[throwmylifawy]

Reading through the comments as black person is depressing.

Many of the comments question whether the accusations are even true or collusive attack because of an unfounded accusation that black people tend to be SJWs (stereotyping). Others blame affirmative-action, bad schools, etc. (classic misdirection). Some even venture into the possibility that a black person complaining about being passed over for promotion might just not be good enough for the job and then just blame discrimination rather than facing the truth (pure gaslighting). Others just go on to attack the New York Times (attacking the messenger). I am waiting for the data science guru to synthesize statistics about how everything is just fine!

I am not going to pretend to be the arbiter of truth here, but can we just take a moment to imagine the possibility that racism (specifically against black Americans) is a problem in America in 2020? Is it such a stretch of the imagination? I mean if we can unquestioningly believe that cryptocurrency is viable currency, we can certainly give the benefit of the doubt to the black workers who have abandoned the company.

[generalizations]

It seems like what you're saying is entirely possible. However, where I disagree is that you seem to expect us to simply "face the truth" that the discrimination exists; you're deploring the existence of alternate possibilities!

> Some even venture into the possibility that a black person complaining about being passed over for promotion might just not be good enough for the job and then just blame discrimination rather than facing the truth (pure gaslighting). [emphasis mine]

Let's consider the possibility, but please don't expect us to just accept it's true. And please don't expect us not to consider other possible alternatives.

[aparsons]

This is the problem posed by “SJW” entities in a nutshell. Of course racism exists, and AAs have been one of the big targets for decades.

But even considering another alternative explanation to something related to discrimination gets you on the list of racists/deserving-of-cancellation/etc. There is always room for debate, especially in a case like this where information is sparse. Forcibly shutting down anyone who wants to exercise their thinking is just socially acceptable censorship.

[aspaceman]

But no one is being forcibly shut down here.

The debate is happening. It occurs. But then someone makes a comment like above: “is all this debate really necessary?” and the response is “this is censorship”.

I would agree that some viewpoints are silenced in public contexts. But insofar as this conversation, I don’t see anyone being cancelled or shut down for an opinion. That just seems like a defensive reaction to me.

[xvector]

> But no one is being forcibly shut down here

But they are. If you are skeptical of the claims in the article, then apparently you have taken a “depressing” (incorrect/intolerant) stance.

[enumjorge]

Describing a stance as “depressing” seems like a ridiculously low bar for something to count as a forcible shut down.

[heavyset_go]

Sounds like you're upset that people are allowed to have opinions about your opinions, which would be pretty ironic.

[JacobSuperslav]

people get very defensive when others say their opinion isn't valid.

[arolihas]

That’s not what being forcibly shut down means. Somebody disagreeing with you isn’t oppression.

[RestlessMind]

> But insofar as this conversation, I don’t see anyone being cancelled or shut down for an opinion

Because this conversation allows me to be anonymous. I simply don't dare expressing my thoughts with my real identity attached. Who knows whether I will get cancelled or fired.

The people working on suppression of certain viewpoints have hurt themselves in the long run. Now I am seeing candid discussions happening only in small trusted circles or on anonymous forums. That can be another reason why we saw embarrassing polling errors in 2016/2020 - openly supporting Trump can be a very risky move for someone.

[tptacek]

Could you show me this list of racists you're referring to, with regards to this HN thread and the dangers of disputing the racism of Coinbase's management?

[baryphonic]

This is an odd sort of response. Shouldn't the people claiming that HN is chock full of racism be the ones enumerating exactly which users are engaging in racism and exactly what behaviors they're doing that promote racism? All I see are exceedingly vague accusations, most of which seem to operate from particularly uncharitable assumptions that equate any disagreement as another manifestation of racism.

Ironically, this is not dissimilar to how Zed Shaw treated you. We could either have just believed his accusation that you defamed him, or we could ask for evidence. (My interpretation is that you were making a sarcastic joke at Shaw's expense, mostly because of his extremely opinionated personality, and not making some sort of serious evaluation of his work. And, besides, literally speaking, what you said is probably true.)

If people want to argue that instances of racist behavior exist (at Coinbase, on HN or elsewhere within and outside the industry), few are going argue. The problem is that anecdotal instances do not imply systemic issues unless there is evidence of systemic issues themselves. When the most common response to "show me your evidence of systemic racism" is "you're a racist," then don't be surprised when some of us conclude that the issue is largely overhyped nonsense.

[spamizbad]

I think the point here is “you can’t say certain things or you get put on a no-hire list” is nothing more than a boogieman for adults.

