5 ms·
> Some comments around here are extremely negative of the whole situation. More negative than I think they deserve People would have gotten laid-off to this. T
by tikthot 6y ago
> Some comments around here are extremely negative of the whole situation. More negative than I think they deserve
People would have gotten laid-off to this. The dark patterns are just cherry on top.
The negativity is well deserved.
- photonios 6y agoThe negativity towards to original announcement of making profiles public was deserved. For me, the negativity towards the CEO's apology and cancelling the feature is not. Everyone makes mistakes and if nobody would be willing to look past that, then we'd never get anywhere.
- treis 6y agoIt would have gone over a lot better if he didn't spend a couple days on HN telling people they shouldn't be mad about it. And it would have gone over a lot better if he was honest about what happened. He got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and he's all "was that wrong? Should I not have done that?". They knew exactly what they were doing and calculated that it was worth it.
- photonios 6y agoI can see how that conclusion gets drawn. Any new feature that is announced can be met with some negativity. Sometimes it just ends up working despite that. It is not surprising to me that at first, they tried to defend their plans. It probably took a while for the backslash to sink in and their own opinions to change. I wouldn't expect every company, even ones that target HN's primary audience to turn everything around right away because of an angry thread within a few hours. They turned around in 2-3 days. Quick enough if you ask me. Disclaimer: I am really not in any way affiliated with Triplebyte. I am not even a user/customer. I just see a lot of negativity that I that I find unjustified.
- treis 6y agoNobody is mad about a "feature". They're mad because Triplebyte made sensitive private data public.
- RobertRoberts 6y agoThis ^. This is the issue. Calling it only a "feature" is just downright twisting the facts.
- Silhouette 6y agoThey're mad because Triplebyte made sensitive private data public. And engaged in a host of dark patterns that made it difficult for people to effectively respond to that, for example by getting the data deleted and cancelling any account they had. The problem wasn't just the original error in judgement, serious as that was. It was the doubling down on it in both the implementation and the handling of the criticism when it was announced.
- colejohnson66 6y agoExcept they didn’t make any data public. Yes, they were going to, but they hadn’t yet.
- username3 6y agoHe didn't spend a couple days on HN telling people they shouldn't be mad about it.
- JshWright 6y agoHe certainly spent a great deal of time saying "I'm sorry you feel that way" (a classic non-apology... there's no better way to make a bad situation worse than by starting off with those words).
- otterley 6y agoI interpret such a statement as expressing sympathy with someone's point of view, but also disagreeing with it.
- nogabebop23 6y agoIt's pretty well understood by people far less experienced than the CEO (i.e. me) that you need to split those messages up. Empathy is unconditional. It says "wow, that must be really painful/terrible/scary". It carries no judgement around the accuracy of such feelings, only an understanding that they are real for the other person. Disagreeing comes later after you have shown there are legitimate competing solutions. "I'm sorry you feel that way" fails at the first so you haven't yet earned the right to disagree agreeably.
- otterley 6y agoWhat makes it complicated, though, is that some people interpret "I'm sorry" as an admission of guilt or agreement, so conservative lawyers and others recommend specifying what you feel sorry for so as to not give away the farm.
- neonate 6y agoYeah but not for a couple days. He got whipped by downvotes and left after a couple hours. Agreed about the sorry you feel part.
- vehementi 6y agoYou're just full of misinformation, aren't you?
- dang 6y agoHey, please don't break the site guidelines even if another commenter is wrong (or you feel they are). This is particularly a bad way to defend someone because readers will instinctively take the other side in response to the personal attack. Instead, please provide correct information in a conversational way, like some of the sibling replies did. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- MintelIE 6y agoIs it possible to look too kindly at somebody? I think so. Clearly the CEO is backpedaling now that there's been a public outcry. He's not sorry about what he did. He's sad he got caught.
- CathedralBorrow 6y agoWhat's the penalty for looking too kindly at somebody in this context?
- MintelIE 6y agoOne continues to be taken advantage of, over and over again. Assuming good faith is not prudent when dealing with people who want your money or data. We have enough collective experience at this stage to say this conclusively. Edit: Being cynical is the new normal when dealing with companies. Especially if they have your data, or want it.
- colejohnson66 6y agoYou’re assuming ill intent on a new company. To be so cynical is not a good way to view things in life. Also, they don’t want my money. You literally pay nothing to use them; they get paid (a one time lump sum) by the company who hires you
- skinkestek 6y agoThink of it this way: If someone I trusted with my data doxxes me it doesn't matter if they do it for free! Yes, we know they weren't doing it for the goodness in their hearts, but there's a huge leap between - using what they know about me to sell services to others (classic Google) - and outright selling/publishing my data to others There's a reason why I still - despite all my dislike for Google - still respect them somewhat: they actually seems to try to guard their treasure chest of juicy customer data against both governments as well as everyone else, they seem to be in this for the long haul. Edit: try to avoid being rude / abrasive
- wolfgang42 6y agoQuick correction: > spend a couple days on HN telling people they shouldn't be mad about it. It was actually a only a couple of hours and a few (very inflammatory and highly downvoted) comments, near the beginning of the thread, and then radio silence as the fire raged on. I think that he took a step back and began reconsidering after realizing that his comments weren’t helping any, but because they were the only thing he said in that thread and a lot of discussion was focused on them it seemed like a lot more activity than it really was. (Not that this excuses anything, but I think it’s important to be clear about what happened.)
- bigiain 6y agoI suspect the board and/or legal and/or investors confiscated all his devices and put him in total lockdown...
- BurningFrog 6y ago> He got caught with his hand in the cookie jar This confuses me. What big payout could they have gotten from making this public?
