8 ms·

How can they be so obvlivious though? Their own blog post doesn't even mention the tarnished reputation Zoom has acquired lately. A lot of people will stop dev

How can they be so obvlivious though? Their own blog post doesn't even mention the tarnished reputation Zoom has acquired lately. A lot of people will stop developing integrations for Keybase because of this. It's sad.

mc32 7y ago
They’re not oblivious but two things; you don’t bite the hand that feeds and it’s easier to get someone to see your side of things when you agree with them. Confrontation will not help to fix Zoom’s culture of insecurity.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
mtmail 7y ago
Zoom is publicly traded. Assume their blog post had to be approved by Zoom's press department.
momokoko 7y ago
They aren’t. They are making a lot of money which is what the business was made for. The post is actually refreshingly honest that keybase is now abandoned and will probably die at some point. The idea that companies were stupid enough to place their internal identity on some random 3rd party is so incredibly stupid that it’s hard to feel too bad for anyone. Congrats Keybase!
- formercoder 7y ago
  Thank you. Keybase had investors and I’m sure the premium Zoom offered was unbeatable. Zoom can effectively pay infinity with equity. Those investors knew that this was the best way they’d ever have to realize gains. That’s why they invested in the first place.
  - gwd 7y ago
    Well, when FB bought WhatsApp, its founders stayed on for a bit to vest his shares then founded Signal with his "screw you" money. Maybe some of Keybase's founders can do the same thing.
    - tass 7y ago
      Founded ‘Signal Foundation‘ with Signal’s creator. Signal was around before FB bought WhatsApp.
- AgloeDreams 7y ago
  > They are making a lot of money which is what the business was made for. I miss the days when businesses existed not just to serve investors but also their employees and the common good. It's like a 1%-er meta profit model where the actual business is in buying and selling the business and the core business is really just a temporary front that is designed to never make a profit, just create fancy looking charts and eventually bait and switch consumers when it is sold to the highest bidder and the employees all eventually lose their jobs. One day, VC funding will either be illegal or required. considering the flow of money in this exchange, I'm betting on the second.
  - ativzzz 7y ago
    > I miss the days when businesses existed not just to serve investors but also their employees and the common good Uh when was this? For-profit businesses have always been created for the primary purpose of making money. Any side effect like employee well being happened to coincide with what maximized profits at the time or due to regulation.
    - rabidrat 7y ago
      Pre-1970 or so. Before Milton Friedman, there was a general sense that companies existed to fulfill some mission, with profit as a means. The CEO of Kellogg commented on this in an interview ca. 1980, that money for a business is like a gasoline for a road trip. You need it to get where you're going, but the point of a road trip is not to accumulate as much gasoline as possible.
      - snowwrestler 7y ago
        Is this a joke? The bulk of the labor movement happened before 1970, and it was not because workers were so well-treated and well-compensated that they had a lot of free time on their hands. I'm a big fan of business and entrepreneurship, but let's be clear here: there is a reason we invented government. There was never a time when we could 100% count on the beneficence of business leaders to advance social goals. Edit to add: I'm not trying to demonize all business leaders here. There are some bad actors, but even business leaders who desire to do well have to succeed in the marketplace--even against bad actors. Unfortunately, doing bad things in business often confers the benefit of lowering costs, which is a competitive advantage. This is a known structural issue with a marketplace economy and why we need more than just business to have a good society.
- bigbob2 7y ago
  Unless I imagined it, they previously said publicly that they were unlikely to pursue a sell like this because they had succeeded at previous companies and cared more about the impact this product could make than the profit they could make from selling it. I based my decision to agree to the terms of Keybase around this statement which I can conveniently no longer find. I suspect it was in one of their airdrop announcements, and conveniently those links don't work in the Wayback Machine.
  - windthrown 7y ago
    You are referring to this Github Issue: https://github.com/keybase/keybase-issues/issues/788 https://github.com/keybase/keybase-issues/issues/788 "Yes, we sold our previous 2 businesses. But I want to point out that (1) neither of those sales ever hurt (and arguably both sales greatly helped) our users, (2) Keybase deserves special consideration which we are aware of, and (3) both Max and I are happy in a world where we never try to sell a company again, and only build things we like." I feel silly for falling for it too. Even very wealthy people enjoy extra money.
coldtea 7y ago
>How can they be so obvlivious though? Their own blog post doesn't even mention the tarnished reputation Zoom has acquired lately I'd say, don't overestimate the tarnished reputation (= some news stories for a while, most didn't read or care about -- including corporate users). And of course they wouldn't get into it in a press release/blog post for an unrelated to the issue acquisition! Doesn't make sense to sabotage themselves this way...
bjoli 7y ago
Sure, the reputation might be tarnished, but to it seems like they have hired recently to ensure people that they are taking measures to change that. This seems like an extension of that. If anyone has thought a lot about multi-party encrypted communication it is the keybase folks.
verytrivial 7y ago
> doesn't even mention the tarnished reputation Zoom has acquired lately I'm interested to know if you thought keybase doing the whole unsolicited Initial Coin Offering was a reputation tarnishing or polishing event for that company. (I'm circumspect about both of these outfits to be honest.)
tensor 7y ago
That's probably why Zoom is buying them, to double down on security and repair their reputation. They genuinely seem to be putting all their focus on improving security. Seems like a smart buy to me.
- nske 7y ago
  There hasn't been enough time since the noise about Zoom's security, for a company to inspect the goods, audit the books, negotiate, draft paperwork, share cocktails and all other stuff that come before announcing an acquisition. Especially in the middle of a disruptive situation. The process must had started many months ago.

