where's fu*kedcompany.com when you need it...
Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
61–70 of 96 posts
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#62where's fu*kedcompany.com when you need it...
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would the narrative be different? Travis Kalanick has been absolutely shit on by the press, and the HN crowd in general, and what he has done is arguably much less egregious than what Elizabeth Holmes has done.
One of the differences is that men (as a group) get vastly more positive press about actual accomplishments. One insidious form of sexism, racism etc is the degree to which we mostly talk about certain groups when there is something negative to say.
You didn't answer my question. OP claimed that:
"If Travis Kaladick or whatever his name is were running the company, the narrative would be very different."
Now, given that Uber and Travis have been disparaged by both the press and HN on a regular basis, how would the narrative be different if he was running Theranos?
Do you actually believe that if Travis was in Elizabeth's shoes, we would speak more positively about the general situation?
I don't see how that's true, given that we speak very negatively about him already, and what he has done (behaved like a douche, promoted a bad culture) is, arguably, less egregious than what she has done (committed outright fraud, stolen investors money, possibly killed or at very least jeopardized peoples' health).
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree with your takeaway, but I agree with the point that much of the talk about Theranos is really about gender. That company just doesn't get covered without people talking about how Elizabeth Holmes is, in fact, a woman, and how she tries to channel a Steve Jobs persona, and how it's not working. If Travis Kaladick or whatever his name is were running the company, the narrative would be very different. I don'…
How would the narrative be different? Travis Kalanick has been absolutely shit on by the press, and the HN crowd in general, and what he has done is arguably much less egregious than what Elizabeth Holmes has done.
The press is creaming their pants over the Uber scandals for the same reason they creamed their collective pants over Trump. It gets clicks. But the coverage for Uber is mostly positive in sentiment.
The stories about sexism at Uber are couched in the overall story about a great company doing great things, led by a great leader, and this is a setback that needs to be dealt with.
Look at any of the recent stories about Theranos. It's a bad company doing bad things, and Holmes is probably a criminal.
And if you don't think that irresponsibly deploying unlicensed driverless cars is as bad as outsourcing your tests because you aren't quite there yet with your technology, I beg you to reconsider.
One of those is worse than the other. To my knowledge so far, Holmes is not responsible for acts that genuinely put people's lives in danger. Uber is.
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting, because most of the comments I've heard from friends and relatives is "Snake Oil seller updated for Silicon Valley". Looks has been brought up, but that goes both ways as you don't find many hucksters who are on the ugly side regardless of gender.
True. Zuck, Page-Brin, Evan Spiegel all are pretty good looking. PG once said , "I can be tricked by anyone who looks like Mark Zuckerberg" (though he claims it was a joke)[1]. I think good looking people have a natural advantage when it comes to persuading VCs or getting the media interested in their companies. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-05-03/how-to-ge...
Eh, there's plenty of ugly looking founders out there (Certainly circa 1980's Bill Gates was no ones idea of a cover-model).
Plus I suspect there's a confounding factor in there. Here's a picture of Musk and Thiel[1] around the time Paypal was started. Its pretty clear that personal trainers, chefs, tailored clothing and whatever the hell treatment Musk got for his hair can go along way to making successful people better looking than they were when they first started earning the big bucks.
[1]https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0196/5170/files/uzn_146193...
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
And you are one of about two people here even trying to understand my point of view. Most of the other responses are simply aimed at shooting me down in one manner or another. This is the essence of the problem: I am not even supposed to voice my opinion or feeling. The vast majority of sexism (racism, etc) is not due to blunt and obvious exclusion or targeting. It is due to this sort of pattern of behavior. Jessica…
> And you are one of about two people here even trying to understand my point of view. Most of the other responses are simply aimed at shooting me down in one manner or another. This is the essence of the problem: I am not even supposed to voice my opinion or feeling. I'm curious about why you feel this way. In reading the other responses to your original comment, it is clear that most respondents disagree with you.…
I used to not hesitate to defend my views on HN. The result: I ended up rate limited, probably because as a woman, I often have a minority viewpoint. This makes me look extremely fighty merely for being willing to engage the discussion.