Lists that usually do exist in private tend to be ones like “Don’t work for X company/person” which have a plethora of motivations that may or may not have anything to do with discriminatory behavior. But these are circulated and composed by people at the bottom rather then the top so nobody gets fired: the biggest risk here is you lose out on talent.

[neilv]

I'm glad you spoke up, and maybe I and others should've.

There are some kinds of topics that I can immediately guess will invite certain kinds of comments on HN, and I've learned to just take a deep breath and ignore them. (If it gets really bad, I go catch up on that other Web site that does over-the-top criticism of HN, so that I don't feel like the only one.) On rare occasions, I've tried to engage some of the, but it's just draining.

However, when not enough people speak up, that can send an implicit message that some life-sucking background noise from others is OK with everyone else, when it's not.

[mssundaram]

> I go catch up on that other Web site that does over-the-top criticism of HN, so that I don't feel like the only one

Which is that, if you can share?

[function_seven]

It's n-gate [dot] com

I think you have to type in that URL. If the referrer is set to this site, you get goatse'd or something.

[sumedh]

The comments link at n-gate points back to HN?

[adjkant]

Very well said.

People seem to be trying to apply a criminal prosecution level standard for proof/evidence, one that is almost never applied to other companies on non hot button issues or generally on HN. You highlighted the specific hoops people are jumping through well. I hope maybe people can examine why they are so motivated to use this hypocritical double standard to defend this company they have no direct ties with.

[aparsons]

Can it not he argued that the recent phenomenon of cancelling / treating those accused of these acts as criminals and trying to ruin their livelihoods, means applying a criminal level of evidence is warranted?

[adjkant]

No.

We have played this argument out and I'd love to get over beating this dead horse, here and all over the tech industry. Go look elsewhere in the comments. Fantastical conspiracy webs ("trying to ruin their livelihoods") require according evidence, not refutation. We have a slew of people on the record, and direct response from Coinbase. Not to mention that no one is getting "cancelled" here.

The bigger conversation to be had is that cancel culture doesn't exist as you describe even.

I'm simply tired of this.

[RestlessMind]

> We have played this argument out

I didn't get the memo.

> I'd love to get over beating this dead horse, here and all over the tech industry

Among the people I know closely enough, I see almost no one who has changed their minds ever since these discussions started circa 2015. And I have been in the tech industry for a long time. So keep beating that dead horse, or beat it in a different way.

> Not to mention that no one is getting "cancelled" here.

Some people are trying very hard. NYT article seems like a smear campaign as part of that overall effort.

> cancel culture doesn't exist as you describe even.

In my experience, it does. I personally know many other people for whom it does. Maybe your bubble is very thick? Maybe people are not honest and open with you because you are highly opinionated and based on this comment, not open to an open dialog?

> I'm simply tired of this.

If you keep communicating the same way as in this comment, you will keep getting tired. I don't think cancel culture, SJWs or suppression of uncomfortable viewpoints are going to stop anytime soon, nor the secret revulsion of these trends.

[adjkant]

If you go look at my other comments over the thread, how I respond very much varies based on context. I spent energy where I think others will actually benefit.

> Among the people I know closely enough, I see almost no one who has changed their minds ever since these discussions started circa 2015.

You've pointed this out yourself, why in the world would I keep beating the dead horse here? Do you think people haven't tried different ways? Why should I expend that effort to people who are clearly dug in to the other side permanently? I look for good-will first to engage with people who appear to be open in some way, like in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25234798

The thing you're missing here is that the purpose of this type of response is not for you or OP. It's to show that this type of response is not blindly agreed upon or grounded. When its espoused with no response or criticism, it has a meaningful negative effect on marginalized people in this industry. To quote someone else on this top level thread:

> When not enough people speak up, that can send an implicit message that some life-sucking background noise from others is OK with everyone else, when it's not.

[prionassembly]

Do you want to have that bigger conversation, or are you tired?

Is the assertion that you’re tired expected to lend weight to the version (that cancel culture is a bogus notion) for which you’re evoking (but not presenting) a defense?

[adjkant]

No, it's a commentary on how much lifting is expected to be done by each side in a good faith discussion and the imbalance exhibited all over the current discussion. Everyone has the same tools - if you want to understand the perspective you asked for, you can absolutely do that!

Here, I grabbed a link off Google for you with one perspective: https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/2020/07/cancel-cul...

If you prefer less meat but a more known publishing house: https://time.com/5735403/cancel-culture-is-not-real/

If you find that worth discussing, I'd say go ahead and submit it to HN!

[_wt8k]

I'm sorry. HN attracts a certain audience, and so do cryptocurrency companies, and some people from this audience tend to immediately pivot to "culture war" issues whenever allegations of racism arise. The priorities of some commenters on this submission are very misplaced.

