The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM - <AUTHOR> https://docs.google.com/a/metalabdesign.com/document/d/1aL_b_Eq6WKv_u_ZKiPNPBXz5UbuMhi2Xm1AjdsgVER4/pub <comment><USER2> If you're wondering how you should do these types of transactions without putting cash up front, the field is called trade finance.

Call your bank - most of them have a trade finance desk, or Google the term. A slightly cheaper way of doing it is to have a lawyer draft a terms of trade or supply agreement with either the funds in escrow with the firm or a bank guarantee.

Having your bank finance the trade is worthwhile as interest rates are so low at the moment. Common terms are 60, 90 or 120 day delivery with FED/LIBOR + x% (where x is the risk profile of your business - shop around to get prices) cost over the term.

The agreement would contain delivery timetables, warranties, customs clearance, liabilities, indemnities, guarantees, who pays what, etc. and you are protected legally without handing over tens of thousands of dollars or more upfront. These contracts are protected by law in almost all jurisdictions.

You don't finalize the transaction and pay for it until all conditions have been met and you have the goods in hand and have verified. The seller is trusting an international bank or a law firm escrow, and they should also have a lawyer or bank on their end (a trusted seller can receive the cash upfront for a fee with the bank picking up the risk, although I doubt any bank would finance a bitcoin atm without verified trade volume and a lower risk profile).

Talk to your lawyer and talk to your bank, having expensive items delivered without risking the full cost is a solved problem as old as finance itself and trillions of dollars annually are traded in this way. The extra $1k or so you'd pay on a $25k deal are worth it for the guarantee. If you ship goods regularly the costs are amortized as you can use the same contracts and finance suppliers. Don't deal with anybody shipping $20k+ valued products that doesn't deal with a bank trade finance desk or law firm and is instead asking for a bank transfer.

This is how most high cost goods are traded - from oil and other commodity supply contracts through to companies like Boeing and Airbus supplying planes, or GE supplying turbines for a power plant. Most people without experience lead into it thinking that buying something that costs $25k, $100k or millions of dollars is just the same as purchasing something at your local store just with bigger numbers. It isn't.

Bitcoin multisig transactions, or m of n transactions are also worth investigating as they cut the costs - although there is currently a lack of escrow/intermediaries who are as trusted as major law firms or an international bank. There is a huge opportunity in cutting the costs and fees associated with trade finance with bitcoin.

<comment><USER3> Like a bank is going to offer trade finance on this?!? Seriously. That should be clue enough.

<comment><USER2> Not sure what gives you an impression that there is some minimum amount for a trade finance deal. Bank guarantees are a form of trade finance, and you have other simple instruments. A google search brings up 2 or 3 providers who would do an online quote for amounts starting at $10k.

Structured trade finance is a whole other matter, that is where you have bespoke instruments and teams working on deals - usually with businesses that see $50M+ p.a in deal flow.

In either case I mentioned in my post that having a lawyer do a terms of trade or supply agreement is cheaper at the low end.

<comment><USER4> Maybe Mark meant a bank one would have heard of? :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The fraud level in the Bitcoin world is so high that it makes South Florida look good.

There's a working Robocoin ATM at Hacker Dojo in Mountain View, CA. Nobody uses it. Nor should they. 15% bid/ask spread, 5% fee.

Incidentally, the retail price for an ordinary ATM machine is $2,000 to $4,500, depending on the features ordered. A standard through-the-wall bank ATM is about $9,500. Even if you order every option from cash deposit through biometrics, they don't cost $25,000.

<comment><USER6> Ordinary ATMs have economies of scale not available to Bitcoin ATMs, from simply making bigger purchases to distributing fixed costs (like software development). It's also a much safer business - you can be relatively sure the dollar economy won't crash tomorrow and kill your business.

<comment><USER7> I'm not sure about this. Since Bitcoin ATMs still dispense cash, why not just retrofit the same hardware?

Hell, why aren't people paying the smaller ATM companies to make custom ones? It's not like banks don't already get custom-shaped ATMs made for them.

<comment><USER6> _Since Bitcoin ATMs still dispense cash, why not just retrofit the same hardware?_

You can use the same hardware, but when you're buying 10s instead of 1000s of them, it'll probably cost you a lot more per unit. At least that's how it works for most manufactured goods.

