|
After the former VP of engineering at uBeam came out publicly stating that their product is almost completely useless, I looked at the resume of their current VP of engineering, Sean Taffler. Turns out his previous role was VP of Systems Engineering at HashFast Technologies, a Bitcoin hardware company that was shut down for fraud, for running a scheme similar to Butterfly Labs.quote:http://bravenewcoin.com/news/bitcoin-miner-manufacturer-found-guilty-of-fraud/: I guess if you need an engineer who is an expert at promising customers a fake product that never ships, he would be a good fit.
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 04:43 |
|
|
poo poo just got to the end of that article about the guy who died in an AirBnB and realized I went to school with the author (and was friends-of-friends with him). 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:The building itself doesn't become unsafe necessarily, but the unit itself can become unsafe. Does the unit have its own water heater, or furnace? Does it have a CO monitor? Is it getting checked for bed bugs that could then infest the whole building? Frequent guests are going to increase your chance of bed bugs because they could be bringing them from their own home. Is the unit being kept clean, or are guests leaving it messy and the owner isn't cleaning it thoroughly, which can attract vermin? These are all important things that need to be taken care of when running a hotel out of an apartment.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:I'm pretty sure that all of these are regs that Airbnb doesn't actually object to. What you see instead a lot is cities trying to ban Airbnb entirely or put incredibly onerous restrictions on them. AirBnB doesn't object to the regulations, they object to having to ensure their illegal hoteliers comply with them.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:I'm pretty sure that all of these are regs that Airbnb doesn't actually object to. What you see instead a lot is cities trying to ban Airbnb entirely or put incredibly onerous restrictions on them. They don't object because they throw up their hands and say "Lol not our problem! We have a contract indemnifying us from liability for deathtrap hotel." Which is why there's a push to ban them. If these 'disruptive' companies actually spent any money or put real effort into ensuring they complied with laws there wouldn't be such a pushback.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:They don't object because they throw up their hands and say "Lol not our problem! We have a contract indemnifying us from liability for deathtrap hotel." Which is why there's a push to ban them. If these 'disruptive' companies actually spent any money or put real effort into ensuring they complied with laws there wouldn't be such a pushback. Nor would there be any profits.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
Boot and Rally posted:Nor would there be any profits. So what you're saying here is that their business model isn't viable? Sounds like a personal problem
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:I'm pretty sure that all of these are regs that Airbnb doesn't actually object to. What you see instead a lot is cities trying to ban Airbnb entirely or put incredibly onerous restrictions on them. This sounds like complete bullshit, prove it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/731108749830696961
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
The worst thing Steve Jobs ever did was perpetuating the idea that black turtlenecks confer some kind of aura of genius.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
There's a lot of cargo-cult CEOing going on -- see whoever it was (Andreesen?) saying that he preferred to give VC to founders who reminded him of Mark Zuckerberg.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Huge_Midget posted:The worst thing Steve Jobs ever did was perpetuating the idea that black turtlenecks confer some kind of aura of genius. You'd also think someone would have told Elizabeth Holmes to tone down the crazy eyes.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
MC Nietzche posted:You'd also think someone would have told Elizabeth Holmes to tone down the crazy eyes. maybe that IS toned down
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
Why are her pupils in parentheses. I have a weird feeling that a bright blue laser beam is going to shoot out of her eyes in about 4 seconds.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
Nah, everyone knows that the crazier the better. I mean, not crazier, the proper word is DISRUPTIVE EXCEPTIONAL INDIVIDUAL and you have to be able to produce all these bullshit success quotes straight out of some lovely self-help book. That's what CEOing is basically. Just some neverending TED talk.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
go3 posted:maybe that IS toned down A terrifying and sobering thought. Pochoclo posted:Nah, everyone knows that the crazier the better. I mean, not crazier, the proper word is DISRUPTIVE EXCEPTIONAL INDIVIDUAL and you have to be able to produce all these bullshit success quotes straight out of some lovely self-help book. That's what CEOing is basically. Just some neverending TED talk. Man millennials managed to ruin the fine art of CEOing too. How bad are we?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
MC Nietzche posted:Man millennials managed to ruin the fine art of CEOing too. How bad are we? Yeah, before all this bullshit, being a CEO just meant inhaling obscene amounts of cocaine and doing whores with other CEOs while closing down juicy deals that meant more money for you at the expense of the wellbeing of the general populace. Nowadays, the end result is exactly the same or worse, but they get to be cult of personality figures, annoying on public. At least in the old days they did their dirty business behind closed doors.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
I kind of feel like a poo poo load of people are looking at people like Bill Gates, Gabe Newell, Steve Jobs, or Mark Zuckerberg and asking "how can I become that bug gently caress wealthy in the tech world?" They focus on the "I have this idea..." part of it rather than getting in early side or the fact that, generally speaking, these things ended up getting huge portions of massive markets. The idea wasn't what made the money. The business is what made the money. Yeah 30 years ago something like Windows or Facebook or an iPhone would have sounded insane. Sooooooo now we have venture capitalists vomiting piles of cash at whoever has some insane, disruptive idea that will totally take over a new market.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
Making fun of the way a woman looks is really elevating the level of discourse ITT Jobs-esque turtleneck is definitely fair game, but otherwise drat
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
I feel there is a significant difference between making fun of someone's appearance because they're a pillock and making fun of their appearance because of their gender.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
Yeah no ones saying anything gendered about her appearance. It would all easily apply to a male CEO.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
