Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee • Hacker News Board

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#291

Post by viewtransform » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 9:36 PM UTC

ansible wrote: post #138

InTheArena wrote: post #93

Intel is in serious trouble right now.They accidentally gaffed recently and stated that their goal was "to keep AMD from getting more then 10-20% of the server market" while they deal with a whole bunch of engineering and fab problems with their current generation of chips. They are also looking down the barrel of Apple abandoning Intel, and for the first time in two decades, unleashing a true X86 competitor to the m…

> Intel is in serious trouble right now. The whole semiconductor industry is in trouble right now, though few seem to feel the weight of the issue. We are looking at just a couple process nodes at best before we reach the end of the road for silicon lithography. Sure, there will be further tweaks on existing techniques which will squeeze out small improvements in power, performance and density. But long gone are the…

That is true for general purpose computing. However, AMD has been diversifying away from client (laptops, desktops). There is a large and growing market for semi-custom designs: game consoles, CPU+GPU cloud computing, DaaS virtualization, embedded systems. Since these are markets with large companies competing against each other there will be continual demand for incremental power and performance improvements that an individual consumer may not care about. A company that can rapidly mix and match IP to customer needs will have an advantage.

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#292

Post by ksec » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 9:40 PM UTC

daeken wrote: post #147

paulddraper wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are US companies always so aggressive about moralising these issues? Or consider Mozilla's week-long CEO who years earlier donated $1000 to a popular ballot initiative supported by most California voters. Be careful how you vote, citizen. Your livelihood depends on it.

I really liked that you skipped over what that ballot initiative was. He donated in support of Prop 8, an attempt to ban same-sex marriage in California. As a former Mozilla employee, I'm pretty glad that he was ousted for his homophobia. Good riddance.

So am I not allowed to be in US / US company / Any US company top position , that due to my religion and belief is against Gay Marriage, and can not support it ? Are those religion now deemed evil by US ? My / Our way or the high way ?

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#293

Post by jhayward » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 10:15 PM UTC

knuththetruth wrote: post #182

jhayward wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Among married people something like 50% of couples met their spouse at work. It's going to happen, it's best to have an open and above-board way of co-existing with fraternization rather than simply banning it, which is idiotic.

>Among married people something like 50% of couples met their spouse at work. What is your source for this figure? I just googled around and every survey appeared to put in the 15-20% range.

Every survey of whom? Did it include people married for over 40 years? Most of the "surveys" you find are conclusion-driven to target an audience for an article, something like "how are people finding their SO's today"?

It's going to be hard to come to consensus on a number because it changes over time. Are we talking about all married people today, people of a certain demographic (18-34, etc)? During what period?

My source for the ~50% number is "common knowledge in the 80's and 90's". Anything you find by googling right now is going to have definitional problems. I'm not aware of something like a US Census that would be definitive.

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#294

Post by whatsstolat » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 10:57 PM UTC

sbinthree wrote: post #5

There is no way you would fire a CEO you actually wanted in place because they had a consensual relationship with a subordinate in the past . Why are US companies always so aggressive about moralising these issues? No one would take issue if he carried a gun at work. Why is it that corporate morals rule?

In tech ... its a Nerf gun

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#295

Post by mathattack » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 11:08 PM UTC

coredog64 wrote: post #280

mathattack wrote: post #235

At a prior (Fortune 500) company the head of HR got sacked for having sex with his secretary in his office the weekend. (Security walked in on them) Poor judgment.

Phil Condit lost his CEO job at Boeing for the same reason. It was a mess -- his wife kicked him out (he was living in a hotel), Boeing fired him, and then his secretary sued him for sexual harassment.

It’s very strange. Hard to judge because I’m not in their shoes, but if you must cheat, do you have to do it with a subordinate? Is it a power thing?

It looks like another corruption scandal got Condit, no?

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#296

Post by greglindahl » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 12:24 AM UTC

jhasse wrote: post #237

greglindahl wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shakespeare used "they" to refer to singular people.

Shakespeare's language is very awkward today.

