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

Tech Workers' Values

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 276 posts

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#151

Post by pseudalopex »

xienze wrote: post #116
lazyasciiart wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Namely, LGBT stuff, female and minority representation, immigrant's rights, etc. offering parental leave is an excellent example of the kind of thing a union would negotiate, and is also pretty well related to how attractive a company is to women (who are more likely to have childcare responsibilities). Rules against firing someone for being gay or a different religion are a great example of something a union would…

> Rules against firing someone for being gay or a different religion are a great example of something a union would negotiate Except they're not, that's what our existing laws are for. > Why do you see 'working conditions' as unrelated to these topics? Because in my reading of this it doesn't sound like they're going after things like vacation time, pay, IP rights, you know, day-to-day stuff that a union would really…

It's legal in 28 states to fire someone for being gay. 32 for being trans. Some have even preempted local nondiscrimination ordinances.

I agree with you that this doesn't seem to have anything to do with working conditions. I don't see why you think they'd want to go anywhere near abortion.

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#152

Post by nemild »

A few weeks back, I wrote a piece about assessing and setting your values as an engineer:

https://www.nemil.com/musings/software-engineers-and-ethics....

I was surprised we didn't discuss this more and I wanted to help someone early in their career think through it.

(I also got some good feedback from YC's Paul Buchheit who helped coin "Don't be evil" in the early days of Google)

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#153

Post by paulddraper »

intrasight wrote: post #76
sidlls wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this industry is far from being like the other engineering disciplines. It should be like them, but it is still far too immature to be put at that level.

For starters, we are not licensed. And I suspect that a non-citizen couldn't get an engineering license.

Neither are other engineers (in the US).

There are certifications (e.g. PE) but you can get a job with or without them.

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#154

Post by xapata »

xienze wrote: post #116
lazyasciiart wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Namely, LGBT stuff, female and minority representation, immigrant's rights, etc. offering parental leave is an excellent example of the kind of thing a union would negotiate, and is also pretty well related to how attractive a company is to women (who are more likely to have childcare responsibilities). Rules against firing someone for being gay or a different religion are a great example of something a union would…

> Rules against firing someone for being gay or a different religion are a great example of something a union would negotiate Except they're not, that's what our existing laws are for. > Why do you see 'working conditions' as unrelated to these topics? Because in my reading of this it doesn't sound like they're going after things like vacation time, pay, IP rights, you know, day-to-day stuff that a union would really…

> touchy-freely Bay Area stuff

I don't think those beliefs are exclusive to the Bay Area, nor would I describe those topics as "touchy-freely [sic]".

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#155

Post by pcmaffey »

Lots of focus in the comments here, on the Unions aspect of this post, but Sam leads with how it's "tech companies" who have the power and responsibility to change things. And then follows up saying that unions might be a good way to make companies beholden to popular belief.

This is mostly bullshit. Instead of putting the honus on the executives and VC's who define the growth-first business models, it's somehow the responsibility of their employees to wield the power of a tech company responsibly? To shape the direction of a company?

Maybe in a round-about way, Sam is saying that unions are the only way to responsibly limit the power of tech companies' leadership. But make no mistake, the responsibility for the power of technology falls directly in the laps of a company's leaders.

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#156

Post by dionidium »

Danihan wrote: post #109
csneeky wrote: post #60

Tech workers are as disparate and varied as non-tech workers... There is a hierarchy and I think it is unlikely we will see common ground emerge. Survival of the fittest and the best will still win the day. Just like the labor unions of the industrial era, efforts like this are doomed to be spikes of ideology rife with the same contradictions of those it proposes to keep in check. Some tech workers run multimillion d…

Exactly. This post is founded on so many bad assumptions.. We'd also like to discuss how tech companies can heal the divide in our country. Why _shouldn't_ there be divides in our country? Which divide is being referred to? Religious? Political? Net worth? Productivity? Persuasion? Why assume differences need "healed?" Why this constant, desperate push for homogeneity? Why can't people simply be different, and have c…

A lot of the push for healing is really about a belief that the other side would agree with you if they just had all the facts. That what's holding back agreement is educational in nature.

I don't think this is true, to state it mildly, but a lot of modern politics (and nearly every smart-aleck tweet ever written) makes a lot more sense when viewed through this lens.

