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

Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 96 posts

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#11

Post by protomyth »

Mz wrote: post #5

To my disgust, the biggest thing most people seem to take away from it is "Yup, that's what happens when a woman is in charge of a business." I'm a woman. I am fine with her burning. But, geez, I hate the idea that there is lava-like splash back spattering all other women in the world who are trying to be taken seriously.

Interesting, because most of the comments I've heard from friends and relatives is "Snake Oil seller updated for Silicon Valley". Looks has been brought up, but that goes both ways as you don't find many hucksters who are on the ugly side regardless of gender.

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#12

Post by omarforgotpwd »

Mz wrote: post #5

To my disgust, the biggest thing most people seem to take away from it is "Yup, that's what happens when a woman is in charge of a business." I'm a woman. I am fine with her burning. But, geez, I hate the idea that there is lava-like splash back spattering all other women in the world who are trying to be taken seriously.

I don't think anyone sane would say Theranos problem was that the CEO was a woman. I feel like men are much more likely to pull off this kind of fraud than women, but all genders are equally capable.

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#14

Post by maverick_iceman »

Mz wrote: post #5

To my disgust, the biggest thing most people seem to take away from it is "Yup, that's what happens when a woman is in charge of a business." I'm a woman. I am fine with her burning. But, geez, I hate the idea that there is lava-like splash back spattering all other women in the world who are trying to be taken seriously.

Really? I have discussed Theranos with a lot of people, both on HN and elsewhere, and nobody ever referred to her gender. Not as if there's any dearth of unethical male executives. Fraud is an equal opportunity employer.

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#15

Post by droopyEyelids »

RangerScience wrote: post #2

The story of Theranos makes me think about where the "great filter" lines for startups are. My prior company - who I was with from ~20 people to the current 300+ - has been going through some shakeups that make me wonder. This adds to my thinking. I'd have thought that both were past those lines - hundreds of people, multiple offices? Seems like it'd be solid at that point. The common factor is that both have yet to…

The "Great Filter" is a concept that doesn't cleanly map to business success.

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#16

Post by cjf4 »

Mz wrote: post #5

To my disgust, the biggest thing most people seem to take away from it is "Yup, that's what happens when a woman is in charge of a business." I'm a woman. I am fine with her burning. But, geez, I hate the idea that there is lava-like splash back spattering all other women in the world who are trying to be taken seriously.

I've seen this complaint several times, but personally have yet to see any comments attributing the disaster to Theranos's founder being a woman.

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#17

Post by throwaway90001 »

RangerScience wrote: post #2

The story of Theranos makes me think about where the "great filter" lines for startups are. My prior company - who I was with from ~20 people to the current 300+ - has been going through some shakeups that make me wonder. This adds to my thinking. I'd have thought that both were past those lines - hundreds of people, multiple offices? Seems like it'd be solid at that point. The common factor is that both have yet to…

How do you scale to 300+ employees in multiple offices without having released a product?

It sounds like both companies were just money-burning machines, where the only thing keeping them afloat is VC funding. If you aren't selling something for more than it costs you to make (or deliver, in the case of services), you're not going to have anywhere to sit when the music stops.

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#18

Post by user5994461 »

protomyth wrote: post #13
user5994461 wrote: post #8

Could we have a summary for people like me who are not familiar with them? What's the case on Theranos? what did they do and sale? What happened?

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=Theranos&sort=byPopularity&pre...

It's clearly evil and bad judging by the title.

Opened two random articles... and they were two WSJ paywalled articles. OMG.

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#19

Post by celticninja »

Mz wrote: post #5

To my disgust, the biggest thing most people seem to take away from it is "Yup, that's what happens when a woman is in charge of a business." I'm a woman. I am fine with her burning. But, geez, I hate the idea that there is lava-like splash back spattering all other women in the world who are trying to be taken seriously.

i have never seen this feeling expressed, her gender has never come into any criticism I have read of Theranos, it is clearly focussed on the failure of the technology, the compartmentalisation of information and their attempts to fill the board with people who can further their business contracts rather than their expertise in medical technology.

Re: Theranos Agrees to Pay $4.65M in Arizona Refunds

#20

Post by Mz »

cjf4 wrote: post #16
Mz wrote: post #5

To my disgust, the biggest thing most people seem to take away from it is "Yup, that's what happens when a woman is in charge of a business." I'm a woman. I am fine with her burning. But, geez, I hate the idea that there is lava-like splash back spattering all other women in the world who are trying to be taken seriously.

I've seen this complaint several times, but personally have yet to see any comments attributing the disaster to Theranos's founder being a woman.

And, yet, her catastrophe and the fact that it is founded by a woman gets vastly more press than any female successes.

So, one must wonder why that is. And my feeling is that it is a form of sexism and the subtext is "See, this is why you shouldn't put a woman in charge."

Also, at this point, there are six comments refuting what I said. Why is that? If I am so wrong, crazy and stupid, why do so very many people need to step up and inform me of my error? <-- Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Post reply on HN