4 ms·

Two things. First, Coinbase has a no-politics rule. I wonder where this falls. Since it's something business-related, I imagine it's fine to discuss internally

Two things. First, Coinbase has a no-politics rule. I wonder where this falls. Since it's something business-related, I imagine it's fine to discuss internally, but this is an example where (if I was at Coinbase) I'd feel the no-politics-rule does the company a disservice. I'd be pretty mad if my company was selling to ICE and I wasn't allowed to say anything about it. Second, it always amazes me how little these ICE contracts are, and how quick big companies (like Github) are willing to burn their credibility over such a relatively small amount of money.

rchaud 4y ago
The initial contracts are cheap for a reason. It's all about the after-work that results from the initial deal. Today, it's ICE. Next year, it can expand to include the ATF, and perhaps after that, the FBI.
- gkoberger 4y ago
  Coinbase made $1.17bn last year. A $1.36M contract from each of ICE, ATF and the FBI doesn't even come close to covering their Superbowl ad budget. On average, people have varying levels of appreciation/distaste for government agencies... but I think regardless of your stance, it's an easy argument to say ICE falls high on the list of disliked government agencies. Sources: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/10/coinbase-coin-earnings-q1-2022.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/10/coinbase-coin-earnings-q1-20... https://www.marketplace.org/2022/02/14/how-much-did-cryptocurrency-companies-shell-out-sundays-super-bowl-ads/ https://www.marketplace.org/2022/02/14/how-much-did-cryptocu...
oceanplexian 4y ago
Being on good terms with Uncle Sam often isn’t about the money.
- Consultant32452 4y ago
  Government: plato o plomo?
rdxm 4y ago
thescriptkiddie 4y ago
I've said it before and I'll say it again; "apolitical" really just means "supporting the status quo." This is how ideology works, it the things you believe subconsciously, which make you think that the dominant political project is natural, neutral, uncontroversial, even external to politics.
- gkoberger 4y ago
  Totally agree; I'm against any company having a no-politics rule. Everything is political, for better or for worse, and enforcing it is really just enforcing your own political beliefs.
- fleddr 4y ago
  I don't agree. The "no politics" path taken by a few companies (Coinbase, Basecamp) is a blunt response against overexcited activists. You know the type. The ones that distract from the core mission of a company. The ones continuously creating outrage and division, the ones doing walkouts, leaking documents and data, constantly stirring up shit and poisoning morale. It's typically a very small minority, and these companies decided to get rid of them, and codified this as "no politics". Had these people been more reasonable and professional about political aspects of business, surely the blunt instrument of "no politics" would be unneeded.
  - jakelazaroff 4y ago
    What about selling geolocation data to ICE? Do you think it's part of the "core mission" of Coinbase, or a distraction? Don't you think that this, too, creates outrage and division? That it "stirs up shit" and poisons morale?
    - nitrixion 4y ago
      This is not my opinion but instead how I view the Coinbase company's perspective. I'm playing the neutral party here. ICE is a client that wants to utilize Coinbase services. Coinbase "core mission" is making money. As such, servicing ICE is completely within their "core mission".
cityzen 4y ago
i think your rule was truncated... it's actually no-politics-rule-unless-it-makes-us-money-and-what-are-you-really-going-to-do-about-it-,-quit?
undoware 4y ago
Having worked at a big tech company, I can report that there is an intense, career-making-or-breaking individual imperative for managers to prove the 'value' of soft assets like credibility or popularity. In my opinion, the reason these companies are willing to shed vast amounts of credibility for cents on the dollar is a systematic mistaking of asset dividends for asset value, which is reified into the organizational culture -- because no one in the C-suite really knows better, not-knowing is selected for, and ultimately becomes a requirement for individual careers to progress. The dynamic is easier to see in other parts of the economy. While the rent that a fancy house can earn, say, does in fact speak to the value of that house, the fact that it is available for rent in the first place also impacts the value. For literal houses, this offset can be overcome, but for something like your credibility or your integrity, it's lethal. But that doesn't matter if your boss doesn't know this. All that they see is 'number go up'. Then, often, your number -- be it salary or rank or both - goes up too. And six months later, when the consequences of the firesale become clear, it's too late for the employer -- but not for you, the architect of this terrible idea! You've already augmented your own income, and you can go back on the job market asking for equal-or-better compensation. Since the number of companies suffering from this acculturated cognitive bias is greater than 1, you can in effect ping-pong between two such companies while gutting both, making larger and larger paycheques with each bounce. This process is even easier if you work for a really big company, because then you don't even have to change employers! You can just change divisions every six months. The next reorg is right around the corner. Credibility-for-sale is apoptosis, pure and clean, and it's lucrative to induce, even by accident.

