RT @IPProfEvans: "Coinbase’s New ‘Direction’ Is Censorship, Leaked Audio Reveals" @VICE Excellent reporting abt this very troubling action by CB leadership. I've used CB as the primary onboarding tool for my #FromCashtoCrypto students, primarily WOC, but that ends today.
RT @bigblackjacobin: Coinbase's refusal to specify what topics are "political" even as it pursues a political project ("creating a cryptoeconomy") means that it will likely censor political opinions that aren't shared by its CEO or the "silent majority" he claims to represent. https://t.co/ED1O8mblZf
I got in a big argument with Brian over a business deal that went bad. While he was probably legally in the right, I told him that he was morally wrong.
He could have just totally ignored me after that, there really wasn't anything I could have done about the situation. However, later upon reflection, he agreed with me and gave me 10 bitcoins compensation.
Sure, I am just one person, but ever since that event, I will always consider him to have a very high level of integrity.
I'm not questioning his integrity in his personal life, I'm sure he's a decent guy (even though he screwed you, by your own admission) who thinks he makes moral choices, but money has a tendency to corrupt people... and being in [bed with JPMorgan](https://decrypt.co/29832/jp-morgans-ceo-held-secret-meetings-with-the-coinbase-ceo) tends to force a person's hand, especially when said person wants their business to attain banking services and attain a seat at the big boy table and not fear running afoul of regulatory agencies. If he'll bend you over for <six figures, imagine what he's capable of now that he's in Jamie Dimon's pocket and deals are worth 10 - 100x more. He sold you out, then bought you off, but i very much respect you sharing your perspective and have no reason to doubt your sincerity.
Mind if i inquire how long was the length of time between when the deal went bad and when he attempted (or did) make things right with you? Somehow i doubt Mr. Armstrong woke up the next day and immediately went to correct his error, i have a sneaking suspicion by the time he did it, 10 BTC was rather insignificant to his bottom line. It's not like he dropped a briefcase of cash on your doorstep, it was barely an inconvenience to his world. But now I'm just speculating a ton. I'd love to be wrong, but i think we both know he's spineless. There's plenty of decent human beings without the capacity or courage to stand up to Wall Street or Uncle Sam (not that there's much of a difference). Heck, I'd sell out every user on Reddit for the ability to be the first crypto IPO in the USofA. Someone has to take those secret meetings, at least we always knew the Gemini twins were corporate whores, i held out hope and made excuses for Brian (and Cbase) because there were so few other options when trying to assist neophyte crypto users. Oh well, not the first time I've been a poor judge of character. Nor the last. Stupid hippie hopefulness always making me want to give folks the benefit of the doubt.
Regardless of my unhinged rant, i do genuinely appreciate you taking the time to share this anecdotal tale. Please stay safe, sir.
>Mind if i inquire how long was the length of time between when the deal went bad and when he attempted (or did) make things right with you?
A few months. And thinking back, I realize that one of his programmers probably had more to do with the situation than he did. He was involved in a lot of projects at the time. I prefer to think that once he had a clear picture of what transpired, he made things right for me.
Brian Armstrong is 100% correct, and we would live in a much better world if more CEOs had the courage to follow in his footsteps.
A corporation is not a campaign rally, and a corporation is certainly not a front for the terrorist Marxist organization known as Black Lives Matter, which is a fundraising initiative for the Democratic Socialist Communist Party. A corporation should never bow down to the mob.
I didn't read the article but how else can you runs bitcoin exchnage. Are you supposed to do what arthur from bitmex supposedly did, and then get arrested or would you really rather there be no centralised exchanges at all
You can run an exchange without censoring the thoughts of your employees. DeFi would be great, but we're not there yet. We're still working on basic adoption for the masses while the technology (hopefully) scales.
>without censoring the thoughts of your employees.
Yet it's okay for employees to coerce their management to follow their political groupthink?
The CEO guy is allowed to not give a fuck about blm. He's just the only one open about it. No corporation gives a fuck about blm. They all put out their cucky statements to appease the mob for a few weeks and you guys eat it all up and take the pitchforks to the next village.
Get over it.
