Wokeness in Tech - (Rainbow-washed logo) Targeting bleeding-edge architectures to facilitate viral niches and strategize best-of-breed networks #BlackLivesMatter

Least Concern

Pretend I have a Biden avatar like everyone else
kiwifarms.net
(Thread subtitle created with the help of https://www.makebullshit.com)

The Open Source Software Community thread is a great thread about woke nonsense in the space of open source software, but I kept posting stuff there that wasn't specifically OSS related. So I'll try starting a new thread for posting stuff about wokeness in the broader tech sphere which isn't directly related to open source software. And I'll start with this:

Coinbase is a cryptocurrency exchange and probably the largest player in the crypto space for the US and probably many other countries as well. On Sunday, the CEO of Coinbase, Brian Armstrong, posted a rambling blog post entitled "Coinbase is a mission focused company." The tl;dr is that he believes Coinbase should not take a side in politics or the recent social unrest and instead focus on its mission of democratizing access to finance through the blockchain blah blah. We can take the implication that there was some pressure internally for Coinbase to do stuff like put a #BlackLivesMatter banner on their site or Twitter profile like many other companies have done, but he took a stance against it.

Predictably this did not appease woke activist employees and they continued complaining. But did he cave in? No, he actually doubled down, as we can see in a leaked internal email sent to employees offering them up to six months of severance pay and health insurance if they wish to quit over their disagreements with his vision. He's not giving an inch, so these wokies can't take their usual mile.

I really think this is the right approach. Let people who want to put racial politics above doing their damn job self-select out of the company. There's a good chance that the damage and lack of productivity that an activist employee would cause could cost far more than six months of pay and bennies in the long run anyway.
 

Besachf Jhakut

Irredeemable Deplorable
kiwifarms.net
I really think this is the right approach. Let people who want to put racial politics above doing their damn job self-select out of the company. There's a good chance that the damage and lack of productivity that an activist employee would cause could cost far more than six months of pay and bennies in the long run anyway.
I beg to differ. If you don't ruthlessly screen out such people, and for those you miss fire them as soon as they reveal themselves, they can do untold damage.

In a technology company, in a financial company based entirely on technology with a huge side helping of legal and regulatory compliance, one bad apple can kill your company stone cold dead in a very short period of time. In this domain, see all the cryptocurrency exchanges that end when they "get hacked." There are a lot of technology sectors that are fragile like that.

Although Corn Flakes is right, this is a positive thing, is head and shoulders above the current standards for US Bay area companies.
 

Corn Flakes

"Get in the bowl, Shinji!"
kiwifarms.net
Would Spotify count for this thread? I suppose they're mostly in the music industry but it is also tech-related and the employees are currently having a complete shitfit about Joe Rogan.
I'm trying to find a good source for that story about Spotify employers planning to strike if they aren't allowed to censor Rogan. Maybe I'm just bad at googling, but I haven't found large outlets talking about it.
 

Jones McCann

All in all, it was all just bricks in the wall
kiwifarms.net
I'm trying to find a good source for that story about Spotify employers planning to strike if they aren't allowed to censor Rogan. Maybe I'm just bad at googling, but I haven't found large outlets talking about it.

I can't seem to find any of the big companies covering it but it's not like they tell the truth anyways. Here's the best article I found that isn't on a website with spammy shit everywhere.

Hands down the top two free-agent moves of all time were not in sports. Well, one kind of is. The first was when Howard Stern moved from terrestrial radio to Sirius. The second, more recent move was Spotify picking up Joe Rogan off of Youtube.
Yes, the moves made both men oodles and oodles of money. But they also had a seismic shift in entertainment. And after all, sports is entertainment. But now it seems as if in the hallways of Spotify there are some rumblings. And big ones.
Spotify wants to censor Joe Rogan
A report has come out that employees of the mega-company are threatening to go on strike if their newest acquisition is not censored. That's right, in the land of free speech, employees want Joe Rogan to be silent on some issues and have the ability to edit and remove sections of the comic and MMA broadcaster's show.
Back on Youtube, Joe Rogan had total control, and he said after signing the $100 million deal, it would stay that way. But according to DIGITAL MUSIC NEWS:
"Spotify employees were demanding direct editorial oversight over the recently acquired Joe Rogan Experience. That would include the ability to directly edit or remove sections of upcoming interviews, or block the uploading of episodes deemed "problematic". The employees ALSO demanded the ability to add trigger warnings, corrections, and references to fact-checked articles on topics discussed by Rogan in the course of his multi hour discussions. But some of the groups demands have already been met by Spotify management, though a refusal to allow further changes is stirring talks of a high profile walkout or strike. According to preliminary plans the strike would principally involve New York based employees, and would be accompanied by protests outside Spotify's Manhattan headquarters.".
So much for freedom of speech. The fact that Rogan was made to apologize for things said recently can't be sitting well with the funnyman. Even if it's added a lot of zero's in his bank account.
Joe Rogan is what you call an equal opportunity host. He's chatted with a who's who list of sports, music, politics, and all points in between, with every viewpoint imaginable. And allowed them all to state their views without leading questions.
While NOT AT ALL RELATED, it does come on the heels of UFC President Dana White being peppered with questions of should Colby Covington or any fighter be censored in what they say.
Although he allowed Conor McGregor (mostly) and Khabib Nurmagomedov to tear at each other, he's had no issues with what "Chaos" has recently said either. While White says he's all about free speech, that too has its limits. He's no fan of fighters talking about unionizing for example.
But back to Joe Rogan, he now has people he has to answer to. And deep down they might not be so open to people saying what they feel. It makes you wonder if Rogan, who recently moved out of California to go to Texas, may say it's not worth it, and look for a way out of the deal.
 