For example, people can disagree on the merits of e.g. affirmative action, but if former CoinBase employees are alleging that lower-qualified white employees are being promoted in favor of higher-qualified black employees, then that's a serious matter that you ought to address before pivoting the conversation to other topics. Hiring bias is institutional racism, and allegations of such bias should be thoroughly investigated. But, it's probably easier for some people to talk about affirmative action, but harder for the same people to discuss promotion practices that are biased against black employees. I hope that people who feel eager to talk about the former are also prepared to address the latter.

Also seeing some of the comments, I would like to remind some people not to make racial equality issues into black versus Asian. Both groups experience racism (often different kinds of racism), racial equality is not a zero-sum game, and surely we can find good-faith solutions that help one group without pushing down another.

[blub]

When accusations of racism are being thrown around carelessly and people are having their reputations destroyed and lives turned upside down because of a single thing they (allegedly) said, the potential future targets of these accusations realize that the stakes just became much higher for them. So why would they support and enable those that might come for their own heads next?

It's rational to be antagonistic in such a situation.

[slg]

What is "careless" about the accusations in the article and who at Coinbase is having their life ruined by a "single thing they (allegedly) said"? It sounds like you are letting your fears of this overall issue impact how you view these specific accusations against a specific company.

[blub]

The fact that my comment doesn't mention the word "Coinbase" should be a pretty strong hint that I'm referring to a general situation.

What happens at one company is utterly irrelevant, but what happens in many places and in many countries is much more concerning and it also reflects on this situation and the comments.

[slg]

So are you protesting against any accusations of racism regardless of the specific circumstances? Otherwise why bring up something that is only relevant in general instead of this particular situation?

[triceratops]

> people are having their reputations destroyed and lives turned upside down because of a single thing they (allegedly) said

Then perhaps you can find it in you to empathize with the black folks who are scared of the police, and can begin to understand BLM. You have something in common with them.

[blub]

I continue to look out after friends and of course family and strongly believe in equal basic rights for all human beings but BLM (and other causes) are not my fight.

Starting several years ago I couldn't deny any more that several groups use political correctness as a weapon to hurt others. They do not deserve my help nor empathy.

[triceratops]

I said empathy for black people scared of the police. You really don't see the parallels?

For BLM I said "understand", not help or support.

[wwright]

Do you have any evidence that reputations are being destroyed by unfounded accusations of racism to a significant degree?

Secondly, have you compared that to the damage inflicted by racists not being held accountable in society currently?

[demarq]

that point of view is only because you feel that someone could come after you with a false accusation. but you need to see it as a feeling rather than a rational decision you made

people say the same about sexual harassment accusations, once a video, or admittance comes out silence...

most of the times people want there to be videos and solid evidence to believe - but you yourself know that in 2020 we have members of the police force actively killing an meting out their own law upon black people

why is is so hard to believe that behind closed doors people can act and behave in discriminatory ways towards black people?

shall we start walking with little microphones and cameras to work? is this what black people should deal with going to work?

[kaitai]

I understand that people feel threatened by accusations of racism, but we should subject those feelings to the same scrutiny that fear of vaccines, fear of blood transfusions, fears of child kidnapping, fear of having our child trafficked for sex, and various fears of violence are subjected to. If we look at data, we find that many of our fears are not calibrated to probability of occurrence or even to the expected value of the outcome -- they're instead calibrated to media coverage.

Two guys and a gal were fired after Donglegate. People's lives are being turned upside-down in many ways by social media, whether its discussion of justice issues or sex tapes or your dog or your toast going viral. Discriminatory behavior has long been documented in employment, housing sales and rentals, financial services, etc -- just today I was reading about the riots in Cicero in 1951, when a mob of thousands attacked an apartment building in Cicero, IL into which a black couple attempted to move -- and now some of this behavior is being caught on video, unsurprisingly.

Sure, you can be antagonistic, but as doctors have discovered with malpractice, it's actually more productive and more optimized on a financial level to be gracious. Doctors who are honest and express sympathy and empathy, with an apology [1], when things go poorly are far less likely to be sued for malpractice (more links in linked article). Similarly, when you'd done something that appears to someone else to be racist, why not simply apologize (even something like, "Sorry, that was not my intention!") and then try to do better, even ask how you can do better?

If you are committed to an ideology of white supremacy, then of course this doesn't make sense as a next move. But if you're a normal person who just does things that in retrospect do come across as thoughtless or uninformed, like asking your Asian-American colleague where they're really really from and complimenting them on their English, or telling your Black colleague that you're surprised at how articulate they are, or giving a nine-year-old female chess genius a doll when she just wants a chess set... why not just apologize and do better next time?