<comment><USER7> For sure. But a 400% difference is not usual for bulk purchases.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Jordan Kelley has posted his response on Reddit [http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_ro...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_robocoin_ripoff_how_we_lost_25000/cl9yw80)

Judging from the replies, it seems to have backfired probably because he did not acknowledge the errors on his side (shipping a lemon, unresponsive over email and not having provided a refund yet).

Worse, he doesn't seem to realise that the name-and-shame was a result of his and ultimately RoboCoin's actions.

Edit: The correct response would have been to issue a refund immediately, acknowledge and apologise for the issue, highlight the trouble area (upstream supplier issues or whatever lead to this), and commit to solving or already having solved this problem for future clients + internal review of this mishap.

<comment><USER9> Reddit threads sometimes provide nice extra context but the armchair lawyering from angsty 22 yeAr olds is unfun.

<comment><USER10> Damnit, you just made me miss Groklaw again.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "Just so we're perfectly aligned, I want you to understand the relationship that Robocoin has with our manufacturer. We are actually just a reseller of their kiosks with our software."

I've heard this from smaller retailers of all kinds of products and, as pointed out in Andrew's reply, it's complete bullshit. The company that took your money is the company you formed a contract with. Any nonsense about "yeah, but the manufacturer..." is a smokescreen designed to dodge responsibility.

(Wimpy disclaimer: this isn't legal advice and maybe it's not true if you live in Yemen or something, I dunno)

<comment><USER12> I really think that it's not even a smokescreen as much as it's really what they think. "Why should I assume any risk when I'm just a reseller?" is a common thought among many new companies. They don't really see themselves as a business with its own risk as much as a subsidiary of the company.

It's just a sign of naiveté among many new entrepreneurs.

<comment><USER10> A necessary question: What value am I providing?

In their case, they dodged providing any at all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I've helped work on Project Skyhook, which is a $1000 Bitcoin ATM: [http://projectskyhook.com](http://projectskyhook.com)

Orders ship within 2-3 weeks. Shipping to Canada is no problem, customs is no problem. Assembly is in Portland, Oregon, so it's a quick ship to Vancouver. We've shipped hundreds of units.

Setup is completely on the owner's end. Owners don't need the company to configure the unit, and the company doesn't need to run servers for them. Skyhook ATMs use blockchain.com for the wallets (using accounts the owner creates independently), and the exchange price source is the owner's choice, all controlled through the interface. This isn't to avoid having a setup phase - it's to allow owners to have complete control over their money, because then it's a trustless system (the source code to the ATMs is open and auditable: [https://github.com/projectskyhook](https://github.com/projectskyhook)).

I'm astounded at the prices on some of these ATMs. For $25,000 they could have ordered 24 Skyhooks (a little padding for shipping, which I believe can be palleted to save money). Bitcoin ATMs shouldn't cost the down payment on a house, IMHO.

Skyhook is also completely bootstrapped by the founders (no VCs) and a result of that (and careful burn rate management) is now profitable, despite the low price point. The cofounders have been using some of the money (and their free time) to help clean up and build out a new hacker/makerspace in Portland that's going to be awesome. Easily the best group of people I've ever had the privilege to work with.

I wish more people approached startups this way. There's a real pride to making companies on your terms that you control, and succeeding at it. Startups shouldn't be about overvaluing your company and having Kid Rock do a rock concert in your back yard.

<comment><USER14> The physical security on units such as these, or the majority of newly manufactured Bitcoin ATMs, is a joke. There's a good reason to build a large, heavy safe into an ATM, and all but the very strongest and most expensive can be broken into trivially. Bitcoin ATMs are even worse than cash ATMs from this perspective because physical compromise of the machine potentially nets you private keys.

Small/cheap units like this also don't support industry standard features like Mas locks or other one-time-combination locks to allow third party security and cash replenishment organizations to service them. [0] A used Mas lock (or its equivalent) will run you at least $500 and newer units are easily over $1,000 [1]

I'm speaking as a former ATM technician.

0 - [http://www.kaba-mas.com/kaba- brand/products/366024/cencon.ht...](http://www.kaba-mas.com/kaba- brand/products/366024/cencon.html) 1 - [http://www.jmacsupply.com/Kaba_Mas_X09SRD00FZJEZ1A_p/KABA- MA...](http://www.jmacsupply.com/Kaba_Mas_X09SRD00FZJEZ1A_p/KABA- MAS-X09SRD00FZJEZ1A.htm?gclid=CIzErPSCr8ECFaIF7AodmFMAgQ)

<comment><USER15> If the password on boot option actually encrypts something, wouldn't that solve the problem?

