HN user
If you want to get in touch with me reply to a comment and let me know.
Hey. I also hate being in the limelight. But if it's good for business I get over it and have. Just like I get over many things that I need to do in business to make it work. (I have cleaned toilets and done grunt work and still take out the trash. I do things with my wife in personal life that I hate to do in order to have a good relationship as well as I am sure everyone does).
Well perhaps she learned a lesson that if you are going to "lead" with a tasty vignette like that the rest of your message will be lost. So it's a lesson learned, right? Next interview she would perhaps not do the same thing and simply save the story for PG.
So you are saying that she figured that out after 1 bad interview and didn't know it about the press prior to hiring a PR firm?
For a business purposes, part of the benefit of "that family thing" is that it would tend to make employees less likely to jump ship because of a personal connection and bond.
This is also the reason why in business (the reverse example) it's important (generally and depending on the circumstances) to keep an arms length relationship. If your brother in law is, for example, the contractor doing work and renovating your home, your hands are tied more than if it's someone that you don't have a personal connection to. Weighed against the potential upside of getting a bad job from someone who has no relationship with you at all of course. (Details and the parties involved matter as with anything).
"After that she told the PR firm to stop."
Oh wow I disagree with this totally. One reporter gives a bad slant to a story and that is enough to make you give up on setting up and getting other PR? What am I missing here? Anyone who has ever appeared in a story in the news (I have multiple times) knows they always get things wrong and always angle to story to what they think is something interesting that will allow them to sell advertising. That is the business they are in. With all due respect to Jessica (who I don't know) this sounds to me very thin skinned and not exactly an example of overcoming adversity in the entrepreneurship world. Of course it's her right to not do interviews if she doesn't feel like doing them but the way PG presents the story it's as if this one incident was enough to sour her taste (and there were no other factors at play).
Edit: As would be expected say something (not delicately or gently enough) about anyone closely associated with YC and get downvoted. Maybe that's just because people will pay attention to the comment more and tend to react more emotionally than rationally.
Edit#2: As far as those who say "YC is successful Jessica doesn't need to be in the limelight it's important to realize that people read these essays who are not in that position. Or even close. So perhaps PG could have pointed that out in a more direct way so that those learning from his writings could understand the nuance of the decision.
To get past the paywall:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
The issue is not liability. It's whether there is a leg to stand on to get sued for this. In this case there is a leg to stand on to get sued. And in that case it's time and money to defend, assuming insurance does not cover this of course.
"then their professional liability insurance would protect them from the fall-out of sloppy workmanship"
Assumes the homeowner checks that the insurance for the professional is valid at the point the repair is made. Of course nobody does that. (They ask and are told they are insured. Maybe on a large project but on a small repair?)
Along those lines I have a doctor that is practicing in a property that I own (commercial). As part of the lease (as with all tenants that I have) they are required to provide not only proof of insurance but to add my LLC as a named insured to the policy and provide what is known as an ACCORD certficate (as proof). They do have the insurance (I have seen the policy) but even after 2 months I have not been able to get them to get their agent to provide the ACCORD cert. So what am I supposed to do? Tell them to move out? In theory this needed to be provided prior to moving in. But as things like this go of course you give leeway and try not to be a hard ass. I am sure I will get the cert but there is liability for a brief time prior to receiving it. My point is all of this is real life and the difference between what is taught in school (or online) and what actually happens in business. [1]
[1] And another tenant provided the CERT but named me personally instead of the LLC. And I've had cases where my own insurance company mixes up company names (there are several) on the policy and it's a constant battle to get all paperwork actually straight and in order (easy when you own 1 thing, much more difficult to keep track of when you own several or have multiple tenants).
Back in the early to mid 90's the root DNS servers were also left in unlocked rooms of some Universities according to stories that I read around that time.
Also for .info domains when they first came out I happen to be at the headquarters of the registry (Afilias when it was in the US) and they had their servers sitting out in the middle of an office that was quite unprotected like you would any tower computer. The janitor could have taken it off line with a vacuum cleaner. (This was early 2000's iirc.)
"What is the actual risk here, how many people have been bitten by this sort of thing and what was the resulting damage?"
Exactly. And what I essentially typically say is "the scope of the problem has not been defined".
We see this often on news reports on TV as an example. They go off with hyperbole about some issue but fail to address exactly how many people have been effected by it. Simply saying things like "there is a growing concern..." or cherry picking examples.
We see this now with cases of "police brutality" and use of unwarranted force. It's not that it doesn't exist, but that any reports totally ignore how often it actually happens vs. how many times it doesn't happen.
