Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Expedia CEO Dara Khosrowshahi Will Be Offered the Job as Uber's New CEO (recode.net)

Posted by msmash on from the next-up dept.

Kara Swisher, reporting for Recode: The board of Uber has voted and wants Expedia Dara Khosrowshahi to be its next CEO. But here is a shocking twist for those who have had to endure this awful, messy and convoluted process: He has not been officially offered the job as of 15 minutes ago, said sources. Still, most expect him to take it and he appears to be the one person dueling factions of the board can agree on. Unknown until now, Khosrowshahi was the third candidate -- after Hewlett Packard Enterprise CEO Meg Whitman and former General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt. Khosrowshahi is considered the "truce" choice for the board, which has been riven by ugly infighting between ousted CEO Travis Kalanick and one of its major investors, Benchmark. Benchmark had backed Whitman, while Kalanick had backed Immelt. Sources said that going into this morning, after Immelt withdrew his name from contention when it was clear he would not win the job, Whitman had the upper hand in the race for the job. But she also wanted a number of things -- including less involvement by ousted Uber CEO Travis Kalanick and more board control -- that became too problematic for the directors, said sources.

60 comments

  1. More chimps to run america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Invaders having a good time invading America and getting cream of the crop jobs. Surrender to sharia and other shit already.

    1. Re:More chimps to run america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think serving as the interim CEO of an embattled company whose entire existence can be wiped away, if cities just decide tomorrow to actually start enforcing their taxicab and limousine regulations again, hardly counts as "cream of the crop job"

    2. Re: More chimps to run america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a single job pays to retire me and my whole village, then yes, that's cream.

  2. Temp CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Travis Kalanick has said he's coming back to take the job, and any CEO that replaces him is temporary.

    So why would anyone take this job? Any Uber fixes will take a while to implement and not be noticeable immediately...no matter what happens, you're going to get buried by Kalanick when he comes back, he will say you were awful regardless.

  3. What's his leadership style like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's his leadership style like? Is he a leader who gives the customers what the customers want? Or is he a leader who tells the customers what the customers want, even if the customers don't actually want it?

    President Eisenhower and President Trump are examples of leaders who listen to what their customers (in these cases, the citizens of the USA) want, and then do whatever they can to deliver what the customers want.

    On the other hand, we can look to the Firefox and GNOME 3 leadership to see examples of leaders who tell the customers what the customers want, even when the customers don't want it, and then force it on the customers.

    I mention Pale Moon, because there's currently a huge debate going on within its community. For those who don't know, Pale Moon is a fork of Firefox that tried to address a variety of problems with Firefox, including unwanted changes introduced by Firefox's leadership. Well, now the Pale Moon leadership is blocking by default a certain extension, and this has angered the Pale Moon community. This community has never seen this degree of strife before. This extremely controversial decision may even be enough to rip this particular community to shreds.

    The Pale Moon example is interesting, because it shows that leadership that once fell into the give-the-customers-what-the-customers-want category can easily fall into the tell-the-customers-what-the-customers-want-even-when-the-customers-don't-want-it category.

    So what is this fellow's leadership style like?

    1. Re:What's his leadership style like? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      Based on what I've read about Uber, he need to tell the boys to clean up their locker room behavior, zip up their pants, and attend sensitivity training until everyone agrees that women are not sexual objects.

    2. Re:What's his leadership style like? by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      It's weird to see someone bring up this problem with Pale Moon, because I just downloaded it for the first time last week to see if it is a good candidate to replace Chrome. I liked Firefox before it copied Chrome's interface, so was hoping for some old school Firefox vibes.

      Maybe I was too late to enjoy the party.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    3. Re:What's his leadership style like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is he going to make them profitable? That seems to be the new business model in America: lose as much many as you can for as long as you can. Profitability is passe.

    4. Re:What's his leadership style like? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      Profitability is passe.

