Things to plan for when hiring remote employees - <AUTHOR> https://getlighthouse.com/blog/didnt-plan-hiring-remote-employees/ <comment><USER2> Video calls are absolutely useless. They add absolutely nothing and make many people uncomfortable. Not to mention the extra preparation needed by the participants to look good. This isn't a beauty pageant. I've been working remotely for over half a decade and never needed a video call or found a single meeting it would not have detracted from. This isn't management 101. Frankly, it's stupidity. It's what idiot managers think is management 101 along with micromanagement and never giving raises. I stopped reading after that. What a stupid thing to add to the list.

<comment><USER3> I totally disagree-- having video on a conference call is really helpful to me. When you can see the people you're talking to, you can tell if they're nodding along or if you're boring them, or if they want to jump in and say something, and so on. If you're only talking over audio, it's much harder to use those nonverbal cues to guide the conversation.

We also use whiteboards while on calls pretty frequently, which wouldn't be possible if we were audio-only.

<comment><USER4> Agree with those thoughts and would add that especially for things like 1 on 1s, you need to see someone's reaction to questions you ask.

For instance, I talk about feedback from a team member for you...are you defensive? are you surprised? upset? It's hard to tell all that just from someone's voice or the silence on the other end of the phone line.

As for appearance, that really isn't that important:

1) Skype is now giving you the option to blur the background when on video, which hopefully becomes a common feature in the market

2) Zoom and Google both have "visual correction" which makes everyone look better on the call

3) Most important, as a manager I don't care if you look like a model or Gary Busey...it's just about reading your reactions and being able to create a connection. I'm sorry if you've had bad managers who treat that like an inquisition, but for good managers, those that care (and read 6,000 word essays so they get better) really benefit from this because they use it from a position of trying to help.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> In my experience there are several overlooked aspects of the remote work situation:

1\. Extroverts need lots of interaction, etc. Introverts are more inclined to focus on their work. Naturally the latter are going to do a lot more comfortable with remote work and lower levels of interaction.

2\. There are many talented people with disabilities who find it difficult to commute, etc. For them, working from an environment that is set up to accommodate them well, is far more productive.

3\. There is the ever present danger of micro-managers. They are the ones that constantly interrupt and need to see people working under them to feel "useful".

4\. Employing people is not always the best option. Consider sub-contracting, i.e. work is performed to agreed specifications, timeframes and costs.

5\. Much of technical work is "Deep Work" (cf Cal Newport's book, etc) so reducing interruptions leads to greater productivity. I once worked in an office where the norm was to email co-workers 6 feet away so as to not interrupt their being in the flow.

6\. Many multinational consulting firms have their staff work on client sites all week and then bring them back to their local office for Friday afternoon debrief and drinks. The managers travel around the different client sites to manage relationships with clients and check-in with their staff.

</comment><comment><USER6> > 1) Managing time zones for your remote employees

A good rule of thumb is no more than nine time zone span across the company. Anything more than that becomes unbearably difficult to manage.

> Your remote employees may experience severe loneliness

One way my fully remote team tries to solve this is that each meeting starts with each person getting a chance to talk about something not work related. It takes up time, but it's worth it. It can be anything, like a TV show they just saw, or asking for advice on how to fix their broken car.

Each one-on-one starts with asking what they did over the weekend or since the last one-on-one. If the answer I hear is "worked the whole weekend", I made a point of encouraging them to do something other than work. I also try to set a good example by always having something that I did that wasn't work.

> Thank you, Texas, for $2000 in late fees for a business tax I had no way of > knowing even existed.

Yep, I feel that one. We got hit at one point with a $5,000 fine from the State of New York for not getting insurance that we didn't know we had to get. Luckily we were able to prove that it wasn't necessary since our employee in NY was a co-founder, and the rule didn't apply to business owners.

<comment><USER7> > A good rule of thumb is no more than nine time zone span across the company. > Anything more than that becomes unbearably difficult to manage.

Why an upper limit of 9? What is that based on?

<comment><USER8> Because if you go up to ten you reach the second thumb. It's a rule of thumb not of thumbs.

<comment><USER9> But what if we count in hexadecimal?

<comment><USER10> then it's a maximum of 8192 time zones

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm just looking now for my first full-time remote working job. I have worked remotely in the past as a contractor a few times in the workation tourist / digital backpacker category but never as a full-time employee. What I'd like now is to buy a home with super-fast internet in a small town and work from home.

I agree with the article that this category of work is likely to expand. Ideally I can get some remote-manager managing remote-employees experience under my belt. Then I would like to start my own business entirely with remote workers.

As a first timer one question I have is salary. Most recently I have been working in New York, and San Francisco before that. My perception of salary might be skewed by those bubbles. For that reason I'm not sure what my salary request should be. I have 15+ years development experience (most recently full-stack Java/Node.js/React) and 5+ years experience as team- lead/management.

<comment><USER4> I've seen this work one of two ways:

A) If you're already in _remote place X_ then they'll look up salary data on your area and offer to pay that amount or a small premium above it based on your title/experience level.

B) The most clever people I know will take a job in SF or NYC, get some wins under their belt so the company loves them, then say they need to move but would love to still work here. When that happens, the company usually would rather keep you than have to find a replacement, so they accept, and most importantly _your salary is unchanged_.

Both have serious risks: With A) just check Twitter and you'll see that remote work job posts are getting _hundreds_ of applications...so no guarantee you can find a job fast.

With B) the company may not go along with it, and then what?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> As someone who has worked at numerous remote first organizations I felt this list captured a lot of the challenges for remote workers. I wish they'd gone into the 4 different types in more depth, because knowing which type of worker someone is colors the issues/challenges/opportunities which will arise.

