3 ms·
Pure speculation but I guess the usual stuff that happens in every other Silicon Valley IT company today: Some employee or a group an employees decided they di
by throw_m239339 6y ago
Pure speculation but I guess the usual stuff that happens in every other Silicon Valley IT company today:
Some employee or a group an employees decided they didn't like one of Coinbase's client because of their political affiliation and wanted to kick them out because they think they have a say as to who Coinbase should do business with and who they shouldn't.
If it is really the case then, I'm actually surprised Coinbase management had the balls to put out a statement like that, in a era where activists deem "inaction as complicity".
- gwicks56 6y agoThat's the thing about being good at your job in our field though...you essentially do get a say, because we're hard to replace. If you are genuinely good, you can get a new job with a 6 figure income in a matter of days, weeks at most. It will take the company months to replace you, probably 6 at least until the new hire is working even close to your capacity. It wasn't until I started to have to do the hiring that I realized just how hard it was..... finding good tech workers is a long, expensive, time consuming process, and in the end it's still 30% luck whether the hire is going to be both good at the job and a cultural fit.
- throw_m239339 6y ago> because we're hard to replace. Are we? the fact that a CEO has to remind their employees that they are working in a business and this isn't some college campus makes me think we aren't.
- austhrow743 6y ago>probably 6 at least until the new hire is working even close to your capacity If you're focused on the company mission yes. If you're spending your time and energy on other goals, particularly when that involves trying to get other employees to spend their time and energy on other goals, nah the new hire will be beating your capacity on day one just by not being as much of a net negative.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 6y ago> in a era where activists deem "inaction as complicity". My guess is that they realized dealing with the shitstorm once is cheaper (in terms of the damage it does) than dealing with smaller shitstorms constantly.