      The problem with profitability is what to do with the profits? The choices are stockpiling like many Fortune 500 companies are doing or investing in ever riskier assets to find the highest ROI.

    5. Re:What's his leadership style like? by cayenne8 · · Score: 0

      ...until everyone agrees that women are not sexual objects.

      They're not???

      When did this happen?

      I mean, if you can't have sex with them...what's their use?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    6. Re:What's his leadership style like? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      They're not???

      Nope.

      When did this happen?

      1990's

      I mean, if you can't have sex with them...what's their use?

      Eye candy. You can look at them in the eyes but no drooling, no touching, and no mansplaining.

    7. Re:What's his leadership style like? by cayenne8 · · Score: 0

      I mean, if you can't have sex with them...what's their use?

      Eye candy. You can look at them in the eyes but no drooling, no touching, and no mansplaining.

      Well, where's the fun with that? I mean, hell...a strip club gets boring really quick because just looking isn't really very fulfilling.

      I mean, the old joke really does have some basis in fact....as in:

      "You know why God gave women breasts?

      ...So men would talk to them...."

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:What's his leadership style like? by mi · · Score: 1

      You can look at them in the eyes but no drooling, no touching, and no mansplaining.

      Well, that's one way to solve the global warming and the overpopulation problems... And the endangered species one too — except for the one species, which has grown so smart as to consider sex wrong.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    9. Re:What's his leadership style like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But we all are sexual objects, this is how we ended up with 7 billion + of us. If women aren't sex objects, why are they sexy?

      It's funny how desperately they want to be sexual objects around the time menopause hits, though. THEN all of a sudden they're all about sex.

      I know talking about this with creimer is like discussing shades of purple with a blind person, but still.

    10. Re:What's his leadership style like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on what I've read about Uber, he need to tell the boys to clean up their locker room behavior, zip up their pants, and attend sensitivity training until everyone agrees that women are not sexual objects.

      Creimer should've been named CEO. He has all the right ideas, and I bet he's got a Python script he can run that would do a great job as CEO of Uber, while he continues the tradition of defrauding his employers by spending all his time shitposting on Slashdot!

      I mean, CEO of a multi-billion dollar company can't be any harder than dispatching tickets when he feels like it, right?

    11. Re:What's his leadership style like? by jimbo · · Score: 1

      I tried Palemoon once but went back to Firefox. I realized I really don't care whether it looks like Chrome or not as long as it works. I'm very flexible, even a bit indifferent with UIs, as long as they can perform the tasks I need done.

      Also this is a very exciting time for Firefox, over the next year a lot of very interesting components will be merged from Project Quantum and the speedups should be substantial.

  4. Immelt? Whitman?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, so all Immelt would do would be to carve up the company into hundreds of little fiefdoms, pit them against each other in the name improvement through competition, and then fire the bottom 10% of performers every year to keep everyone on their toes.

    Meg Whitman would carve the company into hundreds of little fiefdoms that had everything in common, and then forbid them sharing expertise or resources, effectively paralyzing the organization and preventing any sort of innovation.

    1. Re:Immelt? Whitman?! by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      If Meg Whitman had taken the Uber CEO job, I wondered what that would have meant for the future success of HP after she split the company into two.

    2. Re:Immelt? Whitman?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect that her taking the job as Uber CEO would have had zero impact on the future success of HP, since HP Inc is run by Dion Weisler since November 2015.

      Meg runs Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE), which is an entirely separate company. And, to answer your question applied to HPE, the company she runs, I suspect that the future success of HPE would be dramatically improved if she took the job as Uber CEO.

  5. Re:I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That sounds boring anyway, and probably only appeals to a very small subset of the population. Instead let me recommend some Douglas Adams.

  6. Re:I'm disappointed... by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    This Douglas Adams sounds depressing. I think I'll go buy new shoes instead.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  7. Re:I'm disappointed... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    That sounds boring anyway, and probably only appeals to a very small subset of the population.