See also 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Sure, mock her for obviously trying to dress like Steve "Giant Arrogant rear end in a top hat" Jobs, but I never see guys getting accused of having crazy eyes, for example. Fishmech posted this Tumblr employee in YOSPOS yesterday:  That guy made himself look like a clown's idea of ridiculous tool, but I'm not going to make fun of the face he was born with.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
I calls 'em like I sees 'em.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Crazy eyes isn't a thing you're born with, it's an expression you make, same with trump's weird funnel mouth, you can elect not to hold your eyes open in an expression of either abject terror or terrifying fascination.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Crazy eyes isn't a thing you're born with, it's an expression you make, same with trump's weird funnel mouth, you can elect not to hold your eyes open in an expression of either abject terror or terrifying fascination. That's why Jim Jones opted to wear sunglasses.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Yeah, sure. I think I've stumbled on to the gender version of the work-inappropriate hair GIS https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=crazy+eyes
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:Making fun of the way a woman looks is really elevating the level of discourse ITT I think that drawing the line arbitrarily at clothes and not facial expressions is a personal choice. However, I am willing to concede that in my experience crazy eyes is most often leveled at women. That being said, opening her eyes like that is definitely a choice she makes as there are pictures where it is more and less pronounced. Even if news agencies that publish pics choose ones where its less pronounced, the image we're talking about comes from their own PR which definitely makes it a choice by Holmes and Theranos, and that makes it hilarious.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Going by the GIS apparently it's more racist than sexist.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
For me it's the 20/20 hindsight along with the bullshit TED-esque technobabble and the cargo-cult Steve Jobs uniform that leaps out at me. The Marshall Applewhite piercing gaze is just the icing on the cake. Munkeymon posted:Fishmech posted this Tumblr employee in YOSPOS yesterday: He sure is disrupting the idea that going to the bathroom shouldn't be a chore or a hilarious disaster.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
sure elizabeth holmes dresses like she's trying to build a cult of personality and has the crazy eyes but if you're jonesing to be outraged at someone based on criticism about her being a woman then just listen to her voice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGfaJZAdfNE&t=99s
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:Sure, mock her for obviously trying to dress like Steve "Giant Arrogant rear end in a top hat" Jobs, but I never see guys getting accused of having crazy eyes, for example. That man has to be colorblind. Also completely ignorant of the concept of what ties, sashes, and belts are.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Going by the GIS apparently it's more racist than sexist. That's a character nick-named 'crazy eyes' from a TV show.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:sure elizabeth holmes dresses like she's trying to build a cult of personality and has the crazy eyes but if you're jonesing to be outraged at someone based on criticism about her being a woman then just listen to her voice Can't blame people for their voice but jesus christ that's a whole lot of stupid bullshit she's spouting. If I said like a hundredth of that poo poo in a job interview I'd get a boot up my rear end, why do rich people think it's a good idea to give lots of money to people like this?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
So what's going to happen in the long run? Are we in for another huge recession when people get tired of throwing fistfuls of money at wacky monkeycheese ideas?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:So what's going to happen in the long run? Are we in for another huge recession when people get tired of throwing fistfuls of money at wacky monkeycheese ideas? I don't know how bad or wide-ranging a recession it would be but you can't look at the patently stupid ideas that have been getting absurd funding over the last few years and not speculate that we may be in some sort of tech bubble right now.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:So what's going to happen in the long run? Are we in for another huge recession when people get tired of throwing fistfuls of money at wacky monkeycheese ideas? This tech bubble is extremely localized to places like SV and mostly centered around start-ups and unicorns who are trying to go as long as possible without an IPO rather then the first tech bubble of "everyone IPO, everyone day trades, it all comes crashing down " or the subprime bubble of "housing prices can only go up Up UP, issue as many subprime loans and collateralize debt obligations as possible, whoops it turns out housing prices can crash." At most you'll see a localized recession in those areas and maybe a few weeks of more volatility in the stock market. It won't be something that threatens the big banks like the 2008 crisis.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:So what's going to happen in the long run? Are we in for another huge recession when people get tired of throwing fistfuls of money at wacky monkeycheese ideas? I don't know the numbers, but I'd be shocked if startups were a big enough portion of the economy to strongly affect the entire economy. I'm going to make the same argument below that posters in Debate & Discussion commonly make in defense of scientific research into old, tired, very unlikely to ever economically matter physics research: if venture capital/esoteric physics research is so small when compared to the rest of the economy, why obsess over how it isn't the most economically efficient activity? It's like playing the lottery but with much more uncertain odds--maybe you can hit the jackpot and win big! Venture capital isn't even taxpayer money, so it doesn't necessarily have to be your money that they are gambling with. Obviously there is a lot of stupid stuff and dumb ideas in startups to make fun of, but I think a lot of the hostility in the thread towards them is just culture warfare. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 21:03 on May 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Obviously there is a lot of stupid stuff and dumb ideas in startups to make fun of, but I think a lot of the hostility in the thread towards them is just culture warfare.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 04:43 |
|
|
silence_kit posted:I don't know the numbers, but I'd be shocked if startups were a big enough portion of the economy to strongly affect the entire economy. Considering that a lot of the money they are throwing around came from QE, in a way it is taxpayer's money
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 21:31
|
|