The world is made of imperfect people who are all gonna die anyway. Most likely no one will care about your reputation in 100 years, even your great-grandkids (I knew my great-grandparents and I only knew a bit about them). So use this time to actually do your part to make the world better -- why not? It will most likely make you feel better, feel you have more integrity, and you'll be happier.

[1] https://www.natlawreview.com/article/you-had-me-i-m-sorry-im...

[secondcoming]

Because it's impossible to prove you're not a racist.

I could claim that you have a sexual interest in children. Good luck proving you don't. Would you just 'apologise and do better next time'?

[x86_64Ubuntu]

I'm black too, and let's be honest here. The burden of proof that is being posed by folks on HN isn't because they are actually seeking proof, it's so that they can say

>"You don't have sufficient evidence, so we are going to go with whatever non-race based reason I can find as the cause"

Seeking evidence about an event is a worthy activity, but becomes a fools errand when the audience is sympathetic if not outright supportive of the wrongdoers.

[treis]

>I'm black too, and let's be honest here. The burden of proof that is being posed by folks on HN isn't because they are actually seeking proof, it's so that they can say

That's not honest and that's not why I asked for proof.

[koheripbal]

Meanwhile you are asking us to believe your narrative without evidence.

[bellevue]

100% agree. I saw some of the shit posted about this on Cryptocurrency forums when Coinbase posted their weird tirade about wanting to be "neutral and apolitical" with regards to social justice and a few days ago about how everything is a lie as they tried to pre-empt this article.

It all feels of gaslighting and has a shit ton of people buying into it.

At the end of the day, the best thing for Coinbase employees to do is to jump ship to a competitor (I for one, am happy to give a referral to any Coinbase employee who is leaving due to all this) - but absolutely vile that they would try to buy-out all POC in the company.

[baryphonic]

> At the end of the day, the best thing for Coinbase employees to do is to jump ship to a competitor (I for one, am happy to give a referral to any Coinbase employee who is leaving due to all this) - but absolutely vile that they would try to buy-out all POC in the company.

What makes you think POC are equivalent with woke activists? That seems a bit like stereotyping to me. It also seems to contradict actual data.[1] While most black Americans agree that racial issues are still serious problems, they tend not to endorse the extreme progressive interpretations and policy recommendations.

If I were to guess, tech workers are much more likely to be progressive activists than workers in most other industries. This includes the (shamefully small) number of black tech workers as well. But at the same time, almost all of the activists are white.

[1] see appendix 1.1.1 https://hiddentribes.us/pdf/hidden_tribes_report.pdf

[joijoiwejrr]

> What makes you think POC are equivalent with woke activists?

It's actually the opposite of the truth; "woke" activists/SJWs/whatever you want to call them are disproportionately white.

[i-write-comment]

This comment is a good example of an insidious trend that has existed throughout America's history, which tries to offload any agitation against racial discrimination onto white outsiders. In the past, race riots and protests were often blamed on Northern abolitionists, communists and Jews, basically "white agitators who aren't from here". You see this same trend today, when protests are blamed on Soros-paid white agitators from "out of state" and Antifa.

It's intended to mollify any concerns of well-meaning whites that POC might actually really be upset with racial discrimination, and actually want significant change beyond superficial proposals.

[baryphonic]

> It's intended to mollify any concerns of well-meaning whites that POC might actually really be upset with racial discrimination, and actually want significant change beyond superficial proposals.

First, you have no idea of my intent, because I didn't tell you. Second, what you allege to be my intent is not my intent. Third, conceding for the sake of argument that you were right about my intent, why is it that the measured facts totally contradict your narrative, i.e. those who want radical change appear to be overwhelmingly white and particularly non-black?

Are you one of those who think logic and data are tools of the white oppressor?

[i-write-comment]

Support for "defund the police", both the harsh slogan and the actual policy of reallocating some funding to social services, is dramatically higher among POC than whites so I don't think your analysis that "those who want radical change appear to be overwhelmingly white and particularly non-black" is correct.

https://morningconsult.com/2020/06/17/defund-the-police-comm...

[baryphonic]

Framing in these types of polls is incredibly important (indeed, I found two others from around the same time as yours, and all were fairly different from one another in their conclusions[1][2]).

If you ask people whether they want the police presence in their communities to stay the same or increase, large majorities agree. Only 19% of black Americans want police presence to decrease.[3]

And yet none of this is inconsistent. If the problems in predominantly non-white urban areas are at least in part crime problems that the police aren't solving, it makes sense for those citizens to want to take money from the police, whom they perceive to not be doing their jobs. At the same time, these same people probably would prefer the police to just do their jobs in the first place.