Μusk

kiwifarms.net
I am absolutely under the belief that there is a coordinated effort to undermine tech entities. Some collusion is happening somewhere. There is of course the public open-source movements that exist on platforms such as Twitter and Reddit, but actual, coordinated efforts are best performed in secret. After all, you don't want your adversaries gathering intelligence, discrediting your identities, or thwarting your plans now, do you? Could have been something as small and innocuous as a group of friends operating in an IRC or discord server, later growing in size after recruiting attractive assets and serving as a think-tank to push whatever agendas they want. Do not underestimate the ability of a group of people, or perhaps even a single person, to instigate great change.

The open source community of course has been one of the largest targets of these movements. The Linux kernel itself, Linux distributions, common software, the FSF, Libreboot, Mozilla, Silicon Valley, and of course a few others.
It is a very accessible community (At least the FOSS side). Participation does not necessitate deep, nor physical interaction. You can be a project contributor regardless of skill and identity. That isn't to say your contributions will be accepted, or praised, but participation is still possible. Now, after entering the stage, you can portray leaders in a bad light. Yell that "you are being discriminated against", and that "the project is non-inclusive and hostile towards these people", and you've not only garnered the help of people externally who's knowledge of the subject is superficial, if existent at all, but you've also slandered your targets and the project itself. This destabilizes the organization, fostering chaos and hatred within. It forces the hands of those within it to act in accordance with your demands, even if it means their resignation.
Doing this of course also appeals to similarly minded people, who come aboard to aid in pushing these ideologies and "ceasing the harassment, discrimination, and hostility", replacing the regular people. As they flock inwards, they begin to counter the normal population, with a louder voice to cause more damage. Once enough of the normal population has been displaced, or perhaps the directors position assumed by a different party, the project can be taken in any direction the malicious entity wants.
 

Hongourable Madisha

You see, some of us don't know English properly.
kiwifarms.net
Apparently the Rust logo mascot crab thing is non-binary, and absolutely nobody cares apart from a tiny clique of wokelords.
I mentioned this in the thread in Games about The Sims 4 getting more dark skin tones for sims: a lot of this stuff really is virtue signalling, EA is really not a very equal opportunities sort of place to work for, from what I hear on job sites, but it gets all this great press from SJWs about how progressive and diverse it is by doing stunts like that one. It's a bit like Mars getting rid of the black slave inspired mascot for Uncle Ben's while still using actual African slaves (child slaves at that) to grow cocoa for their chocolate bar ranges. They see it as an easy win and good PR.

I am absolutely under the belief that there is a coordinated effort to undermine tech entities. Some collusion is happening somewhere. There is of course the public open-source movements that exist on platforms such as Twitter and Reddit, but actual, coordinated efforts are best performed in secret. After all, you don't want your adversaries gathering intelligence, discrediting your identities, or thwarting your plans now, do you? Could have been something as small and innocuous as a group of friends operating in an IRC or discord server, later growing in size after recruiting attractive assets and serving as a think-tank to push whatever agendas they want. Do not underestimate the ability of a group of people, or perhaps even a single person, to instigate great change.

