7 ms·

Thanks for sharing the only actual piece of commentary I can find from the company. Reading between the lines, this suggests that they've decided to use an ext

Thanks for sharing the only actual piece of commentary I can find from the company. Reading between the lines, this suggests that they've decided to use an external firm to cover these security domains (for now). Without knowing which firm or firms we obviously can't say anything specific about their reputations, but I will say that I know some individuals who operate in this space and there are some very qualified and talented outside security firms out there. However, the good firms aren't cheap. Obviously we can't know the details, but I wouldn't assume this move was motivated by cost-cutting reasons. Keeping a top-notch outside security firm fully involved could easily cost more than the salaries of the people who were let go. I don't want to single anyone out, but a quick glance through LinkedIn leaves me somewhat confused about their former security team's structure. I could be missing something, but the only lead I found on LinkedIn was listed as "acting head of security" with a description that they were covering the Head of Security position for now. It's possible that the security team were good engineers, but maybe not the exact engineers/managers that Patreon needed at this stage of their development. Some times a mismatch like that really can't be overcome easily, so employing a known external firm can cover the gaps while the company tries to find a better match for their security leadership needs internally (if they return to internal at all). This move could make even more sense if Patreon was aggressively heading toward IPO. In this case, the company would need to demonstrate that they've done their due diligence and made a best effort to cover security as best they can, even if that means paying exorbitantly for an external firm that has helped prepare companies for IPO in the past. If their internal security team didn't have this experience (and maybe didn't even have an official head of security) then they didn't stand a chance.

t-writescode 4y ago
> This move could make even more sense if Patreon was aggressively heading toward IPO This upsets me so much. Patreon is a perfect example of a company that could operate as a non-profit and everyone would benefit; but, instead, they need to make so much money that they're valuable on the Stock Market. It seems like a net harm for society, here :/
- PragmaticPulp 4y ago
  > Patreon is a perfect example of a company that could operate as a non-profit and everyone would benefit; Everyone except all of the employees who built the company with some equity compensation. Like it or not, a lot of the current and former employees are equity holders in the company. An exit event gets them paid for their ownership piece. Of course, anyone could start a non-profit Patreon competitor if they really wanted to and operate it as such. However, cloning Patreon isn't as trivial as it might sound to the casual observer. A lot of work has gone into getting the company to this point, and IMO it's fair to reward the people who took on the risk to make it happen.
  - t-writescode 4y ago
    As an employee of a startup, I understand the value and desire to get that compensation. My argument is that I wish Patreon had been non-profit from the start and such there would never be a time for them to "Go Public"; and, all their employees would already be focused on the common good that comes out of a patronage platform.
    - kasey_junk 4y ago
      How would that impact their ability to recruit and retain talent though? They are competing against some of the best paying firms in the world. “Making it easier for podcasters to make money” is not high on the list of causes I’d give up my high paying gigs for.
      - t-writescode 4y ago
        "High paying" and not-for-profit are not necessarily contradictory terms. Market rate for good engineers is still what it is.
        melony 4y ago
        A significant amount of tech compensation is in equity. It means Patreon would have to offer a lot more in cash to match the same total compensation as other firms.
bawolff 4y ago
Its possible of course, but the statement does sound a lot like PR speak for: we are going to get a really cheap pentest once a year to check the compliance box.

t-writescode 4y ago

> This move could make even more sense if Patreon was aggressively heading toward IPO This upsets me so much. Patreon is a perfect example of a company that could operate as a non-profit and everyone would benefit; but, instead, they need to make so much money that they're valuable on the Stock Market. It seems like a net harm for society, here :/

PragmaticPulp 4y ago
> Patreon is a perfect example of a company that could operate as a non-profit and everyone would benefit; Everyone except all of the employees who built the company with some equity compensation. Like it or not, a lot of the current and former employees are equity holders in the company. An exit event gets them paid for their ownership piece. Of course, anyone could start a non-profit Patreon competitor if they really wanted to and operate it as such. However, cloning Patreon isn't as trivial as it might sound to the casual observer. A lot of work has gone into getting the company to this point, and IMO it's fair to reward the people who took on the risk to make it happen.
- t-writescode 4y ago
  As an employee of a startup, I understand the value and desire to get that compensation. My argument is that I wish Patreon had been non-profit from the start and such there would never be a time for them to "Go Public"; and, all their employees would already be focused on the common good that comes out of a patronage platform.
  - kasey_junk 4y ago
    How would that impact their ability to recruit and retain talent though? They are competing against some of the best paying firms in the world. “Making it easier for podcasters to make money” is not high on the list of causes I’d give up my high paying gigs for.
    - t-writescode 4y ago
      "High paying" and not-for-profit are not necessarily contradictory terms. Market rate for good engineers is still what it is.
      - melony 4y ago
        A significant amount of tech compensation is in equity. It means Patreon would have to offer a lot more in cash to match the same total compensation as other firms.

bawolff 4y ago

Its possible of course, but the statement does sound a lot like PR speak for: we are going to get a really cheap pentest once a year to check the compliance box.