[1]https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/64-americans-oppose-defund-p...

[2]https://news.gallup.com/poll/315962/americans-say-policing-n...

[3]https://news.gallup.com/poll/316571/black-americans-police-r...

[CryptoPunk]

All I see is you not finding it conceivable that someone could not think like you do, and think that every organization should be committed to your social causes, and also be a decent person who believes in fairness and justice for all.

Hence the baseless personal attacks.

[unityByFreedom]

My takeaway from such comments is their perception that it is not a problem for them.

And, they are in denial, since if it wasn't a problem for them they would not question the story.

Sharing stories does help. Racism is rooted in lack of exposure to diversity. It may never be eradicated but working to end it among every new generation is worthwhile IMO.

[inglor_cz]

"Racism is rooted in lack of exposure to diversity."

Uh, have a talk with South African whites sometimes.

And isn't American Deep South, with its 30-50 per cent black population, considered stereotypically racist, while you have a lot of anti-racist movements in mostly white places like Oregon and New England?

It does not work in Europe either. For example, the far-right Rassemblement National has most support on the French Riviera and Corsica, places where the Arab and African populations are very numerous. It struggles to gain support in Bretagne, where there is little immigration.

Israel is very diverse and the level of ethnic and religious violence there is massive.

I am Slavic myself; traveling around former Yugoslavia, I heard things that would absolutely stun American readers. There are people absolutely ready to slit throats of the villagers two kilometers away, just because of a different religion.

From your comments, I hear the conviction that upon meeting people from a different culture, everyone will rejoice and cherish the changes. You do not take into account a possibility that two cultures may, upon contact, develop a serious conflict, perhaps even ending in war.

Diverse places like Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia, former USSR, the Caucasus, Lebanon, Iraq or lately Western European metropoles seem to be a hotbed of conflicts.

[unityByFreedom]

You can grow up in a diverse city while isolating yourself to a subsection that has no diversity.

Look at Trump, from NYC. Spent all his time at private clubs.

[koonsolo]

> Racism is rooted in lack of exposure to diversity.

The biggest racists that I know grew up in an environment with the most diversity (talking about EU here, not US). It also shows in political results, where extreme right is most voted on in diverse environments.

[unityByFreedom]

Sure you can find racists anywhere. It's more about their home environment than it is about anything external. But if your parents tell you white people are bad and you meet one who's nice you might start to question that upbringing.

[koonsolo]

You clearly didn't hear what I said.

For example, there is a reason why gay people don't like to walk around in muslim environments, and it has nothing to do with how their parents raised them.

So like I said, your theory is that when you are exposed to diversity, you have less racism. But the numbers (such as political preference) show completely the opposite.

[unityByFreedom]

I did carefully read what you said. I'm sorry you do not feel understood. Have a good one mate.

[leppr]

I find it difficult to conceive how one could work at/manage a mainstream cryptocurrency company and be racist.

Both empirically (it's the most multicultural tech scene I ever witnessed), and in principles (one of the core tenets of crypto is precisely eliminating discrimination), crypto would be among the most counter productive fields for a racist to spend their time on.

Of course I'm not discounting the fact that humans are often irrational and incoherent, so it seems fair to give the benefit of the doubt to both parties until we have more information.

[adjkant]

I think it's helpful here to examine the conception of a racist. Most racists don't identify as such and have a racist agenda they consciously act on. In these cases, it's baked in through various experiences into the subconscious, and rationalized away in many ways. Maybe it's eugenics, maybe it's media bias, maybe it's simply a personal preference, and they think they don't let it affect their decisions.

> it's the most multicultural tech scene I ever witnessed

Coinbase's own (unrefuted) numbers show they are far worse than other tech companies. Where is your conception based off of?

> one of the core tenets of crypto is precisely eliminating discrimination

As this thread as made clear if you go to the bottom of the comments, stated principles and actual beliefs/actions often don't match in tech. Closeted republicans in tech compared to the leaning of corporate action is a great example of that. In some ways, Coinbase said the quiet part out loud with their apolitical stance. When that happened, tons of people flocked to applaud them, both on HN and in the VC industry. All of this perfectly aligns with finding racism within said company, and the tech industry as a whole.

[leppr]

> Coinbase's own (unrefuted) numbers show they are far worse than other tech companies. Where is your conception based off of?

They are (were?) at 3% vs 6% average, on small absolute numbers. Not great but certainly within margin of forgiveness.

My conception is based on the scene as a whole, which is extremely international. Look at the public personalities in crypto vs. the wider VC tech scene. It's possible Coinbase is a pocket of prejudice, but it would be an exception.