I posted this and wanted to put the word "flawed" before "poll". Mainly because this got front page mention on the WSJ website but if you read how the poll was done it's clearly suspect in it's methodology.
I actually don't like the sliders for that matter. I'd prefer side by side (especially because of the point that you are making).
In case you miss the thread here at HN that mentions you:
"just the ability needed to put together a shell pipeline to get a job done, or a twenty-line script to automate some tedious task. Imagine how much that would change everyday life."
Well unfortunately like learning a foreign language if you don't constantly use those skills they are near worthless. Especially as you get older. And in one way it's quite a bit different than learning a foreign language. There is a great deal of latitude to make mistakes in, say, Spanish. If you don't have it even slightly correct people can still piece together what you are saying. With programming as everyone knows it's got to be near 100% accurate in syntax or it's not going to run and/or give correct results. I agree that being able to do things in the shell is helpful if you are somewhat regularly doing that type of work. I question how useful it is if someone learns that in high school or college and then needs to apply it to do a task years down the road.
Edit: In other words it's not like learning how to ride a bike or play tennis.
"who believe it is in their best interests to cultivate a populace with unquestioning deference to authority"
The populace doesn't ask questions. They simply parrot what a few outspoken people with a mouthpiece tell them to do or think. Most people are lemmings they don't have your brain (I looked at your resume). Not that every conclusion that you would come to would be correct. But in the everyday world (away from NYC, SV and HN) the mediocrity and low level thinking of everyday people is stunning. A large amount of lawn signs is enough to get you elected to local office.
I can't figure out if you are being downvoted because you made a joke or because you used the word "torture" in vain.
The quote I always seem to remember from that movie is: "New guy puking his guts out".
Noting he was flagged 36 days ago. At what threshold does someone gets banned?
Counter-point to your counter-point!
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Pre...
Free to me doesn't matter. By one definition a vendor is a company that supplies goods. Some definitions go further to say that they "sell" the goods. However there is nothing to indicate in any definition of vendor that money has to change hands. A company could be a vendor for a particular product and give it away for free. Additionally whether an organization is non profit or for profit really doesn't change the situation.
I wonder what controls they have to prevent someone who gets dinged with bad ratings (as a landlord) from reposting the same exact property. After all it would be trivial to post with an address and unit "1705a" and then if a problem just call it "1705b" with different pictures as if it's a completely new listing (and curious if that much effort is actually needed). Likewise landlords (I am a commercial landlord) often have various entities that they use so it's easy to come up with a new "owner" of the unit. I wonder if Airbnb even cross refs ownership with city records at all.
Oh also the DNS wasn't resolving and we use google 8.8.8.8 DNS servers.
It worked a bit later for me when I tried (maybe a half hour later) and it works now. (Nice photos!)
Well the issue appears to be settled it was Aaron Cheung:
Yeah I always forget that.
Btw, dns for (aaronbrethorstphotography.com) in your profile isn't resolving.
To get past the paywall just google "Twitter Shares Slide on Revenue Concerns"
"Finding a warm body to drag a tepid rag around your countertop is easy"
Back in the day I had a cleaning service that I trusted and used regularly put a wet rag on top of a CSU/DSU [1]. Not something that I ever thought could happen. Ironically the spare CSU/DSU was sitting right next to that. (Cold and ready to be put in service if the main one failed.) There were of course vents on the top. That's where the rag went. And I was near the equipment at the time (I would never let a cleaning service in where there was sensitive equipment without being onsite).
The irony of an article from 1974 with a link bait title in a Medical Journal! If one of the other names was in the title I would never have scanned this article.
Interesting thought. [1] Probably doesn't fill the letter of the law. Otoh that is what I would call "a leg to stand on". That is it gives some wiggle room and reasonable doubt that you weren't following the law. Would depend on the exact wording of each States law and how tight it was. Ianal but often things boil down to this type of thinking with other things as you probably know.
[1] For that matter what if you conference in a friend and the friend is the one that did the recording.
What matters is the state that you are making the recording in.
So if your state is a one party consent state and you are one of the parties it doesn't matter what the rules in the other state are.
Now what could get interesting is if you are in a one party state and you are calling on a cell phone and you hit a tower in another state. So then you claim that you are in State A and if they were to put in the effort to check or cell records they saw you hit the tower in State B then I would guess you would have to offer further proof of actually making the call in State A other than your statement that was the case. (As opposed to a land line where it's clear where you are located).
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-co...