Wouldn't it be helpful to have someone who's friendly to tech and immigration advising the president?<p>Seems to me Uber's CEO had a much better chance of changing things by advising the president than by walking away. Buy hey, whatever makes people feel good based on their knee-jerk reactions. That's the most important thing.
"After the immigration order against refugees and seven Muslim-majority countries, many staff members wondered why Mr. Kalanick was still willing to advise the president."<p>That's <i>exactly</i> why someone should want to advise the President: to have the opportunity to advise the President <i>against</i> such things, or at the very least temper them.<p>This kind of "if you have any association with Trump, you must be evil" mentality is going to end up resulting in Trump being surrounded by people who already agree with him, rather than Trump being surrounded by people who <i>disagree</i> with him and can potentially sway him in more reasonable directions.
I'm typically a naysayer when it comes to protests, and particularly hashtag activism- I (strongly) doubt their efficacy. However, #deleteuber seems to have been remarkably effective.<p>I wonder if this will be enough to staunch the bleeding. How many installs have they list? I wonder what the equivalent cost would be for marketing to create that many new installs.
I don't know which is more sad... that regressive leftists would shame someone out of positively contributing to society or that the CEO of Uber would fold to it so easily.