> stated principles and actual beliefs/actions often don't match in tech.

I agree, but this isn't just a principle here, the mechanics of crypto themselves prevent racial, gender, socioeconomic bias. You can't say one thing and do the other when the code is open source and is the main UI. That's the difference with things like big-tech's empty "privacy pledges" for instance, here the bad thing is made actually structurally inconvenient.

[adjkant]

> which is extremely international

Racism against Africans can be found internationally, but in this case we are talking specifically African-Americans. Being international does not mean diverse in this specific way, it just means diverse in terms of nationality. For a good example, as the article and many have highlighted, asian representation is not an issue at Coinbase. Racism isn't generalized but specific to races and cultures. A person can be prejudice to just one category or many categories.

> the mechanics of crypto themselves prevent racial, gender, socioeconomic bias

mechanics and community are not one in the same, and crypto is still plenty susceptible to discrimination for any transactions that begin off-network (most all, humans are social creatures). While the mechanics help a small edge case or two, I don't really see any meaningful difference. What's the real material racism that crypto stops that other forms of payment or speculative trading fall victim to?

[leppr]

You may be right on the first point, I won't speculate. I just wanted to point out that it's unlikely to be something endemic to the space.

> What's the real material racism that crypto stops that other forms of payment or speculative trading fall victim to?

Access to financial services like loans for instance. No human or even AI model to judge you based on external factors.

[adjkant]

> I just wanted to point out that it's unlikely to be something endemic to the space.

I'm still not sure why that would be the case. FWIW I don't suspect it is either, but I don't see any reason it would be more or less than the tech community at large. In this case, Coinbase is reflective not of the subcateogry but of leadership.

> Access to financial services like loans for instance

https://blockfi.com/apply-for-crypto-loan

> Along with our proven KYC/AML process, we review an applicant’s credit history and other information to assess for risk.

This still has all the normal hurdles for a loan. Just because the asset is on a ledger doesn't remove the human factor. Not to mention that a direct collateral backed loan is already very unlikely to get rejected at a traditional financial institution. I didn't find any actual crypto loan options that weren't collateral backed from a quick search. Am I missing other options?

[xenihn]

>All of this perfectly aligns with finding racism within said company, and the tech industry as a whole.

I don't understanding why you're stopping at the tech industry when it's a problem in every other industry too. I'd go so far as to say it's a problem that permeates every industry in the entire world.

[adjkant]

All of this is within the context of the "apolitical" statement by Coinbase and those who engaged with the post, which was by and large only the tech industry. I'm not looking to go on a full analysis of "racism in the world" in HN comments today lols

[textgel]

You can find it as depressing, problematic and triggering as you like; those interested in a civilised society aren't interested in bringing in witch trials no matter how traumatised the progressive crowd are by their unreasonable demands not being met.

[michaericalribo]

Reading through the comments as a white person, I’m depressed, too...I hear you, and it pains me that so many in tech are just clueless / insensitive to the real problems of the minority voices in our communities.

Systemic racism is insidious, for so many reasons, and one of them is that it is not always overt. I believe the aggrieved commenters reacting to SJW boogeymen are not ‘racists’, in the sense that they are not consciously discriminating against people different from themselves. But voicing racism is only the tip of the iceberg! Systemic racism is baked into the system, that’s what makes it systemic!

Some of the important questions we (white // male // straight // what have you, fill in your own) need to ask ourselves are like:

How many Black friends do I have? (Nowhere near as many as White friends. That makes intuitive sense: almost everyone in my building is White, same for my job, most of my friends’ friends are White too... But what choices do I make on a daily basis that reinforce that? What different choices could I make to actually expand the range of people I have a chance to interact with?)

How can we better address inequality? (I have a doctorate and I’ll admit it, I’m a bit of a snob, and I’m proud of what I’ve accomplished. My strong preference is to hire based on merit: I’ve worked with incompetent people, unfortunately; and I would be pissed if I wasn’t rewarded for my own merit. But there’s a lot of backstory that got me here: private schools, SAT prep classes, I wasn’t bullied, my own computer, not having to have a job to support my family, not being sick, my native English language skills, I’m handsome and charming and tall and well educated and know lots of lingo and have shared experiences with most hiring managers I’ve met—all of these things helped me a lot to get to where I am now. Systemic racism comes into the picture because there are real social structures that have prevented Black and other minority communities from having access to these same resources. Just a few off the cuff examples: Jim Crow, urban food deserts, underfunded public schools, shitty computers at the public library. Merit hiring seems to me a lot less fair when I consider friends of mine who don’t have that ‘merit’ because of factors that were determined far out of their control.)