    Out of all the books I've recommended on Slashdot, "I'm Feeling Lucky" got 1,300+ clicks and sold 12 copies. There's a lot of interest in the early history of Google.

  8. Re:I'm disappointed... by houghi · · Score: 1

    If she becomes the CEO of Uber, I am going to work for them, just so I might be sexually harassed by her. As of 15 minutes ago, they have not yet been officially informed about me starting there.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  9. Meg Whitman by doctorvo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh, please, let it go to Meg Whitman! Let Meg Whitman demonstrate how female power can transform an evil, hated corporate empire into a loving, kind, progressive transportation company! Please! Let her do for Uber what she has done to, I mean for, HP!

  10. Hubris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What incredible Hubris these VCs have, They decide to openly talk about which CEO they want to poach for their ridiculous Taxi service.

    After all the BS I've shot down with VCs in my time, the arrogance never ceases to amaze. And it never ceases to amaze and infuriate them when I tell them to pound salt... I've come to enjoy that part.

  11. Re:I'm disappointed... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    If she becomes the CEO of Uber, I am going to work for them, just so I might be sexually harassed by her.

    How will you distinguish yourself from all the other bootlickers who have the same idea?

  12. Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by swillden · · Score: 0

    Given how many issues Uber has had with sexism and the "bro culture", hiring a female CEO would be a really good idea, IMO. I'm sure Khosrowshahi will be fine, but putting a woman at the head of the company would be a stronger statement. As for Whitman's credentials as CEO, while she hasn't turned in great results at HP I'm not sure that anyone could have done better, and her eBay experience shows she clearly knows how to grow a startup.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    1. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by mi · · Score: 0

      Given how many issues Uber has had with sexism and the "bro culture"

      Whether they have such issues or not is none of our business. Do they deliver good service at a good price is what should concern us. How they choose to treat various groups of employees is entirely up to them — so long as nobody is forced to work there. And no one is — not in this country, not since early 1860-ies...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    2. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by swillden · · Score: 2

      Given how many issues Uber has had with sexism and the "bro culture"

      Whether they have such issues or not is none of our business. Do they deliver good service at a good price is what should concern us.

      You're certainly welcome to make that your only basis for evaluation. In terms of my day to day transactions, I agree with you. But there are larger issues, and many people do choose to care about them.

      I understand the argument that a company that does not discriminate will be more economically effective than one that does, and that over time the former will win and the latter will lose. I even believe it's correct. But we have ample evidence that "over time" doesn't mean a few years, but rather means at least a few generations.

      so long as nobody is forced to work there. And no one is — not in this country, not since early 1860-ies

      You should read Douglas Blackmon's Slavery by Another Name. Black slavery was clearly not effectively abolished until the 1940s, not the 1860s. It was reduced, clearly, and the situation has continued to improve, but any evenhanded analysis of the history of blacks in the US serves to support my point that market forces alone are insufficient to fix the inequalities we'd like them to address on any time scale faster than centuries. And market forces were not enough in that case, either, else we'd never have needed the Civil Rights Act and related legislation.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      And market forces were not enough in that case, either, else we'd never have needed the Civil Rights Act and related legislation.

      The Civil Rights Act had nothing to do with market forces and everything to do with striking down Jim Crow era state government laws that made it impossible for market forces to exist. When you had state-mandated segregation, how the hell can a market function? If the law says it was illegal to allow white and black people to ride in the same train car (this is the famous Plessy v. Ferguson case) then how can the market offer an integrated solution?

      You can't blame the free market for failing to do something when the government has made it illegal for the market to even try. Nor do I think its entirely fair to assume everything will be fixed as quickly as you would like it and which I don't think government policy can do any better than the market. Former slaves and their children would have started with next to nothing, especially considering that in many states it was illegal to teach them to read. It may well just take generations to build up the human capital necessary to see blacks on the same footing as whites. That's just the reality of the situation, and it's quite clear that state governments spent a good deal of time making it far more difficult for black people to succeed. You can't fault the market for that.