Some of it is, but not this part.

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#297

Post by fareesh » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 12:53 AM UTC

goobynight wrote: post #200

jmull wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is different. Companies that are large/sophisticated enough to have formal policies of employee conduct generally ban a wide range of behaviors that prioritizes the employee's personal gain over the company's.

Right, but what's being discussed isn't that the policies are there. It's if they make sense i.e. do they ban something that's actual bad or are they just arbitrary restrictions?

They are there to reduce risk and to reduce unnecessary drama.

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#298

Post by mmt » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 12:59 AM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #272

nodesocket wrote: post #241

I'm I the only one who finds it appalling that the NY Times mentions #metoo and Harvey Weinstein as if to insinuate his consenting relationship was anything like what Weinstein did. Honestly, I get why these policies exist, but sometimes it feels heavy handed to fire somebody for having a consenting relationship at work. After all, when you work long and hard hours often times coworkers are the people you get to know…

The problem is that if you are the CEO, you don't have any "coworkers." You are in charge of everyone. No one else there is your peer. The military has a policy that treats an affair between an officer and the spouse of someone in their unit as non-consensual. It is treated basically like statutory rape. What the spouse says is irrelevant because you can't eliminate the possibility they are basically being blackmaile…

> In some cases, I have some sympathy for the guy who may well have not really fully understood the intimidation factor in the situation. In other cases, they clearly are happy to use their power to bully others into getting their way and, no, I'm not sympathetic to their bullshit claims.

How would a neutral third-party observer legitimately be able to tell the difference (assuming the latter is a sociopath or just a really good actor pretending to be the former)?

To me, that seems to be the real benefit to the strictness of some of these rules. It removes an avenue of the unintended intimidation that you mention.

I do think it helps to discuss it and call out these issues so that people understand that they're not just arbitrary or some kind of over-reaction or extreme bureacracy.

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#299

Post by marcus_holmes » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 1:12 AM UTC

Gargoyle wrote: post #257

kbar13 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

surely you can list the differences between a romantic / physical relationship and a purely platonic one and understand why it is bad when it comes to imbalances in power right?

Unequal treatment in the workplace due to friendship is far, far, FAR more common than due to romance. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever worked at a company of more than a few people where it didn't happen.

yeah, it's one of those things that is really hard to avoid as a manager. Naturally you like some people and don't like others. Maintaining objectivity and evaluating people on their performance despite your feelings about their personality is hard.

This is why good managers don't aim to be friends with the people they manage. You may end up being friends because of team camaraderie and the amount of time you spend in the same building, but deliberately choosing to socialise with some (but not all) of the team is a bad idea.

And exactly the same thing happens if there is a perceived friendship in the team. Was the employee promoted because of their skills or because they're mates with the boss? Were they not promoted because the boss didn't want to be seen to be promoting a friend? Did they get into that argument because they're a brown-nosing jerk that thinks they're untouchable because they go for beers with the boss every Friday?

Re: Intel CEO resigns after relationship with employee

#300

Post by marcus_holmes » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 1:16 AM UTC

tfha wrote: post #86

marcus_holmes wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A relationship between a manager and someone they manage compromises the effectiveness of both the manager and the team. As CEO, he is everyone's boss, so having a consensual relationship with anyone involved in the organisation is a bad thing. If she got promoted, would it be because of her work, or her relationship with the boss? If she didn't get promoted, would it be because of her attitude, or her relationship w…

You can ask those same questions about any attractive person or any person with powerful family members. Does that mean we can't employ those people either? Of course not. If a manager runs a tight ship and treats their team fairly, then there shouldn't be anything wrong with a relationship. If as a manager you can't properly separate your emotions and friendships from your management duties, you aren't going to make…

it's not about what the manager actually does. It's about the team's perception of it. He could be the best manager in the world, and have perfect separation between his emotions and his professional judgement. But the other people in the team will evaluate his decisions with the relationship in mind even if he doesn't. There will always be a question mark over his leadership decisions, even if those decisions were made for the best reasons.