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

Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 514 posts

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#181

Post by crackercrews »

yojo wrote: post #131
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #90

Back in my time, we called "treating people differently, based on their race" racism.

People are treated unequally because of their race everyday. My wife’s former boss (CEO of an education non-profit) was a black man. He was walking in downtown Paulo Alto, wearing a suit, on a way to a business meeting. A cop stopped him at gunpoint and had him lie face-down on the ground and frisked him. Eventually, finding nothing, he let him go. “Mistaken identity.” This is the kind of shit black people have to li…

> None of my white bosses have ever had interaction with law enforcement

You must be very good friends with your bosses to know this. People I work with have no idea what interactions I've had with the police.

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#182

Post by choko »

subsubzero wrote: post #139
enumjorge wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Latino, I too am growing tired of the way some leadership and HR departments in tech callously, carelessly push and promote these diversity initiatives in a way that creates resentment. Combating racial bias is a sensitive topic. You'd have to be living under a rock to not know that. And yet companies continue to make statements like this without the tact it deserves. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt, an…

Curious how you feel about the term LatinX that all tech companies are embracing? Reason I ask is I have a few really good friends who are Hispanic(Nicaraguan, Dominican, Mexican) and they all despise that term. I don't know why its used and it seems strange as its been forced on us the past few years with no consulting or buy-in from any of the Hispanic employees at these companies. Even outside polls found that a h…

The people that tend toward terms like Latinx treat non-white folks like children, constantly getting offended on their behalf and denying them agency. It's ironic that many "anti-racists" act in a racist manner.

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#183

Post by enumjorge »

subsubzero wrote: post #139
enumjorge wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Latino, I too am growing tired of the way some leadership and HR departments in tech callously, carelessly push and promote these diversity initiatives in a way that creates resentment. Combating racial bias is a sensitive topic. You'd have to be living under a rock to not know that. And yet companies continue to make statements like this without the tact it deserves. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt, an…

Curious how you feel about the term LatinX that all tech companies are embracing? Reason I ask is I have a few really good friends who are Hispanic(Nicaraguan, Dominican, Mexican) and they all despise that term. I don't know why its used and it seems strange as its been forced on us the past few years with no consulting or buy-in from any of the Hispanic employees at these companies. Even outside polls found that a h…

While I appreciate the sentiment behind LatinX, my main issue with it is that it's mostly a distraction. I can't speak for women, but I imagine their top worries are things like the amount of violence against women [1] (at least in Mexico where my family is originally from), unequal pay, how much the burden of having children rests on their shoulders and limits their careers, etc. You know, stuff that has a significant impact on their lives. Spanish defaulting to male form of words is an archaic reflection of how male-centered the culture is, but it's not the wheel that needs greasing. Trying to change the language to make it less male-focused is both awkward and also seems like a consolation prize that moves the needle for women exactly zero amount. It creates an illusion of progress, while not solving any of the big problems.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/09/world/americas/mexico-wom...

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#184

Post by csa »

trention wrote: post #135

So, a company explicitly states that when push comes to shove, if you are white, you move to the front of the firing queue. Remind me again, why would a white person (especially man) not put them on the back of the queue when deciding where to apply for a job? Despite not living in the states (and in a country where this sh*t is illegal), I think I will make it my policy to never work for a (parent) company that has…

Indeed.

They may not realize it, but they will quietly lose business over time to folks who are not fans of the style of this layoff.

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#185

Post by vkou »

CSMastermind wrote: post #115
vkou wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

There's a difference between certain segments of society being racist and making racism your official company policy.

Yes, the difference is that responsibility is diffused in the former and nobody can be held accountable for it, despite a similar outcome.

And there are plenty of institutions (law enforcement in particular, but there are many others) that actively behave in a racist manner. Again, since there's no policy, nobody in practice can be held accountable for it.

So no, nobody should be surprised that racism is alive and well in 2022. It thrives in the intersection of personal bigotry and the wide open space of discretionary power exercised by figures of authority.

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#186

Post by wil421 »

ClassyJacket wrote: post #159
white_dragon88 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I consider myself very ‘liberal’ per American standards (pro abortion, pro lgbt rights, pro racial diversity and acceptance), and this to me screams of woke culture gone wild. Looks like anything can be weaponised.

Agreed. I don't consider myself to have moved politically right at all, but progressives are moving drastically left. Stuff like this, and the modern gender politics that is resulting in the erasure of women and lesbians in particular, has resulted in me no longer referring to myself as a leftist.

The Republicans left me a while ago. This kinda stuff is way too left for me and I fear the Democrats are going to do the same. I’d say I’m a moderate who votes Democratic. Both sides are going too far left and right.

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#187

Post by anonym29 »

weatherlite wrote: post #122
rurp wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. I'm pretty liberal on a number of issues, but this kind of language is extremely off-putting to me. If it means that the layoffs were explicitly racist, that is disgusting.

But we are all fine with racist hiring...

I am fine with hiring that enforces equality of opportunity (where nobody is denied an opportunity because of their race).

I am NOT fine with hiring that enforces equality of outcome (where some people, who would otherwise be considered unqualified, are granted an opportunity because of their race).

Race should account for ZERO percent of a hiring decision.

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#188

Post by John23832 »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #174
peter422 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question: Are you aware of the historical context of the United States as it concerns race? Without looking anything up tell me what you know about it.

Are you talking about slavery? Since i'm a slav, I'd know, considering the similarity of the words is not a coincidence. But since neither I nor any of the employees there were ever a slave, I have no idea why a histy so old has to be taken in consideration.

The etymological relationship between "slav" and "slavery" (which is a contested relation at best) doesn't answer the question about your depth in American race relations?

The answer also shows a lack of knowledge about anything other than the headline "slavery".

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#189

Post by prottog »

vkou wrote: post #185
CSMastermind wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between certain segments of society being racist and making racism your official company policy.

Yes, the difference is that responsibility is diffused in the former and nobody can be held accountable for it, despite a similar outcome. And there are plenty of institutions (law enforcement in particular, but there are many others) that actively behave in a racist manner. Again, since there's no policy, nobody in practice can be held accountable for it. So no, nobody should be surprised that racism is alive and we…

One cannot logically conclude from a "racist" outcome, however that is defined, that the inputs to that outcome are also racist, because the intervening interactions are so complex and uncontrollable (that is, it is a chaotic system) that the outcome that emerges is almost always not what anybody intended. That is, the activities of institutions with no "actively racist" policies may very well result in "racist" outcomes. I believe we are in agreement here.

Where we disagree is on the thesis that you can control for the outcome of such a chaotic system, especially using something as flawed as the postmodern "anti-racist" movement that is in vogue. Many eggs have already been and will continue to be broken in service of the anti-racist omelette, and we will all be the worse off for it.

Re: Twilio to lay off 11% of workforce

#190

Post by jballer »

Ensorceled wrote: post #168

This line seems to be referenced a lot in these comments: > Layoffs like this can have a more pronounced impact on marginalized communities, so we were particularly focused on ensuring our layoffs – while a business necessity today – were carried out through an Anti-Racist/Anti-Oppression lens. Sounds like they are taking steps to make sure whoever was chosen for layoffs were not chosen for racist reasons. But so man…

“We avoided firing people who aren’t white” vs “we preferred firing people who are white.”

This school of thought purports to agree that harmful impact supersedes good intent.

They just refuse to recognize the individual as the ultimate minority.

Post reply on HN