    4. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It is out business if they are breaking the law. Don't you have employment laws covering hostile workplaces and sexual harassment?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by mi · · Score: 0

      but any evenhanded analysis of

      Nice. So, any analysis that disagrees is automatically not evenhanded... One would've thought, this method for pre-emptively disarming a dissenter was mocked out of existence by Hans Christian Andersen in the 19th century, but no, evidently, the "sophisticated" debaters continue to employ it with smug self-satisfaction...

      else we'd never have needed the Civil Rights Act and related legislation.

      If anything, that legislation has proven itself a remarkable failure 50 years later. For all the "reverse" racist laws and policies, for all the self-flagellation of the Whites, the dissatisfaction among Blacks is still remarkably high — indeed higher now after the first Black President, than it was before.

      Should have left it to the market-forces.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    6. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by mr.mctibbs · · Score: 2

      So it's ok for them to discriminate as an employer, but not for me to discriminate as a consumer?

      Hypocrisy is just, super trendy lately.

    7. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given how many issues Uber has had with sexism and the "bro culture"

      Whether they have such issues or not is none of our business. Do they deliver good service at a good price is what should concern us. How they choose to treat various groups of employees is entirely up to them — so long as nobody is forced to work there. And no one is — not in this country, not since early 1860-ies...

      The 90's called and Nike wants to go back to making their gear in sweatshops...
      Can Apple now tell Foxconn to take down those suicide nets?

    8. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by swillden · · Score: 2

      The Civil Rights Act had nothing to do with market forces and everything to do with striking down Jim Crow era state government laws that made it impossible for market forces to exist.

      True, but an analysis assuming a purely rational and efficient market would indicate that separate and equal options would have arisen. Sure, trains would have to have separate cars for different races, but it was societal attitudes, not economics, that caused those cars to be so different. Note that the argument that the difference arose from differences in ability to pay doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

      The reality in the Jim Crow south was that business owners were expected not only to segregate (as required by law), but also to offer lesser services to blacks. Offering the same level of service would have been legal, but provoked criticism, ostracism and a loss of white business. The market in that case actually selected against equality, because a significant (and relatively wealthy) segment of the customer base actively boycotted businesses that attempted to provide it. Other extra-legal elements of the Jim Crow system, such as restricted access to banks, and the constant sub-rosa threat of judicial or non-judicial violence against uppity blacks ensured that black business ownership was suppressed.

      Nor do I think its entirely fair to assume everything will be fixed as quickly as you would like it and which I don't think government policy can do any better than the market.

      Businesses are run by people, and the range of options that those people consider when deciding how to participate in the market are determined by the societal context. I agree that market forces are a powerful mechanism for changing society, and that government really isn't, but what government can do is exactly what it did in the case of the Civil Rights Act... make it illegal to offer differentiated services based on old distinctions that we wish to eliminate. That prevented social pressure from being able to make businesses offer lesser services to blacks.

      It may well just take generations to build up the human capital necessary to see blacks on the same footing as whites.

      That argument would hold more water if it weren't for the fact that other immigrants, arriving with similar low levels of education and other forms of human capital, climb much faster. I don't completely dismiss the notion that there are elements of black culture in America that are anti-progress, indeed I think it's easy to point out that the bone-deep skepticism of the establishment which prevails in much of black culture (and which is entirely understandable given the history of incredibly-pervasive hypocrisy in that system that was so blatant in the era between reconstruction and the end of Jim Crow, and is still not wholly eliminated) is extremely negative. But I don't think that fully explains the situation today, either, mainly because new black immigrants who arrive without the same cultural baggage, also see retarded progress up the social ladder.

      That's just the reality of the situation, and it's quite clear that state governments spent a good deal of time making it far more difficult for black people to succeed.

