I think it is a bad idea to say this about him without providing a concrete example on how he made you uncomfortable. I'm sure I have accidentally made someone uncomfortable before. Does that make me a bad person? I hope not.
> I think it is a bad idea to say this about him without providing a concrete example on how he made you uncomfortable. They don't have to justify themselves to you. He saw what he saw, and felt what he felt. if you have any problem with that, that's on you.
the need for offense is strong with this one, yes?
Some could argue, that under sufficiently corrupt or inherently unfair regime, business success is mutually exclusive with being moral/ethical person.
I completely disagree. Power and influence allow one to be a shitty person without having to deal with the consequences that other folks might, so the situations where that happens are outrageous and rightfully get a lot of exposure. However, this is a consequence of the fact that you already need to be powerful. Unless you get lucky, or otherwise hit the jackpot, you generally have to be a nice person to work your w…
> Not going to lie; taking advantage of others can be a great short-term business strategy. Long-term, not so much. People tend to remember shitty behavior.
Vinod Khosla. Robert Bolton. Samantha Power. Practically every dictator bar Lee Kuan Yew.
Because when you simply accept the world as is, it looks a lot like you're endorsing the status quo. Especially on this site where a lot of people seem to take a weird pseudo-detached outlook. Trying to analyze things in an almost entirely emotionless judgement free manner. I think this is seen by people as enlightened. Personally I find it genuinely disturbing. It becomes hard to tell where this sort of detached ana…
This isn't really the site for people who want to create genuine social change in the world, other than through startups. The site guidelines say that what's on-topic is "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity". Curiosity is more about knowing things than doing things. I think one implicit belief held by the folks who started this site is that if you do want to challenge entrenched power structures, the…
I love how you defended not trying to make the world better because HN has a ToS.
We'll have to agree to disagree on point 1, as there's plenty of common knowledge out there that I don't need to muddy the thread with. The parent comment was referring to the general election of 49%, and the "grab by the pussy" story broke after the primary was over, so point 3 is a straw man argument. Edit: Sometimes I underestimate how in the dark people really are on the subject so I did a quick search to find th…
Point 3 is not a straw man argument; he was objectively a horrible person before that quote came to light. It wasn't remotely surprising to anyone.
We've had many presidents who were not great people, it turns out that's never been a requirement for the job.
1. That is unarguably false. 2. There were other candidates. 3. Mr Trump also won the primary.
We'll have to agree to disagree on point 1, as there's plenty of common knowledge out there that I don't need to muddy the thread with. The parent comment was referring to the general election of 49%, and the "grab by the pussy" story broke after the primary was over, so point 3 is a straw man argument. Edit: Sometimes I underestimate how in the dark people really are on the subject so I did a quick search to find th…
> I want the Iranians to know, if I am the president, we will attack Iran if Iran were to attack Israel -- even if there were no Congressional authorization or a clear and present danger to the U.S
I mean, as a "Clinton is the worse option" quote, that hasn't aged well this week, has it? Mind you, the entire article is just the same old "Trump is visibly awful and we can work with that" many idiots ran with and were completely wrong about.
> Drummond was charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2005 with causing Google to violate securities law because he failed to advise the company's board that the company was required to register $80 million in stock options used as compensation for employees.[1] Do you know anyone who would hire someone after making a $80MM mistake?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Drummond_(businessman)
Not entirely sure about the date, but wasn't everyone backdating options and/or marking them as zero cost to the company?
In the late 1990s "everyone" was doing so -- and then a nonzero percentage of "everyone" went to jail for it. By 2005 people were on notice.
I would assume people in positions of power / wealth are more likely to engage in these types of behavior.
If we look at the behavior of alpha males vs. alpha females in other non-human mammalian species, it suggests that it is at least more common among alpha males. Not that it couldn't also happen with females.
What do non-human mammalian species have to do with anything? Few things vary across species more than sexual behavior. Even chimps and bonobos (very closely related, same genus) have wildly different gender roles, sexual/mating patterns, etc.
It makes no sense at all to invoke the entire of mammalia.
Adulterous relationships. Incestuous relationships. Relationships between professors and students. Relationships based on economic or employment coercion. Relationships in the workplace, even if not coerced, that could result in favoritism prejudicial to others. Again, consent merely distinguishes rape from non-rape. There are many degrees of wrong and unethical conduct short of the outright criminal.
Some of those are fair points (scenarios issues involving external people), although considering the context of this discussion I was referring to ethical concerns between the two parties involved in the relationship. Coercion of various sorts negates consent in my book.
I’ll add to the list: doctor-patient, lawyer-client, judge-lawyer, judge-litigant, social worker-charge, police-detainee, prison guard-prisoner, etc., even in contexts where there is no actual coercion. There is more to relationship ethics than consent. You have to consider the ethics in the context of the other relationships between the parties. Lawyers engaging in relationships with their clients is in fact an ethical violation, regardless of consent, because of the possibility of or appearance of abusing the lawyer-client relationship. Relationships necessarily also affect third parties (other partners, coworkers, etc.) Those effects must be considered too. People owe each other (not just partners, but third parties) more than just not committing rape.
I think it is a bad idea to say this about him without providing a concrete example on how he made you uncomfortable. I'm sure I have accidentally made someone uncomfortable before. Does that make me a bad person? I hope not.
Of course it doesn't make you a bad person. In fact, there's a good chance you're a good person, and if you have accidentally made someone uncomfortable, it was through something they could easily put their finger on; you said something, you reminded them of something, etc. This doesn't sound like it's that. He does, after all, call it 'inexplicable'; literally unable to be interpreted or expanded upon. It was a 'gut…
It is totally unreasonable to go around commenting on third parties giving off creepy vibes of no consequence based on no evidence. Not to be too personal because a comment isn't the measure of a commentator but kcanini is basically saying nothing with as much negative allusion as can be put into a comment. It is a comment with no consequences, no relevant context, no observations and no argument.
Gut feelings are often surprisingly accurate, sometimes we all pick things up a lot earlier than our consciousness cottons on. But that is no standard to hold in public discourse. There are a bunch of people who give off creepy vibes who are great and a bunch of people who give off positive vibes who are creepy. Binning people like that should ideally be done with evidence or at the very least an argument to give the comment some substance.
We've figured out that good looking people are not more upstanding than ugly people. Truly the next step is to avoid comments like that. Truth is no defence for a comment like that; a comment that says nothing is automatically truthful but also meaningless.