<comment><USER13> That's what it currently does.

<comment><USER16> The code seems to suggest this was written by someone that isn't all that versed in crypto, which is more than a little worrying for an ATM:

hash_pbkdf2('sha256', $password, $salt, self::ITERATIONS, $saltSize, true);

where self::ITERATIONS is 500. That's extremely low.

Furthermore, they're using CBC mode encryption for the 'config' file rather than an authenticated cipher. The only 'authentication' there is is whether the file inflates. Because the IV is in the encrypted file (and I can pick any password), I can make the first block decrypt as anything. Depending on when gzinflate throws an error, I could potentially make the decrypt succeed with just control over the first block.

Neither of the issues is (in this case, because it's 'just' the config file encryption) probably anything to especially worry about, but it does show that other, more critical, parts of the codebase might not be up to snuff.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Absolutely terrible.

I have the feeling that Jordan knows exactly what he's doing. The amount of $20,000 is a lot but it's not that much once you start to hire lawyers and file a suit or go into arbitration. Sounds like he's stringing them along waiting to see how much more cash they're willing to invest to recoup that $20,000.

Even worse Jordan might be setting himself up for a settlement of less than $20,000 where he keeps some of the money but knows it's a better offer for Andrew and Rajiv than hiring lawyers.

Been there. Done that. I'll never look at a purchase or legal document the same again. Jordan's got the upper hand here.

<comment><USER18> I wouldn't say Jordan has the upper hand. Managing the reputation of the company is critical for the survival of a startup. Andrew may lose, at worst, $20k, but Jordan can lose everything (unless its a scam or they already made a substantial profit from these machines).

<comment><USER19> Let's recap the situation:

Andrew: has no money

Jordan: has all the money

Which side were you saying is losing again?

<comment><USER20> > Which side were you saying is losing again?

His investors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> From my experience with one of their ATMs (both myself and two friends using it), they're incredibly error prone and not even shitty-ATM levels of usable. (I'm loathe to name locations, since the owners of the ATM are friends of mine and have dealt promptly with any problems I've had stemming from the ATM. They're often at the bar where it's located, as bar customers, and I've seen them deal with other upset ATM users. Great businessmen, bad equipment.)

That being said, it doesn't really surprise me that people with that poor of a user experience have poor customer service.

What is it about the bitcoin market that seems to attract less-than-ideal business practices?

<comment><USER22> A currency that defies regulation attracts less-than-ideal business practices - our highly regulated baking system attracts poor business practices, none of this should be surprising.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I am shocked, _shocked_ that a Bitcoin-related vendor was crooked.

Really, this story does totally suck for you guys but there should be absolutely zero trust or respect for anyone selling anything related to bitcoin at the moment. You're just begging to be ripped off.

</comment><comment><USER24> wow that sounds like a horrible experience! it is unfortunate that you got stung like that.

out of interest, what was the expected ROI? I mean, you sunk $25K into it. even if you were charging 5% fees - you would need half a million in transactions to break even, and that isn't including the monthly rental fee for the location.

is there really that big of a demand for BTC in a pub?

<comment><USER25> I think the idea is that there's demand for _cash_ at a pub, but I also don't see how you'd reasonably expect to break even with this setup.

<comment><USER24> Ah yeah thats right, when I read the emails, it read more like an ATM that accepted deposits (there were currency scanning issues attributed to the polymer notes) rather than cashing out. I guess it would work both ways.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I was looking at going in on one of these with a friend. Thanks for the heads up. Good luck getting your money back, the whole thing seems hellish.

</comment><comment><USER27> Robocoin CEO (Jordan) has responded here: [http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_ro...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_robocoin_ripoff_how_we_lost_25000/cl9yw80)

</comment><comment><USER28> Important lesson for expensive capital goods: Pay upon delivery or net 30. Do not pay in full before shipment.

</comment><comment><USER29> Wow and the ceo acts like he is killing it on twitter. If this is how you guys were treated,i guarantee you there is lots more. Thanks for going public as this will save a lot of other people time and money.

</comment><comment><USER30> I used to place/sell regular ATMs. This Stuff sounds pretty standard for the industry. Nobody, even the biggest companies, seem to know what they're doing.

</comment><comment><USER31> I've heard nothing but bad reviews about these things from the user end as well.

