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

WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 199 posts

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#151

Post by geofft »

UncleMeat wrote: post #10
tedivm wrote: post #7

For the number of engineers they have you'd think they'd have figured out how to build a decent wifi network with some actual security in it. Instead every WeWork has the same password for the wifi (literally a variant on `P@ssw0rd`) and it is super easy to spy on other people's connections. The hilarious thing is they actually built a secure wifi network for their staff, so they clearly recognize the need. They also…

Wifi is largely insecure anyway. You should largely assume that the network is malicious no matter what and just rely on application layer security.

That's a reasonable position to take for networks in general like coffee shops, but if I'm paying WeWork to provide office infrastructure, I expect the network to not be malicious, just like I expect not to need to boil and chlorine-treat the water I get from their water fountains.

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#152

Post by jcranberry »

Jestar342 wrote: post #6
jakelazaroff wrote: post #2

I wonder when this trend of calling companies "tech companies" — just because they happen to use technology — will end. WeWork clearly is a real estate company; Uber is a taxi company with an app; etc.

I think it's the trend of bringing tech to an existing market. When that stops, we'll probably stop calling it tech companies. Uber is the perfect example of a "tech company" - they brought technology (and in this context "tech", arguably, means "the internet") to an industry that was previously dominated by standing on a street and waving down a cab/taxi. However I think it is rather pithy to just call them a taxi c…

>However I think it is rather pithy to just call them a taxi company with an app, right?

Perhaps you mean reductive? A pithy statement would be one which has identified the core of something or is very meaningful despite being terse. It is very positive.

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#154

Post by geofft »

zaroth wrote: post #57
ustolemyname wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it does. If you capture the authentication handshake, it's as straightforward as putting the passphrase into Wireshark.

I could have sworn there was a DH key negotiation? And I worked in WiFi for a decade, a decade ago... Sorry, obviously I have not had enough coffee yet today. Looks like this was only added in WPA3!

I think you can also do it with WPA2-Enterprise, so a common trick is to set up enough infrastructure to let your users use EAP-TLS or something, and IIRC EAP sets up a per-client session key in the handshake. The public LinkNYC wifi network, for instance, has both an open network and an EAP-TTLS one that you can download a provisioning profile for.

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#155

Post by tedivm »

parliament32 wrote: post #114
ghaff wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So now there’s significant complexity to getting on the network. Seems like a poor choice for a co-working space. And, as I say, plenty of large companies with competent IT departments don’t seem to think that’s necessarily. And how about when you’re having a meeting with outside people who need to get onto a network?

Most universities and schools have a similar setup. No idea how WeWork works but I assume you have some sort of user account already (how do you pay them otherwise?) that you can use to authenticate yourself. Then your AP just needs to talk to a auth gateway (usually RADIUS) which then talks to your actual auth backend (LDAP, AD, or whatever online login form they use). For guests you either generate guest account or…

Every WeWork member has a dedicated account which is tied to their company and badge (which is used for building access). This account is also used for reserving rooms.

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#156

Post by AndrewBissell »

logfromblammo wrote: post #64
readams wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The structure of the company is mostly about making sure that Adam Neuman can minimize his tax burden while maximizing his compensation. It's not really about stealing the IPO cash, but on the other hand nobody is better positioned to take advantage of the value generated by the company than Adam Neuman, and you can be sure, based on the history, that the governance of the company will be driven by primarily what is…

I don't really see a significant difference between "stealing the IPO cash" and restructuring multiple business entities such that the company's new valuation is predicated on increasing revenues, yet those additional revenues will actually be siphoned off via increased expenses to more closely held companies, rather than reinvested into the public entity, or distributed to its shareholders. Who is dumb enough to fal…

The question you need to be asking is "who is corrupt enough to fall for this nonsense?" The IPO will probably distribute the flaming bag of poo to various pensions, ETFs, and other funds where a PM can be leveraged as a single point of failure.

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#157

Post by 3JPLW »

driverdan wrote: post #96

This paragraph at the end stood out to me: > ...The We Company, used to be called WeWork, but it changed its name. The new name was owned, Bloomberg’s Ellen Huet reports, by We Holdings LLC — so WeWork paid $5.9 million to acquire “we” and changed its name last month. We Holdings — you guessed it! — manages stocks and assets owned by… WeWork’s founders. That's a huge conflict of interest. How would something like tha…

The whole company is premised upon a conflict of interest. They rent space from the founder. What's another 5.9 million between friends?

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#158

Post by tedivm »

com2kid wrote: post #127
tedivm wrote: post #7

For the number of engineers they have you'd think they'd have figured out how to build a decent wifi network with some actual security in it. Instead every WeWork has the same password for the wifi (literally a variant on `P@ssw0rd`) and it is super easy to spy on other people's connections. The hilarious thing is they actually built a secure wifi network for their staff, so they clearly recognize the need. They also…

The Wi-Fi at the WeWork I'm at is blazing fast, even in an open office with a 4 or 5 dozen laptops + cell phones connected. I can get 20-40MB/s, not the fastest I've seen, when I was plugged into gigabit at MSFT I could basically saturate my network card, but far faster than my home connection and good enough for any possible need my development laptop has. TBF to your complaints, I am mostly stationary, and the WeWo…

My experience is with the WeWork in Berkeley. If we had a good connection our speed was great, but we would have to toggle wifi on and off to get that connection.

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#159

Post by basch »

tedivm wrote: post #39
SkyPuncher wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the issue. The password isn't to protect you against other WeWorkers, it's to exclude people on the outside. Personally, I think any attempt at them to provide serious security on the shared network would be a really bad idea. It'd make people feel comfortable but somebody would find a hole and suddenly have access to a ton of devices. If security is an issue, just use a VPN/Wireguard.

Your first point is actually part of my point- the fact that they have a single password means excluding people on the outside is basically impossible. If someone has a lease at WeWork but then leaves there's no way to keep them off the network without changing the password for everyone. Since the password is really simple (like, "easy to guess" simple), and since it's possible that people have shared it publicly, th…

>their network is not that far away from just being an open wifi network.

It is an open network, they just are limiting bandwidth use of passer byers.

Re: WeWork isn’t a tech company; it’s a soap opera

#160

Post by CydeWeys »

autokad wrote: post #51
pdonis wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a lot of tech "magic" involved in Uber I agree this is true of Uber, but is it true of WeWork? It seems like the comparison with Uber just makes WeWork look even less like a tech company.

I agree, I don't see how wework is a tech company other then the fact they probably service mostly tech companies. I was stationed at wework for a while, I liked it. But I don't see how tech is involved

WeWork to me seems similar to a chain gym. Both have shared physical facilities and manage a membership database that allows you to get in (and also provide WiFi). Yes, there's computer systems involved, but any company of any reasonable size is using computers these days.
Post reply on HN