Live data from Hacker News

Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

buzzfeed.com

131–140 of 167 posts

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#131
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and have time, and funding, and patience. 2 out of those 3 are in short supply in Silicon Valley. Robust software is eminently possible, but it requires a development culture that is often incompatible with shipping lots of things quickly and seeing what sticks. I recall that when Parker Conrad spoke at the Stanford startup class, he said that he'd been turned down by many VCs, at least one of which said "Well, if…

As an aside this is something people absolutely do not get. MongoDB haters were always quick to point out how the database can lose data; even after the journal was introduced and that became much harder. But MongoDB failed to explain this same thing well: if you are storing payroll information you need a very robust data storage solution. There's a cost to robustness, however, which you probably don't need to pay wh…

Absolutely.

We used Facebook as an example all the time. For them, moving fast and breaking things is a good value. If someone's status update got lost, that isn't ideal, but it isn't the end of the world.

When people don't get paid, that's a Big F-ing Deal.

It's an easy trap to fall into as an engineer. There are many cool problems to solve, but when you join a team you're agreeing to solve their problems. Focus on the customer.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guy on my team who's a 'hacker' is in his mid 30s. Some people just never grow up. I'm 27, and I'm the guy always arguing with my near-40 boss about trying to do things the right way, not the way that's easiest today. Age is probably the generalization to make, but cargo-cult mentality isn't in any way limited to then young.

Does his code work?

This is a very low bar for success. When you're working with sensitive information or financial transactions, it isn't just about "working". If your code "works" but is impossible to reason about or untested, you're asking for people later on to introduce bugs.

Code is not written in a vacuum. The hardest part, for three nines of software problems, is not just getting it to work. It's architecture and building an engineering team that functions together. People are a major component of software development.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#133
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it should absolutely be up to the individual to decide whether they've met the legal requirements for their job. I hope my surgeons self-certify that they're ready to operate, and the technician that repairs the airline I'm flying on should have the last word on whether he's qualified to start tinkering with the ailerons!

If, after 8 years of med school, your surgeon had to sit through a 2 hour video made 15 years ago about "The importance of surgery" and "where to keep the scalpels", he's probably be a bit frustrated.

Show me the insurance salesman/broker who did 8 years of tertiary education on that topic...

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#134
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was 22 when I started and cared very deeply about the consequences of what I was doing. It's more about heavily interviewing for alignment with your mission. If people care deeply about the problem you're solving — not just the technical problem, the people problem — then you're far less likely to have these issues. I interviewed dozens if not hundreds of people at ZP and there were two red flags for engineers: 1)…

Didn't mean to imply it was impossible to care/have awareness to care at a young age, just that it is rare.

I know what you mean, and most of the people I hire end up skewing older. For engineers, experience usually tames the "ooh let's try this shiny thing!" because they have had experience trying to maintain that beta JS framework or been paged at 3am to deal with their hacked together nightmare.

It is absolutely more rare to find younger people who are already aligned with that mentality. That's not good or bad, just a matter of fit.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#135
post #32

https://www.ycombinator.com/ethics/ > Some examples of ethical behavior we expect from founders are: > ... > - Not using misleading, illegal or dishonest sales tactics. > ... Does this mean Parker is no longer a YC Founder, if the allegations turn out to be true?

I don't think any of their sales tactics fell under "misleading, illegal, or dishonest." It was their California pre-certification practices that was blatantly illegal.

"Our brokers were not properly trained and licensed by the state for the products we were selling" certainly sounds sales related to me.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#136
post #111
post #56

We changed the URL from http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/11/zenefits-under-investigatio... . That article points to an earlier Buzzfeed story ( http://www.buzzfeed.com/williamalden/zenefits-under-investig... ), but since this one appears to be the current canonical source, we'll use it instead.

Just curious - since you switched the URL, why did you credit this version instead of the one I submitted about an hour earlier? My submission was even referenced in a thread you'd replied to.

I'm afraid I don't understand the question. What do you mean by "credit this version"?

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#137

I guess this is a useful lesson to any would-be founders who want to make a business out of breaking the law: make sure you don't break laws higher than those on the municipal level. The difference between Uber and Zenefits/Theranos is that cities have limited resources and angry citizens can convince them to back down (and if you lose, hey, just ignore that city and try somewhere else), whereas state and Federal age…

How about just not breaking laws anyway?