No, I do not believe most comments here are inviting me to substantiate anything. A few are, but most actually are dismissive. That is the entire point: I am a woman with an opinion and that can't be allowed. It is a threat to the status quo.
It is one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't things. There is no winning move. You either don't express your opinion at all, or you tread incredibly lightly and worry vastly more about the overwhelming majority male POV lest you draw this kind of pile on, or you speak your mind and draw this kind of pile on and get downvoted to hell and then have to worry if you will be rate limited or banned or something for what amounts to merely being female.
I am fine with debating people. I rather enjoy that. That mostly isn't what happens though when a woman expresses herself.
I have blogged about how I think Holmes' gender helped create the Theranos debacle (http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/05/theranos-cul...). But, I do not know how nor understand why I need to "back up" my concern that the enormous negative press here has a potential serious downside for women generally. I also do not know how on earth to get past or around the very obvious "People are being disrespectful and dismissive of me in a way that looks like sexism at work and it looks to me like proof of the very thing that worries me and... Why am I being asked to give evidence amidst this that this exact sort of thing is a problem for women?
I sincerely do not know how on earth to deal with that.
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would the narrative be different? Travis Kalanick has been absolutely shit on by the press, and the HN crowd in general, and what he has done is arguably much less egregious than what Elizabeth Holmes has done.
One of the differences is that men (as a group) get vastly more positive press about actual accomplishments. One insidious form of sexism, racism etc is the degree to which we mostly talk about certain groups when there is something negative to say.
One of the differences is that men (as a group) get vastly more positive press about actual accomplishments
Well, of course they do - there are many more men founding startups overall, so they'll get most of the press even if the publications were actually more likely to report women's accomplishments.
With less than 20% of startups having one woman founder (Crunchbase, 2014), what do you expect the press to do?
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
"If I am so wrong, crazy and stupid, why do so very many people need to step up and inform me of my error?" Because it is wrong?
Oh, and in addition to all the downvotes and the pile on, you needed to create a brand new account to join the pile on. But, sure, I am just a vitriolic, hysterical woman who is oversensitive. I couldn't possibly have a valid point or concern.
Seems like you have a martyr complex. You're fighting against something that doesn't exist. Nobody here is out to get you.
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#69To my disgust, the biggest thing most people seem to take away from it is "Yup, that's what happens when a woman is in charge of a business." I'm a woman. I am fine with her burning. But, geez, I hate the idea that there is lava-like splash back spattering all other women in the world who are trying to be taken seriously.
I think when this broke, her connection to Hillary and the Clinton Foundation kept being played. Also during that same week, news broke that Marissa Mayer hid the huge yahoo data breech from users for years and purposefully didn't take ethical actions addresssing known vulnerabilities. These are three of the most powerful self made women all of whom were heavily publicized for years. The anti-Clinton sentiment along…
twice the pride double the fall.
Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the differences is that men (as a group) get vastly more positive press about actual accomplishments. One insidious form of sexism, racism etc is the degree to which we mostly talk about certain groups when there is something negative to say.
One of the differences is that men (as a group) get vastly more positive press about actual accomplishments Well, of course they do - there are many more men founding startups overall, so they'll get most of the press even if the publications were actually more likely to report women's accomplishments. With less than 20% of startups having one woman founder (Crunchbase, 2014), what do you expect the press to do?
White males commit more murders than black males. Black males typically do more time on average.
It is a little like that. It isn't proportional.
Jessica Livingston is one of the two people who dreamed up YC. Paul Graham soon wrangled his previous confounders in on it. I hear vastly more about the three male cofounders than I do about the one female cofounder. Nor do I ever here her get credit proportional to PG. He was the front man. He was replaced by Sam Altman. Sam now gets most of the press.
Maybe this is Jessica being savvy and sidestepping the sexist bs in the world by trying to avoid press. Maybe she is way smarter than me. But I think YC is probably more "her baby" than Paul's or Sam's, yet I never see it framed that way.
If women are 2% of founders and get 1% of the credit, they are still being shorted.