The open source community of course has been one of the largest targets of these movements. The Linux kernel itself, Linux distributions, common software, the FSF, Libreboot, Mozilla, Silicon Valley, and of course a few others.
It is a very accessible community (At least the FOSS side). Participation does not necessitate deep, nor physical interaction. You can be a project contributor regardless of skill and identity. That isn't to say your contributions will be accepted, or praised, but participation is still possible. Now, after entering the stage, you can portray leaders in a bad light. Yell that "you are being discriminated against", and that "the project is non-inclusive and hostile towards these people", and you've not only garnered the help of people externally who's knowledge of the subject is superficial, if existent at all, but you've also slandered your targets and the project itself. This destabilizes the organization, fostering chaos and hatred within. It forces the hands of those within it to act in accordance with your demands, even if it means their resignation.
Doing this of course also appeals to similarly minded people, who come aboard to aid in pushing these ideologies and "ceasing the harassment, discrimination, and hostility", replacing the regular people. As they flock inwards, they begin to counter the normal population, with a louder voice to cause more damage. Once enough of the normal population has been displaced, or perhaps the directors position assumed by a different party, the project can be taken in any direction the malicious entity wants.
That's what I love about my man Linus, he doesn't go in for that shit and is an abrasive fucker if he wants to be, but he's upfront and lays it all out. People don't have to work with him if they don't like that style of feedback and he doesn't pretend to be all woke, but he isn't unnecessarily cruel to people based on characteristics like race or sex or anything like that. He just doesn't play that bullshit game. Sadly guys like him seem like a dying breed.
 
Last edited:

Kosher Dill

Potato Chips
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I am absolutely under the belief that there is a coordinated effort to undermine tech entities.
I disagree, there's no need for coordination when the phenomenon is entirely self-organizing. You've got organizations staffed by brokebrained autists with more money than sense, why is it surprising that they'll latch onto anyone promising Good Boy Points and tendies if they say the right woke phrases?
 

3119967d0c

"a brain" - @REGENDarySumanai
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Armstrong confirmed coinbased and redpilled?
They already take your account away if you make a payment by Bitcoin to anyone even remotely politically incorrect.

I assume the CEO is just saying that they won't put a 10% tax on all transactions and give it to organizations advocating for pedophile acceptance, at least until 2025 or so.
 

Bad Take Crucifier

"I was a lolcow until I found Jesus"
kiwifarms.net
Youtube, Twitter, Twitch, and other websites banning people now for suspected wrong think in other websites. YouTube specifically, updated their policy that they can just yank people's channels now for what their do in their private lives, even if they never break a single rule on the platform itself. Ultra WOKE.
 

Corn Flakes

"Get in the bowl, Shinji!"
kiwifarms.net
Youtube, Twitter, Twitch, and other websites banning people now for suspected wrong think in other websites. YouTube specifically, updated their policy that they can just yank people's channels now for what their do in their private lives, even if they never break a single rule on the platform itself. Ultra WOKE.
All the more incentive for commentary hosts to go full Doomcock and embrace anonymity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ms. Cegination

Miller

kikongo fucking shits
kiwifarms.net
Would Spotify count for this thread? I suppose they're mostly in the music industry but it is also tech-related and the employees are currently having a complete shitfit about Joe Rogan.
Has anybody saved the LGBT video that Spotify uploaded on Youtube earlier this year?
I know they've deleted it but I wanted to archive it.
 
Last edited:

Next Task

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I disagree, there's no need for coordination when the phenomenon is entirely self-organizing. You've got organizations staffed by brokebrained autists with more money than sense, why is it surprising that they'll latch onto anyone promising Good Boy Points and tendies if they say the right woke phrases?
There's no need for coordination, I agree. But that means it's extremely easy for a malicious actor or actors to be organising in secret. So among the seeming groundswells of woke infestation I'd agree that it's very likely that there have been ones that are actually targeted at a company or organisation.

You can look at the riots of the last few months the same way - it seems like a natural groundswell of outrage, Antifa and entitlement. But that doesn't mean someone couldn't decide to, say, target a specific business to get vandalised, or accuse a company of being white supremacists for purposes other than woke posturing. And that's not even getting into the idea of a government like China's, benefiting from the US being in chaos, and so helping it along when and where they can.

That principle applies here. So while we likely won't get evidence, I also firmly believe that the SJWs have been useful idiots in the hands of people with ulterior motives before, and will be again. The outcomes are the same, but it's too useful a destabilisation tool. And when you've got Jeff Bezos and Amazon promoting diversity in their workplace explicitly because it hinders attempts to unionize the workers, it seems inevitable that some of this woke bullshit has been weaponised.
 

AnOminous

shalom motherfucker
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
The open source community of course has been one of the largest targets of these movements. The Linux kernel itself, Linux distributions, common software, the FSF, Libreboot, Mozilla, Silicon Valley, and of course a few others.

These events always seem to benefit corporate monopolists like Microsoft and Apple and Google. It's no surprise they are the most malevolent and aggressive proponents of this woke fucking bullshit and it's aimed repeatedly, over and over, at small independent groups like open source movements and alternative browsers.

I am virtually certain that this isn't a coincidence. When they went after Linus it became really blindingly obvious this shit is a Trojan horse.
 
Tags
None