I'm talking about centralised exchanges because that's what's here for the most part
BitcoinXioModerator - Bitcoin is Freedom1 week ago
Downvoted for the title. With that said, I can’t imagine the struggle it is to run a giant company that is a leader in the crypto space, but basically telling all staff they can’t talk about certain topics or get fired is really the wrong way to go about things. Especially since crypto is rooted in controversy and going against mainstream ideas and regulations, it just seems whacky to push this sort of agenda at a crypto company.
Thank you for the thoughtful (and correct) analysis on a very complex and nuanced topic. I should have considered my title more carefully, trying to convey a certain level of emphasis without being quite so vulgar.
Yeah I agree with you. TBH discussing politics at work can be very toxic and destructive. I can see why a company would have such a policy. It's like discussing religion at work too -- you're just going to end up taking a side and it will get in the way of productivity.
Do it on your own time. I see nothing wrong with this at all.
Corporations are totalitarian systems.. you should realize that going in to one. They are under no obligation to pay you to waste their time. If you want maximal freedom don't work for a corporation.
I see nothing wrong with what they are doing.
I still don't understand all the heat. Coinbase is a private company, it doesn't have to pay you to organize and participate in political events, that's not your job there. Armstrong was nice enough to offer severance pay to these workers.
This is a non-issue. People need to learn their place.
More like, _"Open your mouth & work dummy!"_ Now... on your knees! /s
What, you don't do **everything** that is asked of you while at the workplace? Tsk tsk, you terrible worker drone, stop trying to think for yourself. Now get back in line.
Except he got into the wrong business, crypto is inherently political. It directly challenges there most powerful institutions on the planet. I guess I forget just how many are just here for, __moon when? Lambo! __ and could give a shit about anything else.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
You have chosen to ignore the political aspects and focus on your specific use-case, but i assure you, read the whitepaper: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
It is definitely political. I suspect you (and your government) would almost certainly agree that it's political once you have triggered enough taxable events, but choosing to ignore it and treat crypto in the same way you might a precious metal, sure it's easy to avoid the politics... but don't try to exchange that for anything, that might become political.
Again, you don't have to agree with me, but you're wrong.
Also, if Cbase were to hand your information over to your government, i think that could become political pretty quickly: https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/81458/coinbase-transparency-report-2020
It's like people have never worked at a corporation before. Financial services monitor almost everything you do. This is nothing new. I wouldn't be surprised if they monitored the conversations on Slack. If your employee's job could theoretically influence the market, you would want to know about it. You are working in their ecosystem under their terms. There is no trust when it comes to the money game. I am pretty sure BlackRock, Fidelity, and Goldman Sachs do the same thing.
Coinbase has the *right* to censor their employees, but that doesn't mean it isn't censorship. Asking someone to delete political posts they previously made is just about the clearest example of censorship I can think of.
The US has a violent, militarized police force that is literally killing citizens in the street and you have the gall to defend them. You're either on the side of the people or the side of the violent police state. I know what side I'm on.
Coinbase has the *right* to censor their employees. I'm not arguing against that. However, it's still censorship. Asking someone to delete previous posts and comments they made is just about the clearest example of censorship I can think of.
Being given the choice to leave doesn't negate the fact that it's censorship. It's the equivalent of saying "If you don't want the goverment to censor you then you can leave the country." Censorship does not need to employ brute force, you just made that definition up.
You just made up another definition. Find me a single definition of censorship that specifies brute force or prior freedom of speech. I guess people in China can't be censored because they never had freedom of speech to begin with. The posts in question were on Slack, an internal messaging app. It doesn't affect their reputation in any way. Also since when are goverments required to uphold freedom of speech laws? That would be news to a lot of goverments around the world.
You have rather weak understanding of what companies are. Private businesses are not street corners to stage protests where freedom of speech laws apply. You cant cry censorship over company's policy - its absurd and laughable. Employees are free to find a job that comes with free speech.
> The posts in question were on Slack, an internal messaging app. It doesn't affect their reputation in any way.
Certainly does. If the news gets out that CB employees are doing woke things using official business/company communication platform, it would hurt CB's reputation.
> I guess people in China can't be censored because they never had freedom of speech to begin with.
Again, false equivalence. Governments are meant to uphold free speech. The fact that CCP doesnt allow free speech doesnt take away the premise that freedom of speech is something that a government offers its citizens. Private companies dont offer employees freedom of speech - they arent a charity.