What would it be like for me to feel uncomfortable or unwelcome or unappreciated at my job? (Technical customer calls are always a boys club, and I’m good at banter w Midwestern ag tech b2b customers. But shit, I sure notice when they mispronounce a coworker’s name, or start a call w our group of men and women as ‘well, gentlemen’, or crack a dick pun. And it makes me sad to imagine what it would feel like to be the odd one out.)

Systemic racism isn’t going away, or easy to fix. We all ought to start giving some real thought to the unconscious choices we make that contribute to tech feeling like a blanket unwelcome industry for a whole lot of people. Smart, kind, creative, strong people, passionate people, worthwhile people.

———

Edit to add that there were supposed to be emojis sprinkled throughout there, which made clear when I was joking...so you should assume the best in me throughout ;D

[Sacho]

I apologize in advance because you seem to be emotionally invested in this, but I really do not understand the questions you pose in your comment. What did you actually expect from the discussion? Were there not enough comments against Coinbase? Were there not enough comments outraged about the perceived racist behavior of it? Do you think none of those commenters "imagine the possibility that racism is a problem in America in 2020"?

Let's assume that I am 100% certain of all the accusations. How many types of comments do you expect to see about this? Condemn the company, point out systemic racism doesn't just affect Coinbase but everything, offer condolences and sympathy, support efforts to reduce racism. All of these comments exist in the thread.

What if I don't believe all the accusations are true? There are multitudes of reasons why that could be the case, which reflects in the number of possibilities being commented on. By your own contention, racism is a problem in America, so you would expect at least some of the comments to be racist, or at least controversial. You seem to have focused only on the worst ones, ignoring the discussions that followed them, whether positive or negative. You've ignored all the nuanced positions or straw-manned them. You're dismissive of people's comments or concerns while simultaneously asking people to not be dismissive of your concerns. I really don't get it.

[tptacek]

You appear to be arguing with the comment you wish that person had written, not they one they actually wrote. The actual comment is specific about the pattern of problematic comments they observed:

* They suggest that Black people are in general SJWs

* They attempt to litigate affirmative action rather than the claims in the article

* They argue that Black employees passed over for promotion were underqualified.

* They dismiss the entire article on the basis of it having appeared in the New York Times.

Take issues with any of these specific complaints if you want, but don't pretend that the comment simply said "there aren't enough anti-Coinbase comments here", because they didn't say that at at all.

[wolco2]

The message was I can't believe people made comments with the points above. Everyone should be on the page that racism exists specifically against black people in 2020.

I don't think the parent poster was pretending anything the parent-parent poster didn't share.

[adjkant]

> The message was I can't believe people made comments with the points above.

Again, where was that said? Disbelief is expressed nowhere in the post.

Even if that was the message, what in the world is the reply adding here?

The post is basically:

- points out the poster is emotionally invested in being discriminated against

- "well racism exists in 2020 idk what to tell you"

- You shouldn't expect people have any sort of productive discussion about the article

All of that is then followed by then saying they misrepresented everything. I'm not even directly tied to this in any way, and that made my blood boil a bit. The first line really sets the tone by leading with an apology, yet posting still. It ends in confusion while contributing nothing and basically saying "well the world is shit, expect it" but also trying to argue that all of this isn't shitty at the same time, tacitly adding to the racism. It's just incredibly unempathetic and doesn't really serve a purpose.

And yet, we have people now commenting in detail on the linguistic interpretation of the post to try and eke out some case for the response. What is this even for?

[Taek]

The response from Coinbase does not feel to me like one that would be presented by a company that is effectively seeking out and mitigating pockets of racism within the org.

The comments section on HN do not leave me feeling like racism is being given enough consideration within the community.

[chandra381]

> The comments section on HN do not leave me feeling like racism is being given enough consideration within the community.

Like it or not, there's an instinctive urge to deny that there are problems, and make it look like the victim is at fault for complaining. Nobody sits down and actually listens to what they have to say. Really disappointed by the HN community on this - and a bunch of big VCs - Jason Calacanis, Paul Graham, Balaji Srinivasan - who flocked to the defence of Coinbase after the memo pre-empting the story, but then were conveniently silent once the report actually came out.

I think this is a broader silicon valley problem - that oh, our companies are perfect! We can do no wrong. This applies to sexism, racism, any kind of -isms. It might also be illuminating reading to take a look at what HN commenters were saying about for example Susan Fowler's blog post (questioning her credentials, speculating that she was making false allegations) or even the Google protests about Andy Rubin's payout.

[Gibbon1]

> I think this is a broader silicon valley problem - that oh, our companies are perfect! We can do no wrong. This applies to sexism, racism, any kind of -isms.

Shorter: We can't be racist! All we care about is money.