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#138

I wonder if this incident and others such as the recent Homejoy / Flymaids kerfuffle have caused PG to rethink whether he's still looking for "naughtiness" in founders [0]. That's not meant passive-aggressively. I completely get why naughtiness might be indicative of a propensity toward innovation -- it's a pretty straightforward and intuitive concept. I'm just wondering whether PG still puts as much faith in the heu…

I doubt it. "Naughtiness" is creativity combined with a lack of conscience, which is a good way to make a quick buck. Regulatory arbitrage or capture, exploiting known cognitive biases, and creating subtle information asymmetry should all feature prominently in "YC 1[6-9]."

If we're trying to define the better side of naughtiness, I'd substitute "an irreverent and inquisitive attitude" for "a lack of conscience" in your definition above.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#139
post #101
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value of training videos is on the back end. Whenever shit goes wrong, peoples' first reaction is to plead ignorance. "Oh I didn't know that, I wasn't told that." These sorts of things eliminate that excuse in a way that leaves a paper trail, making it easier to hold someone accountable if they do fuck up. It's not about making sure they know all of these things that are mostly obvious, it's about ensuring you ca…

That makes sense. But then what exactly happens when this hypothetical conversation happens: - Hi insurance broker man. You did't follow regulation X when you did Y. - Oh, I didn't know that, I wasn't told that. - Oh really? It was right in that mandatory training program you took. See here on screen #7? - Oh that dumb thing? Most people at my company just ran this script to get through the damn thing. I wasn't payin…

Often there is a certification to go along with the video or manual, so the next question could be "so you lied when you signed this certification saying you watched the video?" And even when there isn't failure to follow established procedures can be devestating to someone's credibility. Even if the procedure is stupid, it looks really bad in front of a decision maker or jury when someone says "oh yeah I just blew off that thing I was supposed to do." It's this clear-cut self-contained transgression that makes it easy for people to question your whole character (maybe more easy than is justified).

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#140
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your values page is interesting, though the quotes may be a bit excessive. If you don't mind my drive-by critique, I would suggest listing those quotes at the end of each one as a kind of an "alternate telling." For the "empathy" value: > Oftentimes, this means acknowledging weaknesses and having difficult conversations. Feedback should come from a place of love and respect, under the assumption that everyone has act…

This is great feedback: constructive and substantive. I like your idea framing the quotes as an alternate telling. They were listed first out of habit (ex-philosophy major), but you're right that this is primarily our story to tell. Empathy The difference between front-stabbing and giving good feedback is one of maturity. If you've had many conversations with young kids, they are incredible at giving blunt feedback,…

Thank you in return for thinking through my suggestion :-)

Everything you said sounds fine, with the exception of what makes front-stabbing, front-stabbing.

I agree that maturity is important for giving constructive feedback; just as important, in my opinion, is closeness. That closeness is certainly achievable in a small startup, but the company scales, I have strong doubts that it will match the level of honesty Empathy, the company value, demands.

More to the point: when unleashed in a social context where all parties aren't friends, I believe that "true" honesty (concerning a person's work) will inevitably transform into front-stabbing (attacking a person via their work) .

If someone who I was not close with was uncomfortably honest to me in the middle of a meeting, in front of many other people, I would probably ask myself "Is this person saying this because I'm actually doing something wrong? Or is he just trying to make me look bad?"[1]

When many ears are listening and many eyes are watching, I know I would feel less inclined to reflect on her or his words, and more inclined to worry about my loss of face. Especially if this person has made a habit out of being vocally honest with others. In my opinion, maturity isn't 1:1 with morality; a person can act like an adult and also be ruthlessly ambitious enough to take advantage of and hurt others.

The deep, deep end of being uncomfortably honest among others in a workplace is a struggle session, where one person is in the middle of the room being berated by everyone else. No one wants to let it go that far, at least not initially, but I certainly believe the basic social lubricant of politeness must be valued, and applied in most contexts[2]

Privacy, maturity and closeness are the makings of a real heart to heart, where both sides can learn from each other. Missing one, or having any in deficiency and, as the company scales, the risk of front-stabbing grows exponential[3]. Said another way by a Wall Street Journal commenter: "You better not front-stab your boss."

[1] There was an article recently that surmised that all public apologies are purely P.R; any demonstration of heartfelt guilt is quickly exploited as an act of weakness, so the apologizer is as tightlipped as she or he can be. Can't seem to find it...

[2] Of course, the other deep, deep end is a Japanese firm where the knives are under the table instead of on the plates!

[3] It's 1:40a.m. in NYC so I hope I'm coming across as explaining my perspective instead of as some kind of internet troll.

Post reply on HN