I have no idea why one would buy a Robocoin machine when there are a number of evidently superior alternatives.

<comment><USER32> How are the alternatives "evidently superior"? Not that I doubt this Robocoin experience, but playing devil's advocate and the bitcoin economy... is a bit necessary.

When Butterfly Labs was scamming people over so long a period, it was difficult to mention them without a flurry of negative personal anecdotes coming your way. Is this also the case with Robocoin, or is this an isolated incident?

<comment><USER31> >How are the alternatives "evidently superior"?

The existence of positive reviews and relative lack of negative reviews.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Sad story but:

> We're prepared to take legal action, but we figured we'd give Jordan a taste > of internet justice first.

IANAL but, I don't think you're helping your case by seeking internet justice.

<comment><USER18> First, he's doing the morally right thing by calling them out after a fiasco spanning several months, backed by correspondence.

Second, applying public pressure to get his refund is much better than going to litigious way, unless he seeks damages too (which I believe he doesn't - just wants his refund back).

<comment><USER34> I get that we are on the Internet and everyone gets a voice, but they should have let their lawyers do the talking. Both companies are run by adults I assume, but both are throwing sand in each other's faces running across the playground, in this case reddit, Twitter and HN. Either party can use this as slander I suppose.

If Robocoin is still making money, this bad PR might go against them for just a bit, but their "success" with others will pass on via word of mouth.

If acting like kids on the Internet has worked well for others in order to get their own back, someone should write up a pretty medium article outlining a proper way to do this for any company.

<comment><USER35> Disregarding the legal issues, warning other customers of such behavior is pretty much a moral duty - keeping mum, as you propose, would be a shameful behavior and if everyone did that way then we'd have a worse society.

<comment><USER36> Maybe. But 9/10, we get a hate mob fueled by a one-sided story by someone who feels "offended".

There isn't enough punishment when it's all based on false information. In fact, there's none. If I was the target, I would be personally ruining the lives of the people that started it. It would be my moral imperative.

look at what happened with notch and minecraft. Silly children that couldn't get their own way decided to get the masses sending him shitty and hateful messages, which eventually led to his quitting/selling to microsoft.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> This type of experience is why I don't understand "No Chargeback" or "Replace the credit card" type marketing.

If I purchase this with my credit card and don't get the product before the price goes down, I have the option to cancel the order or get the lower price. If the product gets stuck in RMA or support is not as promised, I can chargeback.

The 'advantage' of bitcoin is that now I have to deal directly with the vendor, who is not my advocate.

</comment><comment><USER38> Is it such a good idea to invest in something that's built on deprecated software (Windows XP)? And to handle money, no less. I'm a layman in regards to this, but is there a valid reason to choose XP over, lets say, a LTS Ubuntu release? Maybe some PCI ruling or something like that? Just seems strange and I've had a bad vibe ever since I read it.

<comment><USER39> It's quite common for ATM's to be running Windows XP, so maybe that is why this one is doing it as well. And ATM's and POS machines running XP do still receive security updates.

<comment><USER40> It's common for ATMs to be built on XP, there's no denying that. But the reason is because they were built on it initially, when it was still okay to do so. To using Windows XP for the base of an ATM (especially one that -- by design -- must be connected to the Internet) in 2014 is more than irresponsible. I can't imagine the kind of cargo cult thinking required to make that decision.

<comment><USER41> I am pretty sure that manufacturer of ATM used XP as a base and Robocoin did not really have a choice. They could have chosen different ATM company, but it's not like manufactures are fallen over themselves to sell 70 ATM machines to new start up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> First warning sign: smiley faces and hashtags in Robocoin's initial email responses. I would expect nothing but professionalism from someone who just sold me a $20,000 product.

<comment><USER43> This stuck out for me, too. Jordan was far too chummy in his responses. This signals, "I want you to like me so that when I fuck up you will give me more slack." It's not genuine warmth, it's a cynical, sociopathic ploy to garner imaginary "friend credits" that can be traded for real money when need.

(It actually reminds me of how mobile customer service call centers repeatedly, obnoxiously apologize, to the point where they seriously degrade the service. I would much rather a person _help_ me than waste time _apologizing to me_.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> I have had some dealings with fraudulent merchants (while running a popular price comparison site and dealing with customer complaints, criminal charges against mervchants etc.) in the past 14 years and my gut feeling with this is that this Jordan has already spent your money on his expensive lifestyle.

