This is fucking stupid, given we have almost literally no information about what has happened at Github, nor the extent to which any events were due to an absence of hierarchy.
I really wish people would dial back on the gloating promotion of their own pet theories and maybe wait until a little bit more information is available before jumping to conclusions.
Bad actors and unstable people are found in EVERY organization, no matter what the hierarchy or lack thereof.
A falling out at GitHub proves nothing! This is a datum, not a statistical study. How many traditionally run organizations have completely imploded and gone bankrupt, or been involved in HR lawsuits?
I find it completely asinine that people will use GitHub's problems to push their pet theories.
Regardless of the details, that things escalated to the extent they did can almost entirely be attributed to it being nobody's job to resolve this earlier. Engineers get paid for shipping code. Executives ensure that the company is moving in the right direction, and often the concerns of one engineer are rounding error. People need to be able to say: "If things happen, I will go to this person, whose long-term success at this company is entirely determined by the success of this particular half-dozen of us."
I really wish people would dial back on the gloating promotion of their own pet theories and maybe wait until a little bit more information is available before jumping to conclusions.
Like you did here, and I quote: "The proper target for anger in this case is the NSA and the government which allowed this to happen"? But mention sexism and everybody's a fucking lawyer waiting for all sides to be heard. Double standard?
I don't understand why everyone is so excited about this.
Any company with more than about 10 employees is going to have some BS drama like this going on.
Did people think github was different because it has a cat/octopus thing for a logo?
Actually, we have a pretty good amount of information. We have one point of view from the employee who left, a message from Github that mostly confirms her story, as well as knowledge about how Github works internally. We have good reason to believe that was is on the table is mostly true, therefore it's not inappropriate to theorize about how things could have been done better, especially since similar stories may play (or have played out) out at other companies.
These aren't pet theories but an excellent starting point for a discussion.
I would have expected a community of smart individuals to sincerely examine these accusations, even if they are not the whole story behind this current scandal, because we could only benefit from such a discussion.
That this article has been flagged by several people only demonstrates a great level of immaturity and that we, as an industry, more than deserve scorn. We can certainly not claim to be open minded and thoughtful after this.
When you're a woman in tech and you're hurt by the community reaction, here on HN as elsewhere, indignation certainly has its place. Catherine Bracy, the author of this post, is an expert on issues of sexism in Silicon Valley, and what she says should carry weight here. The article I posted yesterday was written in the early 70s, and discussed problems in different (though perhaps strangely similar) settings. The words of a modern day expert well versed in Silicon Valley culture should certainly find their place here. I think it reflects badly on this community that HN was allowed to be indignant in the Aaron Swartz and Ed Snowden cases but not in this. This high standard of not adding new information to the discussion was not applied in those cases, as I distinctly remember the front page flooded with at least 5 similar stories on Snowden/Swartz (articles were flagged back then only after a dozen or so stories, and we're not there yet). In fact, HN should be reeling with indignation against all those who suddenly become cool observers and expert rhetoricians calling to suspend judgment.
Whatever the particulars of the GitHub scandal turn out to be don't matter (for the purpose of this discussion). What better opportunity is there to discuss the very real problem of underrepresentation of women in SV than this? And what you call "bait" others might call raising awareness. This isn't the NRA talking after a school shootout, but someone discussing what is possibly the biggest problem in SV culture today as a response to a painful, though far from tragic event.
I also find it problematic that a post by a prominent woman is found to be "indignant and lacking in information", while far worse stupidities by race-car driving programmers are featured prominently. At the very least, I think some affirmative action wouldn't hurt us. In fact, this could be our finest moment, and we're squandering it.
ADD: it is perhaps ironic that Bracy implies that this revulsion from politics in SV is simply a form of a very destructive kind of politics, and flagging this story is precisely a case in point. It is a strong political statement that only nurtures what I think is very bad politics.
I urge you to unflag the story unless you strongly believe that its appearance on the front page is somehow bad for HN.
I would have expected a community of smart individuals to sincerely examine these accusations
From my experience, smartness, sincerity and a sufficiently malleable ego (that enables one to look at accusations constructively) don't always go hand-in-hand. They seem like orthogonal qualities.
People who weren't there arguing about how something they know nothing about actually happened and what can be done to prevent it.
I think to prevent something like this happening again we need to ensure employees can't disable their transponders, either that or make sure we have more power structures in the cockpit.