      And there's a good argument that many federal programs intended to help them succeed are so wrongheaded that they do exactly the reverse as well.

      You can't fault the market for that.

      I don't fault the market for any of it. The free market is a powerful optimizer that seeks the outcome that customers -- especially the customers with the most money -- want. But when what the monied customers want is social inequality, the market can't fix that. Not by itself.

      Note that that isn't the Uber situation. In the Uber situation, most of the money -- investors and customers -- see the sexism and bro culture as a negative. Were the board to take a -- wh

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    9. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the hardest problem will be to find a woman who's both qualified and willing to be the CEO.

    10. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by swillden · · Score: 1

      but any evenhanded analysis of

      Nice. So, any analysis that disagrees is automatically not evenhanded

      I did not make that claim. If you have reference to good analysis that finds otherwise, cite it.

      else we'd never have needed the Civil Rights Act and related legislation.

      If anything, that legislation has proven itself a remarkable failure 50 years later. For all the "reverse" racist laws and policies, for all the self-flagellation of the Whites, the dissatisfaction among Blacks is still remarkably high — indeed higher now after the first Black President, than it was before.

      Should have left it to the market-forces.

      Your conclusion does not follow from your observations, mostly because your observations are very shallow. Also, you are engaging in a blindingly blatant false equivalency. I won't attempt to address all of the problems in your statement, but I'll pick just one: the fact that black dissatisfaction appears to be higher after the first black president was elected. Note that I'm not claiming to offer an authoritative explanation of that fact, but just a plausible explanation which suggests a completely different conclusion than the one you're uncritically assuming.

      I think the reason that black dissatisfaction has increased is because blacks saw the election of Obama as a turning point in race relations, as evidence that the country really was ready to listen to their concerns about the extensive and systemic oppression under which they live. Prior to that point, they had focused instead on the slow, steady improvement they were seeing, but Obama's election seemed to indicate a step change. In particular, a change that indicated that they were now free to speak out about issues they hadn't previously felt it was safe to speak about.

      But the step change didn't actually happen. The system didn't suddenly become fair and evenhanded, and when blacks complained about old injustices what they got was a backlash. Anyone who thought that white supremacy was dying learned that there was a lot more of it than anyone had realized. This backlash resulted in the election of wink-and-nod racist as president, with the full-throated support of lots of open and outspoken white supremacists. The more cynical -- and racist -- blacks took this as confirmation of what they already thought they knew, and the more optimistic blacks felt their hopes crushed.

      So I am not in the least bit surprised that blacks are more dissatisfied. They achieved a triumph of progress, only to have their hopes dashed by discovering that it doesn't really mean what they thought it would, and that in fact their situation is even worse than they thought it was. That'll disappoint even the most optimistic.

      And how in the world can you possibly equate the dissatisfaction we see today with the open, bald-faced oppression that existed in Jim Crow? That's mind-boggling.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    11. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by mi · · Score: 0

      I did not make that claim.

      You certainly implied it, when you claimed that "any evenhanded analysis" agreed with you.

      If you have reference to good analysis that finds otherwise, cite it.

      For someone, who offers no citations of his own, it is a tad too rich to demand that of others.

      Your conclusion does not follow from your observations, mostly because your observations are very shallow. Also, you are engaging in a blindingly blatant false equivalency.

      Whatever.

      The system didn't suddenly become fair and evenhanded,

      Life itself is neither fair nor evenhanded. The point was, the government's intervention in the fates of minorities did not achieve its results. It was and remains a failure.

      And how in the world can you possibly equate the dissatisfaction we see today with the open, bald-faced oppression that existed in Jim Crow? That's mind-boggling.

      I'm comparing what we have today with what we would have had, had we simply let the market forces sort things out.

      And, yes, the "Jim Crow" laws should've been declared simply unconstitutional — unfortunately for all, the Federal government's intervention went much further than that...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    12. Re: Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No such thing as a woman qualified to be CEO.

