5 ms·

Kalanick probably has an ordered list of employees he's ready to fire until this thing goes away. I wouldn't even put it beyond him to hire someone just so he c

Kalanick probably has an ordered list of employees he's ready to fire until this thing goes away. I wouldn't even put it beyond him to hire someone just so he can fire them after a month or two.

madeofpalk 10y ago
Please don't raise fear, uncertainty, and doubt about this. I don't hold Uber is very high regard, especially when it comes to ethical and moral decisions, but your comment comes with a certain amount of unfound malicious intent that simple hasn't been demonstrated in any of Kalanick's, or Uber's, actions.
- lawless123 10y ago
  " that simple hasn't been demonstrated in any of Kalanick's, or Uber's, actions." We're talking about a company that wanted to dig up dirt on journalists. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/18/uber-exec-apologises-emil-michael-journalist-sarah-lacy https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/18/uber-exec...
  - notimetorelax 10y ago
    One doesn't prove the other.
    - lawless123 10y ago
      You're right, there's smoke everywhere and the stern of the ship is on fire but that doesn't prove the bow is on fire.
      - madeofpalk 10y ago
        I'm not trying to defend Uber! They're certainly a company that has very 'flexible' morals and ethics. However the claim "Kalanick has an ordered list of employees he's ready to fire until this thing goes away. [He probably did] hire someone just so he can fire them after a month or two." is absolutely unfounded and is based in such little reality that it doesn't belong here on HN.
        allengeorge 10y ago
        That was not the statement the OP made. He said "Kalanick probably has an ordered list of employees...", which is not the same as your interpretation ("Kalanick has an ordered list of employees..."). One is a supposition, the other is an assertion.
        washadjeffmad 10y ago
        What they meant was, conditioned on the evidence presented about Uber's actions towards journalists, the likelihood of the existence of list of employees to fire is unaffected. The GP tried to support the probability of their supposition with an unrelated fact, which was called out. A person hating puppies doesn't incline them towards murder any more than liking licorice, even if both might be considered by some to be signs of character flaw or moral failing. Sometimes when there's smoke, there's just some guy trying to have a cigarette in peace away from terrible, judgemental people.
- metaphorm 10y ago
  I think you're quite naive and/or haven't been paying attention to what Uber has been doing for the last few years.

Kalanick probably has an ordered list of employees he's ready to fire until this thing goes away. I wouldn't even put it beyond him to hire someone just so he can fire them after a month or two.

madeofpalk 10y ago

Please don't raise fear, uncertainty, and doubt about this. I don't hold Uber is very high regard, especially when it comes to ethical and moral decisions, but your comment comes with a certain amount of unfound malicious intent that simple hasn't been demonstrated in any of Kalanick's, or Uber's, actions.

lawless123 10y ago
" that simple hasn't been demonstrated in any of Kalanick's, or Uber's, actions." We're talking about a company that wanted to dig up dirt on journalists. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/18/uber-exec-apologises-emil-michael-journalist-sarah-lacy https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/18/uber-exec...
- notimetorelax 10y ago
  One doesn't prove the other.
  - lawless123 10y ago
    You're right, there's smoke everywhere and the stern of the ship is on fire but that doesn't prove the bow is on fire.
    - madeofpalk 10y ago
      I'm not trying to defend Uber! They're certainly a company that has very 'flexible' morals and ethics. However the claim "Kalanick has an ordered list of employees he's ready to fire until this thing goes away. [He probably did] hire someone just so he can fire them after a month or two." is absolutely unfounded and is based in such little reality that it doesn't belong here on HN.
      - allengeorge 10y ago
        That was not the statement the OP made. He said "Kalanick probably has an ordered list of employees...", which is not the same as your interpretation ("Kalanick has an ordered list of employees..."). One is a supposition, the other is an assertion.
        washadjeffmad 10y ago
        What they meant was, conditioned on the evidence presented about Uber's actions towards journalists, the likelihood of the existence of list of employees to fire is unaffected. The GP tried to support the probability of their supposition with an unrelated fact, which was called out. A person hating puppies doesn't incline them towards murder any more than liking licorice, even if both might be considered by some to be signs of character flaw or moral failing. Sometimes when there's smoke, there's just some guy trying to have a cigarette in peace away from terrible, judgemental people.
metaphorm 10y ago
I think you're quite naive and/or haven't been paying attention to what Uber has been doing for the last few years.