It's the repeated false promises and claims he makes in his e-mails that create this impression, for example the quick refund. A serious businessman only promises this if he can make absolutely sure that the customer will get it (and it doesn't matter that he wrote "we hope to ...", it's a clear message). I've also read Jordan's reddit posts, sounds fishy as hell.

</comment><comment><USER45> I'm curious if anyone has seen a working Robocoin ATM? Jordan says on Reddit there are "65 out an live in the world"

</comment><comment><USER46> Jeff Berwick, one of the founders of the project withdrew from it back in May 2013.

[https://www.dollarvigilante.com/blog/2013/5/2/my-official- wi...](https://www.dollarvigilante.com/blog/2013/5/2/my-official-withdrawal- from-the-bitcoinatm-project.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed)

</comment><comment><USER47> Personally, I've tried five times to make small purchases with Bitcoin (this was several years ago). In all cases I was ripped off and never received product.

It's not going to be government regulations that kill Bitcoin, its the associations with illicit drugs, child pornography, and dishonesty of vendors like Robocoin.

<comment><USER48> On the other hand, I've been into Bitcoin since early 2011, have made hundreds of purchases with Bitcoin, gotten made for major contract jobs in Bitcoin, paid other contractors in Bitcoin, and _never_ been ripped off. You just have to exercise some caution and do your due diligence.

Unfortunately, Bitcoin has attracted more than its fair share of scammers -- in part because the core community was at one time pretty naive -- but it's also full of honest people who are attracted to Bitcoin for ideological reasons, and fellow technophiles who are happy to engage in honest commerce with other people.

<comment><USER49> While that's all well and good, I don't think that will translate so well into the mass market. At least not for some time.

<comment><USER48> That's OK. As long as there is a large enough population using Bitcoin to create a small economy, that's fine with me. Right now, I get paid in Bitcoin, and pay for about 40%-50% of my household expenses in Bitcoin (and increasing monthly).

For people who are attracted to Bitcoin for ideological or technological reasons, mass adoption would be nice, but it's not as important to us as it is to the massive wave of "to the moon!" speculators who came in last fall.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> This wouldn't be the only company selling Bitcoin related hardware that probably should not be in business:

[http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press- releases/2014/09/ftcs-r...](http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press- releases/2014/09/ftcs-request-court-halts-bogus-bitcoin-mining-operation)

(Butterfly Labs)

</comment><comment><USER51> Full refund processing.

"Hey [omitted], [http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_ro...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_robocoin_ripoff_how_we_lost_25000/cla6b7d)

It was really poorly handled. I take full accountability." -Jordan

</comment><comment><USER52> Was just reading the reddit thread and Jordan posted a picture of a transfer of $25000 to Andrew. However the details were not blacked out properly, you could see the address easily and could probably figure out the account numbers given a bit of time. The picture has since been removed.

</comment><comment><USER53> Apology letter from Jordan:

[http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_ro...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_robocoin_ripoff_how_we_lost_25000/cla6b7d)

<comment><USER54> Discussing this apology without discussing the Reddit comment it replaced only tells half the story:

[http://i.imgur.com/WXyGPM3.png](http://i.imgur.com/WXyGPM3.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> A Bitcoin - related company committing fraud and acting scammy? I am _shocked_.

</comment><comment><USER56> Wow, what a devastating story! Really feel sorry for you guys. I have retweeted your tweet.

But let this be a reminder that you should never pay the full amount up front.

Hope you will get in court with that smarmy Jordan Kelley.

</comment><comment><USER57> For things like this, I find great "relief" in using BananaTag ([http://bananatag.com](http://bananatag.com))

</comment><comment><USER4> Next time pay using a credit card. :)

</comment><comment><USER58> funny thing: 'robo' in spanish actually means theft.

</comment><comment><USER59> Thanks for sharing.

That guy Jordan deserves to be brought in Justice.

</comment><comment><USER60> That is a really sad story...

</comment><comment><USER61> google "translate robo"

</comment><comment><USER62> Meanwhile: Dorian Nakamoto - alleged Bitcoin founder - is trying to raise a fund because this whole Bitcoin entourage and goldrush has destroyed his personal life. Hopefully if Andrew gets a refund he will be so nice to donate a bit to The Dorian Nakamoto Legal Defense Fund.

