Tell HN: Triplebyte reverses, emails apology

Post by colejohnson66 » Mon, May 25, 2020, 8:04 PM UTC

heavyset_go wrote: post #181

californical wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't just an apology -- they reversed the decision before it happened, preventing any damage. I was also furious when I found out, and still am upset at how they went about this situation in the beginning. They could've handled it much better. But they did what the community asked for, and nobody was harmed in the end. I would argue that this was the system actually working. I think we should incourage good beha…

With your attitude, someone could try to something sneaky and dishonest like TripleByte did, but as long as they walk back on it eventually , it's all good. Why wouldn't another company first try to push privacy violating changes on a Friday, when people like you are so willing to turn a blind eye to it if they get caught? They violated trust and it's going to take a lot more than an email apology to get it back from…

Post by ammon » Mon, May 25, 2020, 8:07 PM UTC

elliekelly wrote: post #165

ammon wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say it was both. I wanted to move against LinkedIn profiles, I thought that opt-out was the way to get critical mass, and I screwed up and did not realize how large a privacy violation this was.

Do you have a Chief Privacy Officer? Or Chief Information Security Officer? Was the issue raised and the privacy impact miscalculated (not ideal, but mistakes happen) or were the potential privacy implications overlooked entirely?

Post by travisjungroth » Mon, May 25, 2020, 8:08 PM UTC

enriquto wrote: post #223

mosselman wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This e-mail (which I also got) seems like a heartfelt apology. Even if it is heartfelt, I'd argue that if no alarm bells went off internally when they were discussing this feature, they are not the group of people to entrust with information such as this.

> if no alarm bells went off internally when they were discussing this feature, they are not the group of people to entrust with information such as this. On the other hand, once shit hit the fan, you could argue that these people would be extra-careful about fucking it up again, as opposed to another company where everything seems silently OK. It's a bit like the story of the engineer who did a 400.000 dollar mistak…

Post by colejohnson66 » Mon, May 25, 2020, 8:08 PM UTC

dangerboysteve wrote: post #163

photonios wrote: post #33

I am not an active Triplebyte user, but I have an account and followed the thread(s). This e-mail (which I also got) seems like a heartfelt apology. They fucked up, realized it and turned the ship around. They listened and that's what counts for me. They listened to the negative feedback and responded to it. Some comments around here are extremely negative of the whole situation. More negative than I think they deser…

I disagree, the site is by developers for developers. Every developer on planet earth is well aware of privacy issues and the evil dark pattern of negative options. They knew this ahead of time, they took a gamble and shit hit the fan. The apology is not heartfelt or sincere, its just damage control. If they want to correct this mistake, turf the product manager or make a $25K donation to the EFF as an act of penance…

Post by colejohnson66 » Mon, May 25, 2020, 8:10 PM UTC

xenihn wrote: post #238

colejohnson66 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re not a middle man though. They just let you skip to the final interview. Passing or failing that is up to you. Also, the only advocating they do is saying: “John/Jane Doe knows this much: ...”

Have you actually used Triplebyte? You're required to provide an expected salary range as part of your listing. And yes, you can technically provide an open-ended band (e.g. $0 - $999,999) -- can you guess what happens if you do that, and why Triplebyte advises not doing this, even though you have the option to do so?