7 ms·

It 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 be

by treis 6y ago

It 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 ago
I 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 ago
  Nobody is mad about a "feature". They're mad because Triplebyte made sensitive private data public.
  - RobertRoberts 6y ago
    This ^. This is the issue. Calling it only a "feature" is just downright twisting the facts.
  - Silhouette 6y ago
    They'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 ago
    Except they didn’t make any data public. Yes, they were going to, but they hadn’t yet.
username3 6y ago
He didn't spend a couple days on HN telling people they shouldn't be mad about it.
- JshWright 6y ago
  He 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 ago
    I interpret such a statement as expressing sympathy with someone's point of view, but also disagreeing with it.
    - nogabebop23 6y ago
      It'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 ago
        What 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 ago
    Yeah 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 ago
You're just full of misinformation, aren't you?
- dang 6y ago
  Hey, 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 ago
Is 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 ago
  What's the penalty for looking too kindly at somebody in this context?
  - MintelIE 6y ago
    One 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 ago
      You’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 ago
        Think 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 ago
Quick 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 ago
  I 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?

by treis 6y ago

photonios 6y ago

I 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 ago
Nobody is mad about a "feature". They're mad because Triplebyte made sensitive private data public.
- RobertRoberts 6y ago
  This ^. This is the issue. Calling it only a "feature" is just downright twisting the facts.
- Silhouette 6y ago
  They'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 ago
  Except they didn’t make any data public. Yes, they were going to, but they hadn’t yet.

username3 6y ago

He didn't spend a couple days on HN telling people they shouldn't be mad about it.

JshWright 6y ago
He 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 ago
  I interpret such a statement as expressing sympathy with someone's point of view, but also disagreeing with it.
  - nogabebop23 6y ago
    It'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 ago
      What 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 ago
  Yeah 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 ago

You're just full of misinformation, aren't you?

dang 6y ago
Hey, 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 ago

Is 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 ago
What's the penalty for looking too kindly at somebody in this context?
- MintelIE 6y ago
  One 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 ago
    You’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 ago
      Think 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 ago

Quick 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 ago
I 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?