[http://www.newsweeklied.com/](http://www.newsweeklied.com/)

<comment><USER63> Kinda seems like more of an "attack fund" than a "defense fund." Also doesn't really seem to say how Dorian was harmed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> 1\. Going public on this shows lack of common sense, since the guy there said that contract had 0 refunds in it...

2\. Expecting to pay $25k and pressing a button and then making $2k per month for eternity is NOT wise.

<comment><USER65> Regarding point 1: a contract is an agreement between two or more parties. In this case, Robocoin agreed to deliver a working Bitcoin ATM, and Andrew and Rajiv agreed to pay a certain amount for it.

Robocoin didn't do what they promised they would do, or did it badly. Therefore, A&R are not required to uphold their end of the deal - in fact, if they are willing to take the matter to court, they are also entitled to get a compensation for all the extra money they lost.

So even though the contract specifies "no refunds", that contract was broken by Robocoin, and therefore A&R should indeed get their money back.

<comment><USER10> I am often shocked when I hear people lean on that "it's in the contract" nonsense. State and federal law have always superseded contract law, or else people could overthrow the government by means of contracts. It's just a ridiculous notion to hold, as evidenced by the ridicule heaped on it here, reddit, and twitter.</comment></comment></comment>


The Bitter Life of a Shattered Jockey - how-about-this https://deadspin.com/the-bitter-life-of-a-shattered-jockey-a-mostly-true-st-1834761246 <comment><AUTHOR> Some people seem to get tied up in making themselves into a thing, and managing who it is they project to be. And at some point that seems to spiral out of control. That's not a justification for anything or hand waving about their actions, but perhaps their motivation more than anything else.

Often these people seem very confidant, but I suspect are just entirely lost.</comment>


Uber has hired former Attorney General Holder to probe allegations of sexism - <AUTHOR> http://www.recode.net/2017/2/20/14677546/uber-ceo-travis-kalanick-eric-holder-memo <comment><USER2> Hiring Hoder to head an investigation is essentialy the strongest possible response from Uber. Time will tell if it's enough to win back Uber's urban, progressive leaning US market.

Both Holder and Huffington have reputations of using positions of power to advance progressive causes. Because that's their personal brand, it's pretty safe to assume that they will be giving more weight to that than to making the company look good.

</comment><comment><USER3> Maybe I'm just cynical, but their response comes off as disingenuous.

If the toxic culture is as widespread as is being reported, there is absolutely no way the CEO could not know about it - either by participating in it, condoning it, or just turning a blind eye to it. To come off as so shocked, dismayed, and completely unaware that there is such an issue is ridiculous.

To be fair, I don't see any other way he could respond to this and still save himself.

<comment><USER4> I really hate to defend a CEO with a devil's advocate response, as I generally say only bad things about executives, but I feel I must here, but note that I really know nothing about Uber's corporate culture or very much about the facts in this case. What I do know, from my work at some corporations, is that the people in the executive suite can frequently be very isolated from what's going on below them. So if the misogyny was kept at the lower levels, I think it's quite possible the CEO just didn't know. I've also noticed that, frequently, HR departments act like they're the ones running the company, and don't actually tell the execs what they're doing, so it's quite possible too that the HR goons were in on it, but since they have Napoleon complexes and liked to act like they're really in charge, they didn't tell the CEO anything.

So while I have little love for CEOs, I have far less love for HR directors, and if this ends up getting blamed on the HR people and their whole department is sacked, I'll by laughing my ass off. It's ridiculous how many horror stories I've heard about insane HR directors.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This doesn't address, not to mention even attempt to fix the underlying problem. This just points fingers. You can say "shame on you, don't do this again" but it doesn't change the fact that (an) individual(s) thought their behavior was acceptable, tolerable, appreciated, appropriate...

Just PR as far as I'm concerned. A "yeah, you're right, we've been noted for this before; I (Travis) take responsibility, as it's my duty to ensure that all employees at Uber are treated with respect regardless of gender. I have put in place x and y program, with a required z course which, I believe, are necessary steps in the right direction in eliminating this at our great company" would suffice.

<comment><USER6> It is in Uber's best interest to cultivate a welcoming workplace. Uber has done some shady stuff but I don't think this one is just PR. If tons of people quit Uber because the workplace culture is terrible, they'll suffer brain drain.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> And then what?

Apparently, many other individuals either directly participated, or indirectly did nothing. Both are equally bad. This indicates a broken culture not just for the company, but for Silicon Valley and the industry as a whole.

