201–210 of 320 posts
> 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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is odd to me that they would preemptively go loud on this "This is gonna be really bad, so we need to get out in front of it." That's what it sounds like to me.
I suspect part of the motivation is to scoop the reporter's own story as a passive aggressive reprisal. It also serves to reduce the chance of future reporters on negative topics to talk directly to Coinbase since they've already showed they're willing to break stories before they publish.
When the actual story comes out it is not such a big news any more, because it is not news any more. First impressions often last, so now the first impressions is that the story is fake.
So even if their response does amplify the story, it might amplify a good story rather than a bad one. So go even so far as to say "all publicity is good publicity"
This is an odd thing to see widely published. I'm at a company that had a rather detailed negative article written about us, and we were warned about it internally shortly before it was published, after the reporter had contacted us with details and questions. However, we didn't go public with a reaction until after it was out, since it seemed rather pointless to respond to something that hadn't been published yet, e…
Susan Flower's allegations ultimately led to the firing of Uber's CEO
Yeah, if this is the level of maturity that’s in charge, it doesn’t matter if these execs personally discriminate against their black employees. They’re donezo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you expand on that? Reading through the comment threads on this piece, I’ve noticed this idea of the NYT being intentionally misleading in various forms (“they lie,” “they mislead,” “they make implications,” etc). That isn’t my perception of the NYT at all - but I’d like to hear more of what you’re saying. Has any research been done on the overall veracity of the claims the NYT makes in their articles, or on the…
These aren’t exactly what you are asking about but some recent examples of what I consider to be disingenuous and manipulative: 1. The New York Times published a scathing critique of Google’s 4000 word privacy policy, neglecting anywhere to mention that their own privacy policy was 25% longer and sketchier. 2. The entire handling of the Caliphate podcast and subsequent backpedaling and retroactive reframing. 3. Simil…
#3 The adjustments (aka corrections) were not silent. They announced them, and the big corrections even got their own NYT articles, see e.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/magazine/an-update-to-the....
#4 NYT published the identities of Slate Star Codex because it was newsworthy. The identities of the Chapo House Guys was not, because they were, and this part is crucial: open about their identities. Both of these blogs spread ideological filth, but the CHG didn't cower behind anonymity to do it like the SSC guy did.
#5 This is not submarine propaganda. CP exists on the dark web, and in fact the use of the dark web to spread CP is why so many Tor nodes chose to shut down. (This is also unrelated to putting mandatory backdoors in E2E messaging, which the NYT...opposes...)
#6 The federal government lied about the weapons...not the NYT...And WMDs did exist. Iraq still had a very large stockpile of chemical weapons when we invaded (during Bush II). They simply were intended for use against the local population, not the U.S. (See a non-NYT source: https://theintercept.com/2015/04/10/twelve-years-later-u-s-m...)
This is an odd thing to see widely published. I'm at a company that had a rather detailed negative article written about us, and we were warned about it internally shortly before it was published, after the reporter had contacted us with details and questions. However, we didn't go public with a reaction until after it was out, since it seemed rather pointless to respond to something that hadn't been published yet, e…
> It is odd to me that they would preemptively go loud on this "This is gonna be really bad, so we need to get out in front of it." That's what it sounds like to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems to me that Coinbase is well aware of NYT's recent decline from paper of record to race-baiting propaganda, and knows that instead of being factual about numbers NYT will use weasel words to make it seem like Coinbase's entire company is run by "far right extremist racists" or whatever similar language. Of course, only time and the publication of the NYT article will tell, but given their recent track record…
> NYT's recent decline from paper of record to race-baiting propaganda Good newspapers must always speak truth to power. In a country where white people hold virtually all of it, sometimes that means speaking truth to white power. You’re sort of telling on yourself if you find that offensive.
Come on people, read FT like you are supposed to. They even have an excellent gardening column when you are tired of Boris and Chinese SOE imploding.
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?
> 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.
Note that this is not my own thoughts on the subject, but I'm legitimately curious how you can have discourse in a situation similar to this: https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-fires-employee-who-... - what would you do when someone asks? What would the expected result be?
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?
If you get accused of racism, what you should do is take the accusation seriously, assume that it is the result of genuine tension within the company, and then figure out places in your process where you were not being proactive enough about looking out for your employees and team chemistry. Happy employees don't accuse their employers of racism. If you are being accused of racism by your employees, surely something…
This is "guilty until proven innocent", when exactly did this mentality catch on? Well, in any case I hope the trend reverses because it's directly opposite to how the law works.