    13. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by swillden · · Score: 1

      For someone, who offers no citations of his own, it is a tad too rich to demand that of others.

      I did, actually. I mentioned an on-topic book, which is very much about economic/racial incentives in the post-reconstruction south. You really should read it.

      Life itself is neither fair nor evenhanded.

      We don't have to leave things the way we find them, and the inability to reach perfection is no reason not to strive for improvement.

      The point was, the government's intervention in the fates of minorities did not achieve its results. It was and remains a failure.

      I must have missed where blacks are still slaves (chattel or debt peons), or still segregated.

      I'm comparing what we have today with what we would have had, had we simply let the market forces sort things out.

      No, you're comparing what we have today with where you fantasize we might have been... in spite of the fact that the market made little progress on fixing the issues in a century. It wasn't until FDR put a stop to the use of trumped up charges to create slaves for hire in the 40s (something he did only to defang Nazi propaganda, actually), and LBJ pushed through and aggressively enforced the Civil Rights Act that significant progress was made.

      I'm a strong believer in the power of free market economics, but markets optimize for the desires of the customers with the money, not for overall social good. In most cases, those two things are the same, which is why capitalism has proved to be the best way of providing for everyone. But in some cases, they're not the same. In the south, the customers with money wanted to keep the black man down, and they used both their votes and their dollars to do it.

      If you want proof of that, think about what a purely market analysis would predict of an environment in which "separate but equal" was the law, but racial hierarchy was absent. Clearly, business owners would have had economic incentive to compete for both black and white customers in separate sides of their establishment, and would have found it most cost-effective to offer the same goods and service in both. Or if the economic differences in the segregated classes were large enough, they would have offered lesser services to the poorer class, at a lower price. What actually happened was that any white business owner who offered equal treatment or lower prices for blacks would find his white clientele vanishing -- or find his business or home vandalized and himself and his family ostracized. Black-owned businesses were suppressed through other, mostly extra-legal means like redlining and denial of credit (note that a rational, efficient market should have wiped out those practices, but didn't). The customers demanded that blacks be treated as lesser humans, and the market responded accordingly by providing separate and unequal services.

      The fact is that the market worked perfectly well, it just didn't produce the outcome that you would like to suppose.

      And, yes, the "Jim Crow" laws should've been declared simply unconstitutional — unfortunately for all, the Federal government's intervention went much further than that...

      It had to. Merely rolling back the laws would not have affected the intent of the southern states to suppress and oppress blacks. It only removed one method. There were many others which also had to be shut down.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    14. Re:Whitman would be a better choice, IMO by mi · · Score: 1

      markets optimize for the desires of the customers with the money, not for overall social good

      There is no difference between the two. If somebody wants to dine in a Whites-only restaurant, it is — should be — up to the owner, whether he wants the business of the racists or that of the Blacks (and those joining them in a boycott).

      Merely rolling back the laws would not have affected the intent of the southern states to suppress and oppress blacks.

      How do you know?

      There were many others which also had to be shut down.

      Nope. The official discrimination had to be abolished. Everything else amounts to prosecuting thought crimes — things made illegal by the accused's alleged thoughts. We surrendered substantial personal freedoms — such as the freedom of (not) association and even that of speech — in the hope of racial harmony. 50 years later we still have neither the freedoms nor the harmony. Do we deserve either?

      It has already proven pointless and I argue, that it was not merely that, but also harmful. The recent housing crises was due to that and have the grossly unfair admission policies in various universities, which openly discriminate against Whites and Asians. Similar discrimination is encouraged in the work-place — Uber is seeking not just a good CEO, but one who'd make it less likely, the company will be prosecuted for "discrimination" of women.

      It is stupid, unfair, and inefficient — just like everything a government does...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  13. the double think is real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah let's address sexism and bro culture by making decisions based on stereotypes.