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#157

Post by alphonsegaston »

stale2002 wrote: post #148
matt4077 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything you like, basically. Without a a union there's a power imbalance between employer and employee. People say it's all based on mutually agreed contracts. In reality, you are probably much more dependent on your job than the company is on you. That's because they may lose something like 1/1000 of their employees when they fire you, but you lose 100% of your jobs[1]. Unions are a way correct this balance. Employ…

Sure, band together and fix the power balance on your own, but don't force me to join one. I am perfectly OK with "fighting" the power imbalance on my own, using a skill called "negotiating my salary" and "voting with my feet".

Neither of those things are forbidden by unions. Actors are unionized and negotiate their salaries. And of course you're always free to quit.

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#158

Post by AndrewKemendo »

civilian wrote: post #57
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #10

We believe that employees should come together and clearly define the values and policies they'd like to see their companies uphold. A tech union isn't the perfect metaphor for this, but it's not far off. If it's going to do anything but be window dressing then it needs to have the teeth of union - so just call it what it is. I've argued for a while that tech workers need a union, but the chorus on HN and other place…

My main objection to unions is that, once they're in a company, employees lose the right to negotiate their own compensation. I want to be able to skip my union dues and deal directly with the company. OR I want to be able to make a union of my own, especially for a functional or values-based subset of coworkers, and have us negotiate separately. This is not just a tech-unions-related complaint, this is a critique of…

Well the whole idea of trade associations and unions has it's roots in anarchic-socialism. The idea being that collective bargaining lifts the floor for the worker.

The idea here is that the person at the top with outsized bargaining power is voluntarily relinquishing it to the person at the bottom in order to increase general welfare.

If you don't believe in that, then that's great, but that's kind of the direction everyone seems to be headed.

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#159

Post by bitcrusher »

Barrin92 wrote: post #78
civilian wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My main objection to unions is that, once they're in a company, employees lose the right to negotiate their own compensation. I want to be able to skip my union dues and deal directly with the company. OR I want to be able to make a union of my own, especially for a functional or values-based subset of coworkers, and have us negotiate separately. This is not just a tech-unions-related complaint, this is a critique of…

>My main objection to unions is that, once they're in a company, employees lose the right to negotiate their own compensation. I want to be able to skip my union dues and deal directly with the company. OR I want to be able to make a union of my own, especially for a functional or values-based subset of coworkers, and have us negotiate separately. Bargaining collectively is the whole point of creating a union in the…

Contrarily, the special snowflake and myopic individualism is what MADE the tech industry. The hubris to say, "I see a better way" or "I can do it better than that person" is how we got here. In point of fact, this entire thing is basically another form of "snowflake individualism".

I am starting to think the giant problem in tech is really attitudes which are dismissive of our differences and our experiences. Tropes about "tech-bros" and "millennials" are rooted in the very same biases that they're railing against.

It's just another face of tribalism.

Re: Tech Workers' Values

#160

Post by tropo »

zanzibarwutwut wrote: post #112

This: As members of the community, we're interested in ways in which tech companies can use their collective power to protect privacy, rule of law, freedom of expression, and other fundamental American rights And this: We also believe tech companies have an opportunity and an obligation to reduce the polarization we've helped create. are not really compatible. People from Red America already aren't welcome in tech (I…

At least the words are compatible, though the intent is probably not. Red America is perfectly happy to "protect privacy, rule of law, freedom of expression, and other fundamental American rights", and would love to "reduce the polarization".

Let's start with the easy one, polarization: that gets reduced if the tech industry accepts Red America values. Well? It works. It is a solution to polarization. Problem solved.

Red America is fond of privacy. FYI, the recent ISP thing isn't going over well with non-politicians. When gun registrations were published in a newspaper, that didn't go over too well. Opposition to stuff like home/family/schooling inspections (kid-related government agencies) is intense in Red America.

Red America loves the rule of law. You can tell that Trump has disappointed them on this when they chant "LOCK HER UP" and he evades the issue. Red America prefers that the constitution be interpreted very literally, using the actual text, with the meanings of words as they were in the English language at the time they were written.

Red America accepts freedom of expression even when they don't like it very much. It wasn't Red America that violently shut down Milo's speech. That was all blue.

Red America is obviously fond of other fundamental American rights. When the ACLU counts to ten, they do this: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 (skipping the amendment they don't like)

Post reply on HN