4 ms·

This is a small part of the article but the whole "wartime leader" trope is starting to wear thin. Can we please acknowledge it for the euphemism that it is: T

This is a small part of the article but the whole "wartime leader" trope is starting to wear thin. Can we please acknowledge it for the euphemism that it is: Total control by the executive to enable a narrow set of goals while tolerating greater losses for those at the bottom of the chain, in order to achieve a narrow, high priority objective at the expense of everything else (like "don't be evil" or "ethics")

koheripbal 6y ago
"while tolerating greater losses for those at the bottom of the chain" Who are you referring to here? Employees? Americans? Everyone in the world? The poor?
- Lammy 6y ago
  All of the above? https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/27/facebook-employee-death-was-suicide.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/27/facebook-employee-death-was-...
  - pc86 6y ago
    What exactly are you implying by linking this article?
    - Lammy 6y ago
      That Facebook has worked at least one employee literally to death.
      - koheripbal 6y ago
        This basis of that claim is so laughable... > There are rumors that Qin may have endured bullying at Facebook, Young said. However, Young is not an employee at the company and he said that most of the protesters did not work there, either.
        Lammy 6y ago
        I don’t really want to debate the case out of respect for Mr. Qin, but it was easy to observe that he was a SEV owner at that time, and due to present at SEV review, and fighting against a nag robot constantly enforcing a “due date” a week ahead of what he needed and tried to configure in the task tracking tool. Anything beyond that is of course my own speculation, but I feel comfortable saying it is an extremely stressful and unhealthy environment. Even more so when getting a bad performance review could cascade into you losing your job, losing your visa, and having to wrap up your entire life and GTFO within 30 (iirc?) days. Or find a new job within that short time frame that will sponsor your visa. I don’t think you should be so quick to dismiss such a case as merely a personal matter.
- sailfast 6y ago
  Generally depends on the context of the "War" being fought, and (generally) I'd say the criteria would be those with the least agency in the situation that are therefore the most convenient to lose without impacting higher level leadership or impacting the objective of the war. Actual war: line soldiers - higher losses are acceptable for critical objectives. See: D-Day. Against a virus: Workers - higher losses are acceptable for things deemed "Essential" for society to operate. See: Grocery workers. Profitability / Monopoly in tech: Privacy - higher losses are acceptable if another objective (revenue) is deemed critical. See: the current internet. Profitability in general: Employees - dissatisfaction and retention doesn't matter as much as revenue so it is easiest to push policies that hurt employees to help profitability. Customer satisfaction also sometimes sacrificed here. Hostile Take-over: Employees / Investors? Dunno what happens here but folks seem to be referred to as "on war footing" when this kind of thing happens.

koheripbal 6y ago

"while tolerating greater losses for those at the bottom of the chain" Who are you referring to here? Employees? Americans? Everyone in the world? The poor?

Lammy 6y ago
All of the above? https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/27/facebook-employee-death-was-suicide.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/27/facebook-employee-death-was-...
- pc86 6y ago
  What exactly are you implying by linking this article?
  - Lammy 6y ago
    That Facebook has worked at least one employee literally to death.
    - koheripbal 6y ago
      This basis of that claim is so laughable... > There are rumors that Qin may have endured bullying at Facebook, Young said. However, Young is not an employee at the company and he said that most of the protesters did not work there, either.
      - Lammy 6y ago
        I don’t really want to debate the case out of respect for Mr. Qin, but it was easy to observe that he was a SEV owner at that time, and due to present at SEV review, and fighting against a nag robot constantly enforcing a “due date” a week ahead of what he needed and tried to configure in the task tracking tool. Anything beyond that is of course my own speculation, but I feel comfortable saying it is an extremely stressful and unhealthy environment. Even more so when getting a bad performance review could cascade into you losing your job, losing your visa, and having to wrap up your entire life and GTFO within 30 (iirc?) days. Or find a new job within that short time frame that will sponsor your visa. I don’t think you should be so quick to dismiss such a case as merely a personal matter.
sailfast 6y ago
Generally depends on the context of the "War" being fought, and (generally) I'd say the criteria would be those with the least agency in the situation that are therefore the most convenient to lose without impacting higher level leadership or impacting the objective of the war. Actual war: line soldiers - higher losses are acceptable for critical objectives. See: D-Day. Against a virus: Workers - higher losses are acceptable for things deemed "Essential" for society to operate. See: Grocery workers. Profitability / Monopoly in tech: Privacy - higher losses are acceptable if another objective (revenue) is deemed critical. See: the current internet. Profitability in general: Employees - dissatisfaction and retention doesn't matter as much as revenue so it is easiest to push policies that hurt employees to help profitability. Customer satisfaction also sometimes sacrificed here. Hostile Take-over: Employees / Investors? Dunno what happens here but folks seem to be referred to as "on war footing" when this kind of thing happens.