Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work • Hacker News Board

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#671

Post by core-questions » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:48 PM UTC

zucker42 wrote: post #234

core-questions wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where we seem to find ourselves today is in a position where if you have very progressive politics, you can say whatever you like - no matter how radical - whereas if you have conservative politics you can't even admit that without any specifics without being thought of as evil. This is how we can get away with saying it's "encouraged" while really making sure any meaningful counter-argument is "forbidden" at the sam…

I think you're wrong that this affects conservatives significantly more than other groups (and maybe that betrays your personal bias). What is true is that people who are beliefs much are out of far outside the norm for their workplace are discouraged. For example, if you're someone who believes that profit is theft, and you make that clear during work, it will probably have negative effects for you. Whether "conserv…

Not a conservative, more of a third positionist myself. Even in places where conservatives are comfortable, I've still got opinions they'd hate.

So I shut up.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#672

Post by motivic » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:49 PM UTC

BlueTemplar wrote: post #488

Mvandenbergh wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with at least Facebook and Twitter (and possibly Google) in this analysis is that their attention-grabbing model requires them to analyse and interfere with the data which is coming through their systems. The only way not to do that would be for FB timelines and Twitter feeds to be strictly sequential feeds which at some point in the past they may have been but they are not now. Once you start basing your…

People warned that this would happen when Facebook (YouTube, Steam, etc.) started sliding in this direction. And years before Facebook was even created, a middle way was also proposed where a carrier like Facebook wouldn't be legally responsible for the content they carried, unless they started to select and/or moderate that content, at which point they would lose the carrier status, becoming a simple broadcaster, wh…

> unless they started to select and/or moderate that content, at which point they would lose the carrier status

But since the homepage feed (or any medium really) displays contents in a certain order, some selection must take place.

Typically some algorithm (usually a recommender system together with some business logic) is used to determine which contents from all that's available to you are actually shown to you and in what order.

Bias seems to be an unavoidable part of the design to me.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#673

Post by johngalt » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:50 PM UTC

jetpks wrote: post #502

legostormtroopr wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We can’t improve without discussion, and it’s unfortunate that these type of issues are so divisive. Except Cancel Culture is making it that these can't be discussed without complete agreement. Take for example, "Women in Tech", personally I don't see underrepresentation of women in tech as a problem that can be or should be 'solved'. For the better part of 15 years, there has been a massive movement to encourage w…

Women were barely allowed into workplaces in general within the last 50 years and are still fighting biases that have existed for millennia. Fixing the lack of women in tech is a multi-century process, not something that's just knocked out in as little as 15 years. We'd be lucky to start seeing the needle move in such a short amount of time.

> Fixing the lack of women in tech is a multi-century process

Why does tech take longer than other professional fields like medical and legal? Harvard law started admitting women in the 1950s. MIT started admitting women in the 1870s. Yet the gender balance in the legal field narrowed much more rapidly.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#674

Post by cousin_it » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:50 PM UTC

In my perfect workplace, people would be able to have political discussions by mutual consent, or opt out of any political discussion, and not get penalized for either.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#675

Post by hokumguru » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:50 PM UTC

wolco wrote: post #649

Gunax wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Refusing to serve a customer when you disagree with that customer's goal is pretty far from being a "moral arbiter for society." Keep in mind that anyone is free to use other services (or roll their own) and gitlab can't do anything about that. Neither would it be overreaching for the workers building that product to request a say in how it's used. I think this is the crux of the issue. Anyone is of course free to…

I didn't realize facebooi owned 90%. If you exclude twitter/reddit what's left snapchat?

Facebook owns Instagram - the 2nd largest social network - as well as Whatsapp which is ginormous in its own right as well.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#676

Post by merpnderp » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:50 PM UTC

The same people mad at ICE are fine doing business with China. Gitlab is making the right move, as the people who all of a sudden are pretending to become ethical, are mostly just posturing for their friends, otherwise ICE would be far down their list of business concerns.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#677

Post by jnwatson » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:51 PM UTC

I think most of this discussion has missed the point. The point of the memo is that Gitlab isn’t sorting customer into morally “good” or “bad” buckets and choosing to do business with them.

The decision making process required to do that will necessarily be filled with politics and value judgments.

He’s right, that is a huge distraction from the business of making money.

The important question is whether that distraction is worth it.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#678

Post by gknapp » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:51 PM UTC

burtonator wrote: post #458

anm89 wrote: post #129

I personally think this is awesome. I don't wan't some git hosting startup to be the arbiter of morality for society. The engineers, designers, and PMs shouldn't have an outsized voice in society because they have a specialized useful skillset and ended up on a successful product. If these users are breaking laws, then put them out of business via the courts and sieze the assets (the repos in this case) via legal mea…

I wish it was that simple honestly. If Google is doing business with nazis then as a consumer I have absolutely every right to boycott Google.

In this case, it's likely that Nazis would be labeled a terrorist organization, or a wartime enemy, and would be subject to federally-enforced economic sanctions. It actually would be illegal for Google to do business with Nazis.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#679

Post by ubertaco » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:51 PM UTC

ggreer wrote: post #495

earthscienceman wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which actually really boils down to what the word "white male privilege" really means. If you think politics is annoying, then it's because you're privileged enough for it to not matter. ^^^ privileged white male

I've worked at a company that heavily encouraged discussion of politics at work, and it was a nightmare. The things management sponsored (at the request of employees) included: - A women-only Slack channel. - Women-only events, such as a free screening of Wonder Woman. The men at the company were expected to work during that time. - An "ally skills workshop"[1], which attempted to indoctrinate us with an explicitly r…

This mirrors my experience at Salesforce, to a large extent.

Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work

#680

Post by wolco » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 11:52 PM UTC

gbanfalvi wrote: post #584

anm89 wrote: post #129

I personally think this is awesome. I don't wan't some git hosting startup to be the arbiter of morality for society. The engineers, designers, and PMs shouldn't have an outsized voice in society because they have a specialized useful skillset and ended up on a successful product. If these users are breaking laws, then put them out of business via the courts and sieze the assets (the repos in this case) via legal mea…

> The engineers, designers, and PMs shouldn't have an outsized voice in society because they have a specialized useful skillset and ended up on a successful product. They built these services. They are, ate least in part, responsible for how they work and the consequences of what they built. The content they’re serving and data has a meaning to us. You can’t pretend that a social network doesn’t have a role in bringi…

Social networks bring people together.

Advertising sends a message to groups of people.

Roads allow people to travel by car.

Roads are being uses to bring people to places where murders happen. You can't pretend that roads have no role.

So many things had a role.. power, internet, the company who made the computer they used, teachers, friends (or lack of), parents.. why decidd that social media or ads is the problem.

Social media has reduced the number of cults.