mc32 7y ago

They’re not oblivious but two things; you don’t bite the hand that feeds and it’s easier to get someone to see your side of things when you agree with them. Confrontation will not help to fix Zoom’s culture of insecurity.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

mtmail 7y ago

Zoom is publicly traded. Assume their blog post had to be approved by Zoom's press department.

momokoko 7y ago

They aren’t. They are making a lot of money which is what the business was made for. The post is actually refreshingly honest that keybase is now abandoned and will probably die at some point. The idea that companies were stupid enough to place their internal identity on some random 3rd party is so incredibly stupid that it’s hard to feel too bad for anyone. Congrats Keybase!

formercoder 7y ago
Thank you. Keybase had investors and I’m sure the premium Zoom offered was unbeatable. Zoom can effectively pay infinity with equity. Those investors knew that this was the best way they’d ever have to realize gains. That’s why they invested in the first place.
- gwd 7y ago
  Well, when FB bought WhatsApp, its founders stayed on for a bit to vest his shares then founded Signal with his "screw you" money. Maybe some of Keybase's founders can do the same thing.
  - tass 7y ago
    Founded ‘Signal Foundation‘ with Signal’s creator. Signal was around before FB bought WhatsApp.
AgloeDreams 7y ago
> They are making a lot of money which is what the business was made for. I miss the days when businesses existed not just to serve investors but also their employees and the common good. It's like a 1%-er meta profit model where the actual business is in buying and selling the business and the core business is really just a temporary front that is designed to never make a profit, just create fancy looking charts and eventually bait and switch consumers when it is sold to the highest bidder and the employees all eventually lose their jobs. One day, VC funding will either be illegal or required. considering the flow of money in this exchange, I'm betting on the second.
- ativzzz 7y ago
  > I miss the days when businesses existed not just to serve investors but also their employees and the common good Uh when was this? For-profit businesses have always been created for the primary purpose of making money. Any side effect like employee well being happened to coincide with what maximized profits at the time or due to regulation.
  - rabidrat 7y ago
    Pre-1970 or so. Before Milton Friedman, there was a general sense that companies existed to fulfill some mission, with profit as a means. The CEO of Kellogg commented on this in an interview ca. 1980, that money for a business is like a gasoline for a road trip. You need it to get where you're going, but the point of a road trip is not to accumulate as much gasoline as possible.
    - snowwrestler 7y ago
      Is this a joke? The bulk of the labor movement happened before 1970, and it was not because workers were so well-treated and well-compensated that they had a lot of free time on their hands. I'm a big fan of business and entrepreneurship, but let's be clear here: there is a reason we invented government. There was never a time when we could 100% count on the beneficence of business leaders to advance social goals. Edit to add: I'm not trying to demonize all business leaders here. There are some bad actors, but even business leaders who desire to do well have to succeed in the marketplace--even against bad actors. Unfortunately, doing bad things in business often confers the benefit of lowering costs, which is a competitive advantage. This is a known structural issue with a marketplace economy and why we need more than just business to have a good society.
bigbob2 7y ago
Unless I imagined it, they previously said publicly that they were unlikely to pursue a sell like this because they had succeeded at previous companies and cared more about the impact this product could make than the profit they could make from selling it. I based my decision to agree to the terms of Keybase around this statement which I can conveniently no longer find. I suspect it was in one of their airdrop announcements, and conveniently those links don't work in the Wayback Machine.
- windthrown 7y ago
  You are referring to this Github Issue: https://github.com/keybase/keybase-issues/issues/788 https://github.com/keybase/keybase-issues/issues/788 "Yes, we sold our previous 2 businesses. But I want to point out that (1) neither of those sales ever hurt (and arguably both sales greatly helped) our users, (2) Keybase deserves special consideration which we are aware of, and (3) both Max and I are happy in a world where we never try to sell a company again, and only build things we like." I feel silly for falling for it too. Even very wealthy people enjoy extra money.

coldtea 7y ago

>How can they be so obvlivious though? Their own blog post doesn't even mention the tarnished reputation Zoom has acquired lately I'd say, don't overestimate the tarnished reputation (= some news stories for a while, most didn't read or care about -- including corporate users). And of course they wouldn't get into it in a press release/blog post for an unrelated to the issue acquisition! Doesn't make sense to sabotage themselves this way...

bjoli 7y ago

Sure, the reputation might be tarnished, but to it seems like they have hired recently to ensure people that they are taking measures to change that. This seems like an extension of that. If anyone has thought a lot about multi-party encrypted communication it is the keybase folks.

verytrivial 7y ago

> doesn't even mention the tarnished reputation Zoom has acquired lately I'm interested to know if you thought keybase doing the whole unsolicited Initial Coin Offering was a reputation tarnishing or polishing event for that company. (I'm circumspect about both of these outfits to be honest.)

tensor 7y ago

That's probably why Zoom is buying them, to double down on security and repair their reputation. They genuinely seem to be putting all their focus on improving security. Seems like a smart buy to me.

nske 7y ago
There hasn't been enough time since the noise about Zoom's security, for a company to inspect the goods, audit the books, negotiate, draft paperwork, share cocktails and all other stuff that come before announcing an acquisition. Especially in the middle of a disruptive situation. The process must had started many months ago.