Comments
This is fucking stupid, given we have almost literally no information about what has happened at Github, nor the extent to which any events were due to an absence of hierarchy.
I really wish people would dial back on the gloating promotion of their own pet theories and maybe wait until a little bit more information is available before jumping to conclusions.
Yep. This has been driving me crazy.
Bad actors and unstable people are found in EVERY organization, no matter what the hierarchy or lack thereof.
A falling out at GitHub proves nothing! This is a datum, not a statistical study. How many traditionally run organizations have completely imploded and gone bankrupt, or been involved in HR lawsuits?
I find it completely asinine that people will use GitHub's problems to push their pet theories.
Regardless of the details, that things escalated to the extent they did can almost entirely be attributed to it being nobody's job to resolve this earlier. Engineers get paid for shipping code. Executives ensure that the company is moving in the right direction, and often the concerns of one engineer are rounding error. People need to be able to say: "If things happen, I will go to this person, whose long-term success at this company is entirely determined by the success of this particular half-dozen of us."
Like you did here, and I quote: "The proper target for anger in this case is the NSA and the government which allowed this to happen"? But mention sexism and everybody's a fucking lawyer waiting for all sides to be heard. Double standard?
I don't understand why everyone is so excited about this. Any company with more than about 10 employees is going to have some BS drama like this going on.
Did people think github was different because it has a cat/octopus thing for a logo?
Actually, we have a pretty good amount of information. We have one point of view from the employee who left, a message from Github that mostly confirms her story, as well as knowledge about how Github works internally. We have good reason to believe that was is on the table is mostly true, therefore it's not inappropriate to theorize about how things could have been done better, especially since similar stories may play (or have played out) out at other companies.
These aren't pet theories but an excellent starting point for a discussion.
I would have expected a community of smart individuals to sincerely examine these accusations, even if they are not the whole story behind this current scandal, because we could only benefit from such a discussion.
That this article has been flagged by several people only demonstrates a great level of immaturity and that we, as an industry, more than deserve scorn. We can certainly not claim to be open minded and thoughtful after this.
[deleted]
When you're a woman in tech and you're hurt by the community reaction, here on HN as elsewhere, indignation certainly has its place. Catherine Bracy, the author of this post, is an expert on issues of sexism in Silicon Valley, and what she says should carry weight here. The article I posted yesterday was written in the early 70s, and discussed problems in different (though perhaps strangely similar) settings. The words of a modern day expert well versed in Silicon Valley culture should certainly find their place here. I think it reflects badly on this community that HN was allowed to be indignant in the Aaron Swartz and Ed Snowden cases but not in this. This high standard of not adding new information to the discussion was not applied in those cases, as I distinctly remember the front page flooded with at least 5 similar stories on Snowden/Swartz (articles were flagged back then only after a dozen or so stories, and we're not there yet). In fact, HN should be reeling with indignation against all those who suddenly become cool observers and expert rhetoricians calling to suspend judgment.
Whatever the particulars of the GitHub scandal turn out to be don't matter (for the purpose of this discussion). What better opportunity is there to discuss the very real problem of underrepresentation of women in SV than this? And what you call "bait" others might call raising awareness. This isn't the NRA talking after a school shootout, but someone discussing what is possibly the biggest problem in SV culture today as a response to a painful, though far from tragic event.
I also find it problematic that a post by a prominent woman is found to be "indignant and lacking in information", while far worse stupidities by race-car driving programmers are featured prominently. At the very least, I think some affirmative action wouldn't hurt us. In fact, this could be our finest moment, and we're squandering it.
ADD: it is perhaps ironic that Bracy implies that this revulsion from politics in SV is simply a form of a very destructive kind of politics, and flagging this story is precisely a case in point. It is a strong political statement that only nurtures what I think is very bad politics.
I urge you to unflag the story unless you strongly believe that its appearance on the front page is somehow bad for HN.
I deleted my comment. Sorry for denting the thread.
From my experience, smartness, sincerity and a sufficiently malleable ego (that enables one to look at accusations constructively) don't always go hand-in-hand. They seem like orthogonal qualities.
Github is the nerds version of MH370.
People who weren't there arguing about how something they know nothing about actually happened and what can be done to prevent it.
I think to prevent something like this happening again we need to ensure employees can't disable their transponders, either that or make sure we have more power structures in the cockpit.
It's cute that you think nerds aren't talking about MH370.
With correlation and causation unknown, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills reading this article.