo-Nazi was more damaging, though. FWIW I think The Times overreacted there.

Sarah Jeong made some bad taste jokes at white people’s expense while being harassed by actual racist trolls. Only the truly cynical would call those tweets racist, when viewed in context.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#174

Post by nilkn »

Barrin92 wrote: post #149
nilkn wrote: post #59

I have to wonder to what extent this is just punishment from the establishment for Coinbase’s recent rejection of political activism in the workplace. Of course we will need to see the article from the NYT first before drawing any conclusions, but the timing is pretty suspicious; this implies that the NYT more or less launched this project immediately after that announcement went out.

Probably because the announcement made people question if the change in policy was prompted by exactly something like this brewing internally. That's kind of how investigative journalism works. It's like Google changing their policy to never mention the words 'marketshare' in internal documentation and journalists going out and investigating Google's antitrust situtation and writing about it. That's not a bad thing,…

Completely fair point.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#175

Post by oh_sigh »

peteretep wrote: post #26

> We are committed to maintaining an environment that is safe, supportive and welcoming to employees of all backgrounds I don’t think this is compatible with dismissing the struggle for human dignity in America as “politics”

Of course, the only correct definition of human dignity is your definition.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#176

Post by hda2 »

csense wrote: post #66
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #10

It's really really hard to prove your not racist. If anyone has any clue as how to do so, please share. They could have waited until the story was published I guess to share this statement, but publishing it preemptively makes sense too I believe (it's an always open entity that is incredibly easy to switch away from). But truly, when you get accused of racism, what can you even do?

That's the beauty of it. Denying the charge or defending yourself simply digs you deeper into the hole. What you're supposed to do is admit you're a racist, fall down on your knees, abjectly beg forgiveness of your accusers, and list all the new things you'll be doing to stop being racist. Then your accusers have the power to forgive you. But you really, truly have to go all the way in submitting to their demands. An…

I'm glad to see this position growing in popularity. You should never apologise for baseless accusations. Doing so would just invite more accusations.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#177

Post by throwlastone »

nullc wrote: post #169
throwlastone wrote: post #36

Lies are countered with facts, not generic dismissals. The post is textbook PR pointing to some unspecified inaccuracy which is supposed to cast doubt on the substance of the story. Then self-investigation and self-exoneration. Every company trying to cover up wrong doing writes the same thing.

Their response contains specific facts, such as information on the number of and their handling of reported complaints. That isn't much-- I agree-- but I doubt that they know enough about the time's intended allegations to respond more specifically. And if they did respond too specifically presumably the times would shift their allegations to different specifics in any case, making a general response the only durable…

Those "facts" are about as relevant to dispelling the allegations as is the "fact" that a table has four legs. The facts are there to support an argument. The fact that only 3 people filed a formal complain isn't strong support of the argument that there wasn't more widespread discrimination, particularly when set against the specific statements of multiple alleged victims that will be published in the story.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#178

Post by ve55 »

jolux wrote: post #101
ve55 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there may be a mis-understanding; what I mean is that in the very essence of reporting a scoop, they have already chosen to report that event above other events. So the reporting about the given scoop may be 100% fair and honest, but there is still, in the bigger picture, a large statistical bias, since only some types of things qualify as 'worthy of reporting' and get converted to scoops to begin with. e.g.…

Sure, but I for one was not talking about this story as a marker of the general prevalence of racism, and whether or not it's a representative sample of such. I read you as impugning the integrity and consistency of individual stories in isolation, which is legitimate as well, it just requires more evidence than you presented.

Yeah apologies if it seemed like it went too far, I definitely don't intend to claim anything about the story since it hasn't come out (and even when it does, I know little of the matter), thanks for the addition.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#179

Post by muglug »

nullc wrote: post #168
muglug wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What untrue statements on the topic of race has NYTimes’ news section published recently?

That would be a great question to direct to jimmygrapes, rather than the truth to power old saw. My gell mann amnesia for the NYT has been permanently shattered through personal experience, so I endeavour to avoid reading anything they publish.

I’m sorry that has happened to you. Journalists are fallible, like all of us. But in the aggregate I believe the Times is a force for good in the world, and helps illuminate a good many things that people in power would rather be kept murky.

Re: An upcoming story about Coinbase

#180

Post by hda2 »

creata wrote: post #112
nullc wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The New York times is not a professional news org. They do not, in fact, fact check, get statements, or give their subjects a chance to respond, at least not consistently. When Nathaniel Popper wrote a hit piece substantially targeting me personally he (and NYT's fact checkers-- if they exist/were-involved at all) diligently avoided having any communication with anyone who could possibly contradict his narrative, inc…

The New York Times is one of the most respected news organizations in the world, so if they're not a "professional news org", then who is? Also, do you elaborate on your struggle with the NYT elsewhere? I'm interested, but you haven't given us much information at all.

> The New York Times is one of the most respected news organizations in the world

Not anymore. The web advertising industry strongly effected the quality of their work. Now they're just another slightly larger news organization with a spotty track record.

Post reply on HN