Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 134 posts

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#51

Post by 6d0debc071 »

It's a long shot gamble funded by some people who maybe should and maybe shouldn't know better - I don't pretend to be in a position to judge the science in this case. So, who cares? I don't mean that in a derogatory sense, I mean it in the sense that you might set yourself a limit of a few hundred pounds for a game of poker one night. If it pays off, great. If it doesn't, no biggy. If they're committing fraud, then there are regulatory mechanisms in place around that - how far you trust those is an issue, but it's a much larger issue than one company.

The big sin that you mustn't commit, and that many do anyway, is to trust a private company's data where a potential conflict of interest like this exists. Run your own trials.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#52

Post by jjoonathan »

Zigurd wrote: post #28
ThomPete wrote: post #7

No matter how this story ends (whether they eventually ends up with having a fully functioning product or not) this should be a cautionary tale to anyone wanting to actually change the world in healthcare. Science speaks for itself and does not care how much you raised at what valuation. It requires a rigorous approach to testings and facts and data or it will be merciless if you aren't living up to your own claims.…

Well that's all very moral, but what Theranos is doing is mostly engineering. So while "hype the fuck out of it, raise big money, and fake it 'till you make it" might feel all icky, it's not a unique plan. Will we be saying the same things about Palantir? Maybe, maybe not. There's not that much difference between Palantir and Theranos. What has Palantir got that others don't? Answer: The ability to raise money at inc…

That's what I thought at first, but $400M and 12 years should have been enough to put together a pretty solid uTAS seeing as microfluidic integration wasn't exactly bleeding edge back then either. But they seem to have drunk their own kool-aid and created a working environment so toxic that they sabotaged their own chances to fake it till they made it. They might still get there, but even if they do there's a lesson to be had about expectation management.

EDIT: to clarify, I'm not the source of downvotes. Before the recent media explosion I believed exactly as you did.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#53

Post by eropple »

trevyn wrote: post #23
Mithaldu wrote: post #4

I'm honestly getting kind of annoyed with seeing stuff about Theranos, since everyone writing about them is beating about the bush, and only ends up describing how Theranos communicates with a startling lack of earnestness. Example from the video, paraphrased: Mod: "What prick tests are you able to do, using no commercially available lab equipment?" Holmes: "[lots of waffling] We're currently only doing the Herpes te…

Huh? Sounds like she did answer the question -- only Herpes.

They're currently, as I understand it, doing the herpes test commercially (sometimes, apparently). The question was what they are able to do, not just in a commercial sense.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#54

Post by firasd »

tristanj wrote: post #2

> In April 2014, she got a long email from another employee. The employee alleged that Theranos had cherry-picked data when comparing Edison machines to traditional lab machines to make the Edison look more accurate, according to a copy of the email. > For one test, the device’s accuracy rate increased sharply after some information was deleted and manipulated, the employee wrote. Edison machines also allegedly faile…

The kicker is right after your quote:

He added: “This is product development, this is how startups are built.” The reply ended with an edict that the “only email on this topic I want to see from you going forward is an apology that I’ll pass on to other people.”

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#55

Post by ekianjo »

> Sunny Balwani is an entrepreneur and a computer scientist. Sunny joined Theranos after dropping out of the Computer Science program at Stanford University. He received his MBA at UC Berkeley and undergraduate degree from UT Austin.

Honest question, can you claim to be a Computer Scientist if you drop out from a computer Science program ? To me it sounds like calling yourself a Doctor after dropping out following the first year of Medicine Studies.

Needless to say, this smells of arrogance more than anything else.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#56

Post by [deleted] »

jere wrote: post #19
randycupertino wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glassdoor actually removed a few of the more scathing negative reviews about working there. I think Theranos advertised on Glassdoor so they removed some of the even worse reviews... there used to be some even more negative ones.

So I was on Glassdoor just yesterday and saw a little note "Your trust is our top concern, so companies can't alter or remove reviews." Is that just a flat out lie?

[deleted]

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#57

Post by xkcd-sucks »

jere wrote: post #19
randycupertino wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glassdoor actually removed a few of the more scathing negative reviews about working there. I think Theranos advertised on Glassdoor so they removed some of the even worse reviews... there used to be some even more negative ones.

So I was on Glassdoor just yesterday and saw a little note "Your trust is our top concern, so companies can't alter or remove reviews." Is that just a flat out lie?

No- but glassdoor can remove reviews on companies' behalf :)

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#58

Post by randycupertino »

in_cahoots wrote: post #21
jere wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I was on Glassdoor just yesterday and saw a little note "Your trust is our top concern, so companies can't alter or remove reviews." Is that just a flat out lie?

It's not a lie but it's not necessarily the whole truth. Companies can't alter reviews, but Glassdoor definitely can and does. We just don't know what criteria they use.

Glassdoor seems like it has the same business model as yelp- "Buy our advertising and we will make your good rankings rank higher and your worse reviews be filtered or lower."

Maybe not outright extortion but certainly not what they claim of being a truly independent forum.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#59

Post by ekianjo »

GabrielF00 wrote: post #36

Does the composition of Theranos' board strike anyone else as very weird? It seems much more like the board of a foreign policy think thank than a biotech start up. There are three former cabinet secretaries (state and defense), two former very senior military officers, two former senators (one regarded as a foreign policy expert), a bigshot DC lawyer, and the former CEOs of Bechtel and Wells Fargo. The only physicia…

Well Dropbox has weird board members as well.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#60

Post by randycupertino »

blakeross wrote: post #37

I wrote a parody of Theranos as a TV pilot that is increasingly becoming true: http://www.pricks.com/ (I'm sharing this here because the Hacker News community seemed to enjoy my Season 3 premiere of Silicon Valley [ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10179894 ], but apologies if others feel it detracts from the discussion.)

I was just thinking that someone needs to write a novelization of this Theranos nonsense & turn it into a screenplay and voilà:- Silicon Valley's "Wolf of Wall Street" or the next "The Social Network" ... I'm sure someone is already writing it up.
Post reply on HN