    1. Re:the double think is real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah let's address sexism and bro culture by making decisions based on stereotypes.

      It would be a good PR move and there is some benefit to having someone in charge who might be able to relate to the problem.

    2. Re:the double think is real by swillden · · Score: 0

      Yeah let's address sexism and bro culture by making decisions based on stereotypes.

      I'm breaking my own policy against replying to ACs (as expressed in my sig), but it's worth it this time. Don't expect me to do it again.

      Hell, yes, let's address sexism and bro culture by specifically choosing a CEO that directly counters them. I get the argument that in an ideal world we should be able to just ignore gender, etc., but we manifestly do not live in that world. In many cases it's a good idea to pretend to be what you wish you were, because doing so moves you towards that state. That's great for individuals, but it does not work for societies, because it allows pockets of the "old way" to continue to flourish.

      What also doesn't work is to apply stupid affirmative action. Affirmative action is fine, but it can't be of the stupid, counterproductive sort that elevates people into positions which they are not competent to hold, particularly if the problem you're trying to fix is that the people in question are perceived as being incompetent to hold those positions. But no one with half a brain would argue that Meg Whitman is not competent to be a CEO of a large and growing network-based corporation, since she has done that exact thing before.

      So I'm not remotely suggesting a decision "based on stereotypes" here. Instead, selecting Whitman would specifically break with exactly the stereotypes that have been causing problems at Uber. That you could possibly see this as a decision based on the stereotype of women indicates some sort of deep confusion on your part. Or just an inability to think.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:the double think is real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hiring a female CEO would be a really good idea, IMO

      That you could possibly see this as a decision based on the stereotype of women indicates some sort of deep confusion on your part. Or just an inability to think.

      Or, maybe you need to rethink your opening premise.

  14. Re:I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Out of all the books I've recommended on Slashdot, "I'm Feeling Lucky" got 1,300+ clicks and sold 12 copies. There's a lot of interest in the early history of Google.

    Yes, fewer than 1% of the already-small number of people who clicked your link bought the book. I can see where you'd reasonably conclude that there's a massive interest in the early history of Google!

  15. OT: old school Mozilla vibes by mi · · Score: 1

    was hoping for some old school Firefox vibes

    Go for Seamonkey. Especially, if you use Thunderbird too — you'll save lots of RAM and some diskspace...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  16. Re: I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lol so blatant. Thanks mods.

  17. Re: I'm disappointed... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Lol so blatant. Thanks mods.

    I'm stuck with the stupidest trolls on Slashdot.

  18. Re: I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...birds of a feather... you fat fuck.

  19. Re: I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you sound bitter, douchebag

  20. Re:I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I have a valid reason to give the direct link for "I'm Feeling Lucky: The Confessions of Google Employee Number 59" .

  21. Re: I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you sound fulfilled, white knight

  22. Re: I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And we're stuck with the stupidest ebook writer on Slashdot. Check out THIS gem!

    "Little Suzy and her dog, Spot, are trap inside the detached garage on her late grandfather's ranch in Morgan Hill during a fierce thunderstorm with an unspeakable horror from inside a handcrafted lunch box that hungers for revenge against her family."

    Holy run-on sentence, Batman! But what I really liked is the "are trap" part. The chucklefuck can't even be bothered to edit or proof-read his "sampler"!

  23. Re:I'm disappointed... by aicrules · · Score: 1

    I'm sure there are a lot of people interested in that topic. But probably very few who would buy a book for it considering ....the internet...

  24. Whitman lied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Told HPE shareholders she didn't want to leave HPE just last week. The Uber board probably realized she's a lying cunt, and you don't want a lying cunt as CEO.

  25. Re: I'm disappointed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's actually not even a run-on sentence. I forget what the technical term is, but all those qualifying statements (inside, on, during, in, during, with, from, that, for, against) are just describing one clause. Personally, I think it is ungainly for sure, but it isn't a run-on sentence.