It is likely that Uber employee demographics closely match Bay area. Are we to believe that for all the talk about liberalism, & progressiveness, when it comes to real action, SV employees will choose stock options instead?

<comment><USER4> >This indicates a broken culture not just for the company, but for Silicon Valley and the industry as a whole.

Well, we've been hearing about "brogrammers" now for quite some time. There definitely seems to be a giant amount of misogyny among the under-35 programmer crowd, according to numerous sources and stories. So I don't think that this incident at Uber is unusual for the industry, sadly, but rather the work culture at SV companies is broken.

>It is likely that Uber employee demographics closely match Bay area. Are we to believe that for all the talk about liberalism, & progressiveness, when it comes to real action, SV employees will choose stock options instead?

I think your assumption is faulty. While there's certainly a lot of tech employees in the Bay Area, I think it's faulty to assume that the vast majority of the population of the Bay Area works as programmers (or in closely related fields). No economy can work that way. Yes, there's a lot of progressivism among the Bay Area population; I think it would be ridiculous to deny that. But I think it's apparent that SV programmers only give lip service to it, at best, and they're a small subset of the overall population there.</comment></comment>


Machine learning jobs outside of Google? - <AUTHOR>

	I'm finishing my bachelor and I really enjoy machine learning(one ML course and one AI course). My uni has a great master in ML available I just wonder if the jobs are there, except for working at Google. What's the best background to come from(CS,EE,ME)? <comment><USER2> Off the top of my head. Any of the other companies running a search engine. Any of the companies running a suggestion engine(netflix, Amazon).</comment>


This is what happens when you lend money to poor people - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=a5lhZkEauCu8&refer=home <comment><USER2> So far this thread is setting the record for deleted comments, as people who responded angrily realize it was a parody.

Perhaps the reason people reacted so violently is that they can imagine some reasonable arguments that sound like these. I.e. this is a case of people being made maddest by statements they worry might be true.

<comment><USER3> To be honest, I somehow missed the possibility that it was a parody, as well. Which brings me to something a little 'meta' as far as this goes: What are some good heuristics / algorithms to determine if something is a parody? :)

<comment><USER4> It's more satire than parody. Some helpful heuristics:

(1) Is the author saying "things you can't say" in a place where normally the rules apply? (Bloomberg isn't an especially politically-incorrect news/opinion outlet.)

(2) Is the author out of character? This could have been written under a haughty pseudonym ("Edgar Charles Hyannisport, III") -- but was under the name of author Michael Lewis instead, who's written popular books about finance, business, technology, and sports. If a professional writer offends, you can figure they calculated to offend in service of their real persuasive/entertainment goals.

(3) Does the presentation match the implied mindset? Even people with similar views don't present them in this way, if they want to be effective.

(4) Gradual progression of implausibility. Lewis starts merely speaking more crudely than typical of "the poor", but then goes to the absurd (the poor should have teams of lawyers) and proceeds to talk of debtor's prisons and requiring menial labor of the indebted. A slow build keeps readers guessing, for at least a little while, while eventually causing most/all to realize the author is being facetious.

<comment><USER5> Your last clue should've been the biggest. If you read the article through to the part about dressing poor people up as clowns and seeing how many you could shove into a Maybach as entertainment at rich kids' birthday parties and still thought the author was being serious, your satire detector really, really needs a tune-up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I like what they do with microfinancing in india. Give someone a little bit of money to start a simple street business, i.e. food vendor, and only give him a bit more if needed to help his business run. The real problem is throwing money at problems without much thought. We westerners have done this way too much.

<comment><USER7> Credit unions are useful too, for similar reasons. There's a difference between borrowing a little money to lever yourself out of poverty, and borrowing an obscene amount of money so you can buy that dream house your salary won't stretch to half of because You're Worth It.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Frickin' hilarious. Through thought #1, it's just a bit wry and tongue-in- cheek, but by the middle of thought #2 -- "I trusted these people to get their teams of lawyers to vet anything before they signed it" -- it's high satire. I laughed out loud at its continuation: "Turns out, if you're poor, you don't need to pay lawyers. You don't like the deal you just wave your hands in the air and moan about how poor you are. Then you default."

</comment><comment><USER8> I really hope this is a joke... even then it isn't funny.

</comment><comment><USER9> Weak satire.