- rammy1234 6y agoAt this point in time it doesn't matter if there is an apology or not. Like above mentioned, some would have got laid-off or for some their intentions of job search is revealed. This is much worst of an effect that an apology would do any good. He apologized so what. It is good but damage is done. Can anything be about it ?
- photonios 6y agoBut they didn't. They cancelled the feature in time. So no real harm was done.
- rammy1234 6y agoI thought it went already live. Misread and misinformed.
- tikthot 6y agoThey cancelled because someone caught it and posted it here on HN. It would have been a different story if it's given no publicity
- jki275 6y agoThey emailed their entire user base and notified them of their intentions. You make it sound like they tried to hide this and got caught - that’s absurd given the facts.
- greenyoda 6y agoThey gave their user base only one week's notice of the upcoming change[1], and according to the discussion in the original thread, had dark patterns in their UI that made it hard to opt out of the feature (it would only allow you opt out for 24 months)[2] or cancel your account. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23279837 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23279837 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23283237 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23283237
- rammy1234 6y agoHow could a CEO the one major feature they were trying to do can't think something which many caught that upfront. Its not like something, that was caught after 2 months or 2 years of a change, it was caught and discussed immediately after the announcement.
- wyck 6y agoThis isn't just a whoopsy mistake, this is a drastically stupid decision that brings the whole business into question. This wasn't really a technical mistake, this is bad leadership mixed with bad procedures. When you drive you boat into the ground because your "not thinking" as the captain, it doesn't remove the fact that you drove a boat into the ground. Irresponsible would be an under statement, it would be more appropriate to call this moronic.
- jzoch 6y agoThe explanation for how it actually would have worked (as opposed to how HN thought it worked) seems to clarify the reaction imo. I can totally see how they thought they were justified in the rollout of this feature. They believed it, while opt-out, was merely a badge and contained no sensitive data (compared to HN profiles). This reaction seems way overblown. Its fine to criticize a feature but lets not pretend this is some nefarious plot that would have resulted in layoffs
- greenyoda 6y ago> merely a badge > This reaction seems way overblown. A badge on a user's now-public profile at a service that's used only when job hunting. Any company that noticed that one of their existing employees had a profile at Triplebyte could guess that the employee was looking for employment elsewhere. This would not be good for their career prospects, and could easily result in the job-hunting employee being chosen for a layoff or skipped for a promotion - most companies would rather keep or promote someone who's not about to leave.
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y agoAre workers in a competitive industry such as tech really at risk for getting fired for possibly looking for new work? Having a TripleByte profile would say as much as having a LinkedIn profile. It doesn't necessarily mean you're looking for a job. And when it's extremely difficult and expensive to replace an engineer, it seems like a bad business decision to fire a worker for this reason.
- mentat 6y agoThere are what, 15000+ engineers competing for that many fewer jobs? Getting fired for looking for new work looks much more possible now than it did 3 months ago.
- lmeyerov 6y agoThis gets into all sorts of dynamics and who controls them: -- Layoffs are happening around COVID, now who do you think a manager will feel more OK picking? -- For luckier companies, bonuses/refreshers/promotions happen at different times, a candidate may want their manager thinking about their work vs. them exploring greener pastures That's sensitive stuff! Some candidate may like being exposed (it's a threat!), some won't (shows disinterest! distracts!). Crucially, the question is of agency: folks entrusted TripleByte, expected privacy based on TripleByte's marketing and industry norms, and instead of having the decision, got into a world of dark patterns (opt-out, weak notification, difficult avoidance, long time delays, ...). Edit: People are down-voting this. Consumer tech companies have been going through layoffs, generally one or more rounds of 20%. Many B2B's are on a delay, and are starting to see numbers around their b2c customers plummet: easy for more to happen as ripples continue. What could have been an opt-in feature to help folks maybe get better new positions was instead setup to add easily-avoidable risk.
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y agoI didn't downvote, but I reasonably question how much energy is put into looking if employees have a TripleByte page. Performance reviews are typically backwards looking (what did this individual deliver for us in the last year) and forward looking (what trajectory does this person have in continuing to deliver value to our organization).
- jki275 6y agoI really doubt this. If a company would lay you off because you have a profile on a jobs network, they’re really a shit company you wouldn’t want to work for anyway. Not that I agree with their actions - anything like this ought to be opt in only, but I can’t see people getting laid off. I have a profile on linked in with my boss and multiple people from my company as contacts, I’ve got profiles on multiple additional jobs board both locally and nationally. I’m not really looking for a job, but I have absolutely no reason to think I’d get fired for having a profile on triplebyte (which I do as well).
- greenyoda 6y ago> you wouldn’t want to work for anyway That would have been much easier to say a few months ago. But now, lots of startups and even large companies like Uber and Airbnb are laying off workers. Suddenly, for many, staying at that crappy company they currently work for is starting to seem like a much better option.
- frandroid 6y ago> you wouldn’t want to work for anyway. Sure, but you still have a mortgage to pay and would like to switch companies on your terms rather than on your employer's terms, right? Have enough time to find the right job you want, instead of the least-worst because you're really not comfortable with being out of work in what's looking to be a long economic crisis?
- mthoms 6y agoScenario: You're the boss. Your company needs to layoff one of two people in a specific role. The two employees up for termination are more or less equal in terms of performance, wages, experience, etc. You have strong evidence Employee A is unsatisfied and looking to move on. Employee B has given no indication of such. Which one do you lay off? Keep in mind that unsatisfied employees often have a detrimental effect on the morale of their (otherwise content) co-workers. Answer: You lay off Employee A. And not because you are a bad CEO or bad person. You do it because it's legitimately in the best interest of the company. Now take the same scenario and substitute a promotion in place of a termination. Which employee will get the promotion? Which employee is in your best interest to invest more money and time in? I think you know the answer.