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

Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

buzzfeed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 167 posts

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#151

Post by harryh »

rayiner wrote: post #139
harryh wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

Sure, obviously that looks bad for both the company and the individual in question.

But I think maxcan's point is that at no point in the process has the cheating really lead to any actual consumer harm. Which is a pretty important point.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#152

Post by fixermark »

hluska wrote: post #144
spacehome wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or there's a wide spectrum in people's ability to learn. The real issue is that there is a designated time at all rather than just a test.

Then why not lobby to have the rule changed instead of outright breaking it?

Because while company A is lobbying for change through the front door, company B is eating A's lunch by innocuously bending the law through the back door.

History won't remember that A did the right thing; only that B made it to their next round of funding and A folded.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#153

Post by fixermark »

alexqgb wrote: post #120
calbear81 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "hacker" and "hustler" mentality is also largely driven by expectations of growth when you take $500M in a Series C. When you have that much riding on a company you've built and you have been told to hustle, then you're going to do whatever it takes even if that means breaking the law.

Well, you might. And perhaps that's the difference between you and people who realize that going to jail is considerably worse than going out of business.

But nobody went to jail.

Similarly, nobody goes to jail for using pirated software, securing users' data via security-through-obscurity, etc.

There are a lot of corners you can cut in the Valley before you've cut too many, and companies know this.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#154

Post by fixermark »

thinkmoore wrote: post #137
Analemma_ wrote: post #13

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?

Most people aren't even aware of the number of laws they've broken in a year.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#155

Post by minimaxir »

tptacek wrote: post #149
robbiemitchell wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buzzfeed has proven itself by now to be a legitimate news source, even if the money is coming from the other division (clickbait). And not just tech stories: when big-name publications cut their education coverage entirely, Buzzfeed hired a reporter dedicated to it. I would expect similar penalizing treatment of other "mixed-quality" sources like Quora, Forbes, Techcrunch, Business Insider, etc.

The problem isn't the legitimacy of Buzzfeed; it's that the low-quality content comes from the same domain as the high-quality stuff, and so if you do nothing to penalize that domain, you get cat pictures on the front page. It's not a moral judgement, but rather a practical measure.

> it's that the low-quality content comes from the same domain as the high-quality stuff

But is the low-quality content being submitted to Hacker News? To my knowledge, I've never seen a traditional listicle in the /new page.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#156

Post by hitekker »

tyre wrote: post #142
hitekker wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Em…

I understand more where you're coming from and I absolutely agree. Part of it is my vocabulary, specifically co-opting the word feedback. In public situations, like giving a presentation or a meeting with multiple parties, a huge part of empathy is understanding people's sensitivity to being ganged up on or feeling embarrassed in front of other. Politeness, specifically around being less brutally honest in group sett…

Ah; I now understand your position better, and see that it is not too different from my own. I feel like what you wrote here would work perfectly as another paragraph in the Empathy section.

I'll be keeping tabs on Seneca Systems regardless; best of luck to you, Mr Founder!

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#157

Post by rayiner »

harryh wrote: post #151
rayiner wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

Sure, obviously that looks bad for both the company and the individual in question. But I think maxcan's point is that at no point in the process has the cheating really lead to any actual consumer harm. Which is a pretty important point.

I mostly agree with that. I was trying to explain why these videos exist in the first place--so that when the underlying rules are broken, the regulatory authority can make the rule-breaker look like a liar instead of merely someone ignorant of the rules.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#158

Post by harryh »

rayiner wrote: post #157
harryh wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, obviously that looks bad for both the company and the individual in question. But I think maxcan's point is that at no point in the process has the cheating really lead to any actual consumer harm. Which is a pretty important point.

I mostly agree with that. I was trying to explain why these videos exist in the first place--so that when the underlying rules are broken, the regulatory authority can make the rule-breaker look like a liar instead of merely someone ignorant of the rules.

Ya, I think your clarification was great but it mostly supports maxcan's point that these programs exist so that "some company's lawyers can mitigate some liability."

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#159

Post by tptacek »

minimaxir wrote: post #155
tptacek wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't the legitimacy of Buzzfeed; it's that the low-quality content comes from the same domain as the high-quality stuff, and so if you do nothing to penalize that domain, you get cat pictures on the front page. It's not a moral judgement, but rather a practical measure.

> it's that the low-quality content comes from the same domain as the high-quality stuff But is the low-quality content being submitted to Hacker News? To my knowledge, I've never seen a traditional listicle in the /new page.

Not recently, it doesn't seem. Maybe the penalty should get removed. I'm glad it's not my job to figure this stuff out.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#160

Post by uptown »

dang wrote: post #136
uptown wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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"?

When a link from a HN post is changed, and the link it's changed-to had previously been submitted by another user, should the "posted by" and karma attribution get re-assigned to the user who submitted the link to-which the story is re-pointed, or does attribution and karma continue to credit the user who submitted the link which was replaced? Just curious how the internals of link-replacement works.
Post reply on HN