rchaud 4y ago

The initial contracts are cheap for a reason. It's all about the after-work that results from the initial deal. Today, it's ICE. Next year, it can expand to include the ATF, and perhaps after that, the FBI.

gkoberger 4y ago
Coinbase made $1.17bn last year. A $1.36M contract from each of ICE, ATF and the FBI doesn't even come close to covering their Superbowl ad budget. On average, people have varying levels of appreciation/distaste for government agencies... but I think regardless of your stance, it's an easy argument to say ICE falls high on the list of disliked government agencies. Sources: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/10/coinbase-coin-earnings-q1-2022.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/10/coinbase-coin-earnings-q1-20... https://www.marketplace.org/2022/02/14/how-much-did-cryptocurrency-companies-shell-out-sundays-super-bowl-ads/ https://www.marketplace.org/2022/02/14/how-much-did-cryptocu...

oceanplexian 4y ago

Being on good terms with Uncle Sam often isn’t about the money.

Consultant32452 4y ago
Government: plato o plomo?

rdxm 4y ago

thescriptkiddie 4y ago

I've said it before and I'll say it again; "apolitical" really just means "supporting the status quo." This is how ideology works, it the things you believe subconsciously, which make you think that the dominant political project is natural, neutral, uncontroversial, even external to politics.

gkoberger 4y ago
Totally agree; I'm against any company having a no-politics rule. Everything is political, for better or for worse, and enforcing it is really just enforcing your own political beliefs.
fleddr 4y ago
I don't agree. The "no politics" path taken by a few companies (Coinbase, Basecamp) is a blunt response against overexcited activists. You know the type. The ones that distract from the core mission of a company. The ones continuously creating outrage and division, the ones doing walkouts, leaking documents and data, constantly stirring up shit and poisoning morale. It's typically a very small minority, and these companies decided to get rid of them, and codified this as "no politics". Had these people been more reasonable and professional about political aspects of business, surely the blunt instrument of "no politics" would be unneeded.
- jakelazaroff 4y ago
  What about selling geolocation data to ICE? Do you think it's part of the "core mission" of Coinbase, or a distraction? Don't you think that this, too, creates outrage and division? That it "stirs up shit" and poisons morale?
  - nitrixion 4y ago
    This is not my opinion but instead how I view the Coinbase company's perspective. I'm playing the neutral party here. ICE is a client that wants to utilize Coinbase services. Coinbase "core mission" is making money. As such, servicing ICE is completely within their "core mission".

cityzen 4y ago

i think your rule was truncated... it's actually no-politics-rule-unless-it-makes-us-money-and-what-are-you-really-going-to-do-about-it-,-quit?

undoware 4y ago

Having worked at a big tech company, I can report that there is an intense, career-making-or-breaking individual imperative for managers to prove the 'value' of soft assets like credibility or popularity. In my opinion, the reason these companies are willing to shed vast amounts of credibility for cents on the dollar is a systematic mistaking of asset dividends for asset value, which is reified into the organizational culture -- because no one in the C-suite really knows better, not-knowing is selected for, and ultimately becomes a requirement for individual careers to progress. The dynamic is easier to see in other parts of the economy. While the rent that a fancy house can earn, say, does in fact speak to the value of that house, the fact that it is available for rent in the first place also impacts the value. For literal houses, this offset can be overcome, but for something like your credibility or your integrity, it's lethal. But that doesn't matter if your boss doesn't know this. All that they see is 'number go up'. Then, often, your number -- be it salary or rank or both - goes up too. And six months later, when the consequences of the firesale become clear, it's too late for the employer -- but not for you, the architect of this terrible idea! You've already augmented your own income, and you can go back on the job market asking for equal-or-better compensation. Since the number of companies suffering from this acculturated cognitive bias is greater than 1, you can in effect ping-pong between two such companies while gutting both, making larger and larger paycheques with each bounce. This process is even easier if you work for a really big company, because then you don't even have to change employers! You can just change divisions every six months. The next reorg is right around the corner. Credibility-for-sale is apoptosis, pure and clean, and it's lucrative to induce, even by accident.