Really, though. If a credit-unworthy person can't pay back a loan, and a lender takes a bath on it, well I'm fine with that. Let the one declare bankruptcy. Let the other write it off his taxes. Fine.

There's just one thing I don't want to do: Have money stolen out of my pocket to ensure that either or both of the above idiots are protected from their own bad wagers.

</comment><comment><USER10> The comments here by people who don't recognize TFA as satire are funnier than TFA itself.

</comment><comment><USER11> The irony is that "the rich," or at least those who own mortgage-backed bonds, probably do want a bailout for "the poor." They get the money in the end, and a lot more of it than they can recover from foreclosures.

If somebody owed me a lot of money and had no prospect of paying it, I'd love to see a third party step in and pay with no strings attached.

</comment><comment><USER12> In college sometimes my housemates would buy this tabloid called the "Weekly World News" that always had ridiculous stories. One of the regular features was editorials by "Ed Anger" that were obviously trolling for angry letters to the editor. This looks just like an Ed Anger piece.

</comment><comment><USER13> > By poor, I mean anyone who the SEC wouldn't allow to invest in my hedge fund

This dipshit classifies everyone who doesn't qualify to be an Accredited investor as poor? Wow.

He also thinks its the poor people's fault for taking sweet deals that were offered to them? If you look at it from an economic perspective, all they had to lose was the property on which they took out the loan and a bad credit rating, but their credit rating sucked already anyway. (Granted, this may have emotional consequences as they foreclose and have to move out, but that doesn't really impact the economics of it.) In contrast, the lenders are losing their investment! Isn't it the responsibility of the lenders to invest in, uhm, sensible investments?

OK, I should stop bitching about this troll's obvious flamebait.

[EDIT: after reading the rest of the piece, I see that this is satire. he sure got my blood boiling as I read it.]

<comment><USER14> You _do_ know who the writer is, dont you?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> It is precisely because there is risk involved in giving a loan that there is any profit to be made. If the legal system actively enforced repayment through debtors' prison and the like, there would be no basis for interest.

<comment><USER16> Well, there would still be a basis for _some_ interest, because the lender could make more money on their capital by using it for another purpose, such as buying T-bills or some other security with essentially zero risk. Intuitively I'd think that part of the interest charged on a loan is literally just to "rent the money", preventing it from being used for another purpose; the rest is to account for the possibility that the loan might not be repaid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Regarding the subprime fiasco, it should read "This is what happens when you build an entire industry based on tricking people into borrowing more than they can afford!"

<comment><USER7> Or "this is what happens when you lend money to people who can't persuade anyone to lend them money"...

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> ...no.

What about kiva.org?

</comment><comment><USER19> Us poor people aren't too dumb or disorganized to burn the Hamptons to the ground if pushed too far.

Note: this is the same guy who wrote Moneyball, which is an interesting book about applying a bit of reason to an insane market (baseball recruiting).

</comment><comment><USER20> Clearly this guy is outside his mind. You might have a bad experience with a few white, black, poor, or rich people, but this certainly does not mean they are all the same. I have experienced similar situations several where people ask me stupid fucking questions or make ignorant comments just because of where I am from. I usually do not respond to such low level of maturity and knowledge and the few times I do I make sure they leave the room felling way less intellectual than I am (although I am not so smart, maybe a little bit). Sorry you got screwed by poor people, but not all poor people are the same. There are several stories we can tell about rich people screwing other rich people, in fct I am sure there are more of those cases than his.

<comment><USER21> If you had read more than the first two paragraphs you would have realized it was satire.

<comment><USER22> I read the entire thing and I had no idea. I've a habit of leading people on to see how absurd of a thing I can get them to agree to. Like go to "conservative" club meetings (in college) and see how many people you can convince that Arabs shouldn't be considered human. Or why people that can't afford health care obviously don't deserve it, or how they ought to be forbidden to reproduce, etc.

It's scary.

<comment><USER23> The key piece of evidence that it's satire:

"Michael Lewis in Berkeley, California"

They would crucify him there if he really meant what he wrote;-)

I didn't find it particularly entertaining, though.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


This commit has 6225 parents - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/octocat/Spoon-Knife/commit/6f6cd22bdd596b4d80171a6e6f674afd8b67c7a0 <comment><AUTHOR> This uses the so called "octopus" merge strategy in git as described at [https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git- merge.h...](https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git- merge.html#_merge_strategies)</comment>