[jayd16]

Talk about gas lighting. The commenter should just accept racism as a daily fact, not be surprised or saddened, and not even mention the sadness it brings? I find this pretty offensive.

[kaitai]

How 'bout comments talking about how to fix these problems proactively in other companies?

Why not do something useful instead of just waste minutes and photons?

[spamizbad]

If you know zero Black people and work with zero Black people it’s very easy to come to the conclusion that there is no racism against Black people. If there was you’d see it!

[Taek]

This comment is too snarky for my taste but the main thrust of the message is spot on. When I've taken the time to ask black friends and black professionals in my industry about their experience, it's very clear that they deal with an extra level of complications and hardships compared to me.

And it's not "my one black friend was a victim of racism this one time." It's just generally harder to get a job. It's just generally harder to get promoted. It's just generally harder to be taken seriously relative to your white peers.

And that's why these responses from Coinbase are unsatisfying. Every company and every hiring process has elements of racism in it. We haven't escaped the biases that permeate our culture. There are companies that are aware of these biases and work hard to minimize their impact, and there are companies that stick their heads in the sand and say 'nope, no racism here! Find me actual proof!'.

[tptacek]

Same! For instance, it never occurred to me that Black men have to be especially careful about expressing frustration, because white coworkers find any expression of anger from a Black man threatening. But that's what my neighbor, who also works in tech, told me: that he's basically never allowed to object as forcefully as white coworkers, because otherwise he'll get HR complaints.

There's probably a whole lot of shit like this that we just don't know, as a group, about.

[xenihn]

Who would be filing these complaints? Do you think they would primarily be filed by men, women, or an equal mix of both? And do you believe it would exclusively be white people regardless of the gender distribution?

[eric_b]

The general thesis of the diversity trainings I've attended is that white men believe they are superior to black men (sometimes consciously, sometimes subconsciously, depending on the fervor of the trainer). White men are racist just by existing - being part of the "white patriarchy" gives them a sense of entitlement and many advantages, whether they are aware or not. So let's say for the sake of argument all that is true...

Then why would a white man ever feel threatened by an angry black man expressing his opinion?

And anyways, what white person in 2020 complains to HR about an angry black man? And if they do, who listens? Get real.

[joshuamorton]

Engaging with this as though it were made in good faith:

A white man might be threatened by a black man expressing their opinion for two reasons. First, the audacity of someone "inferior" daring to express their opinion assertively. That could be seen as threatening. Secondly (and probably more likely) the social conditioning that black people, but especially men, acting with anger are naturally dangerous. That is, someone may feel vastly more physically intimidated by a black man expressing the same opinion, with the same words, at the same volume level than a white woman.

Would a person complain to HR about that? Absolutely. Would HR respond? Depends on the company and the people.

[tptacek]

If you're just going to say "you're a liar", why waste so many words?

[triceratops]

> White men are racist just by existing

I've attended my share of diversity trainings but none of them taught me this. Maybe you just had shitty trainers?

[throwaway201103]

And why does this stereotype of aggressive black men persist? Who promotes it?

[tptacek]

White people who are afraid of Black people, I'd imagine.

[throwaway201103]

And why are they afraid? Where did they get the notion that black people are aggressive?

[bleepblorp]

News media. See e.g.:

https://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/news-media/r...

for more information.

[spamizbad]

I apologize for the snark but tthreads on this site that touch this topic are always uh... challenging.

[dvtrn]

So the lived experiences of actual black people when they speak up and straight up say ”this is happening to us” means....what, then, in comparison to actually having dealt with said racism personally?

If it’s hard to believe because you haven’t lived it, then is listening to the multitudes of people also not enough?

[userbinator]

Don't assume the other comments here are from non-blacks either...

Edit: so apparently the blacks I know, and who would agree with a lot of the comments here, don't exist...

[remote_phone]

I’ve never worked in a company in Silicon Valley (I’m up to over 10 now over 20 years) where racism would just be silently tolerated. Never. I would certainly speak up against a manager who was casually racist or wouldn’t promote a good black engineer, knowing full well I might have to quit.

I’m sure racism exists but that type of overt racism that this article suggests, in the middle of SF especially in tech, is hard to believe.

So I take the accounts of some sort of systemic racism within Coinbase with a lot of skepticism. Especially the account of the support people who were forced to move to Portland. It sounds like all except one person was forced to move to Portland and both white and black people were asked. There’s a lot missing in that accusation which makes me think they are twisting things out of proportion.

I would love a more detailed account or talking with others. Could there be racists working in Coinbase? Sure. But this article doesn’t cover enough for me to not be skeptical without getting both sides of the story.