<comment><USER4> Hi -

I helped write the article...would love to hear the nuance, either as a comment here or you can DM me on Twitter @evanish to speak more on it.

Thanks Jason

<comment><USER12> Hiya,I was referring to the contents of the tweet mentioned at the start of the article:

– digital backpackers

– workation tourists

– digital staymads

– remote workers

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The article starts with talking about "work from home", then start talking about distributed teams.

Where I am a bit puzzled is that there are already hundred of thousands of people working in global companies where colleagues are already in different time zones, with different cultural norms, etc.

So apart from the loneliness aspect, I feel it is not that a novel idea, and feels like recycled content.

<comment><USER4> Glad you think this is obvious to you. For many, it's not, which is why we wrote the article...so more people see it as clearly as you do.

<comment><USER14> This is good content and imo remote work is not the same as distributed teams, clustered in offices around the world. Usually these work autonomously and resemble a company within a company. Remote work on the other hand is work in isolation, and the points you raised are valid.

As someone who works remote, i would stress that some, if not all, go both ways. Personally, I try and adjust my work hours to my client's, and where not possible, I make sure there at least a generous overlap, so that ignorance is reduced and communication and clarity increased. Same for cultural communication differences - i make sure i understand the other side and adapt to an organisation's predominant style, to reduce frustration. From my experience as a remote office manager, i know communication is pretty much the root of all evil.

<comment><USER4> Well said. Communication is really at the core of most of the issues...it comes from the question un asked or all the little times you would have seen/heard/said something that doesn't happen when remote.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Municipalities Abandon S&P After Ratings Downgrade - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903639404576514423100697838.html?mod=e2tw

<comment><USER2> So in essence they are retaliating for having their credit score lowered. What kind of system is this, where the rating agency financially benefits from giving municipalities safe ratings? Is this legal (on the part of the munis)?</comment>


A French Novelist Imagined Sexual Dystopia. Now It's Arrived - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/12/books/review/michael-houellebecqs-sexual-distopia.html <comment><USER2> The problem with incels is not the lack of sex, it's the belief that they need to have sex, and that women owe them sex. It's a problem of entitlement, not of sexual revolution.

Well, maybe a bit of sexual revolution: in particular, of the idea that you're a loser if you're not having sex. That is a stupid notion that society needs to get rid of. There are tons of people who aren't having sex. I didn't have any sex until I was over 30, and I'm pretty sure some of my friends are even later.

If you're really desperate to just have sex, find someone else who also just wants sex to have sex with. Visit a prostitute if you must (but check if she's legal and voluntary, and not forced into it; there's sadly a lot of human trafficking, slavery and other crime in prostitution, depending on where you live).

And if what you really want is a fulfilling relationship, then become a better person who is a safe and interesting person to have a relationship with. There are plenty of people of the opposite (or same, depending on your preference) who are also looking for a relationship, but they're not going to date an entitled creep who doesn't respect them. You really don't have to look like Brad Pitt, just being a decent person is enough. Respect people and they will respect you. But see women as sex vending machines and you're not going to get any.

<comment><USER3> From what I understand, inability get laid is not the issue. The problem is that these guys believe/know they are top quality in everything except appearance. Therefore they deserve top quality women, which to them means physically attractive. As these women are not falling over themselves to get with the incel, there must be something wrong with society. So, they rage at society for brainwashing their women to fuck the Chads (their word for men that successfully date the attractive women - which they call Stacy).

To me, the whole thing just looks like narcissism.

<comment><USER4> Agreed on all points. For me the most telling part is 'these guys believe/know they are top quality in everything except appearance. Therefore they deserve top quality women, which to them means physically attractive.'

That's how I might justify getting the best laptop bought for me at work..it's how you justify getting a possession. Women are not possessions, and that is a concept incels just don't seem to get.

The other thing that punches my buttons is that some self-styled incels use bad looks as an excuse, a reason why they cannot get a partner. For many women attractiveness is based on some combination of confidence, success, and how central to your current reality you treat the woman. That's according to a number of studies and based on my personal experience, so YMMV. Looks are a distant factor behind those mentioned above. There are women who are the exception and place looks above everything else as an initial discriminator, but that's true for men too. I think they are in the minority, and I think I've seen studies before that agree, but I don't have the study references at the moment to back that up.

<comment><USER2> Anyone who believes they are "top quality" and therefore deserves "top quality" women, is not in any way top quality. That possessiveness and entitlement does not make them good people, it makes them creeps. And most women don't want to date creeps.

I don't pretend to know what women want (I suspect they all want something different), but my impression is that "no creeps" tends to be pretty high on the list of requirements for many women.

The solution for the incels here is to learn to recognise their own creepy behaviour and to stop doing that, and start treating women as real people.

<comment><USER3> From my experience, they believe the difference between creepy or not is simply how good-looking the guy is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I was an incel for a long time. I wasn't mad at anyone for not being attracted to me, just upset with myself for having some genetic conditions that are not yet curable. I think a lot of people in my position would be almost completely satisfied with legalized prostitution. Some romantic female contact, even if it's done purely as a financial transaction, can really change people's lives for the better.

</comment><comment><USER6> I feel like people are so extra about sex. I had more sex than I probably need to in my lifetime when I was younger and I'm not sure there was a point. Sex->restaurant->sex->work just makes you fat and unhappy. Now my life is not that stable and I work all the time so I don't want to find a partner if I don't think I'll be a good one. Also not interested in dating or having sex with randoms or friends. So I guess there we have it. I wish incel guys would just focus on having a fulfilling life and learning to socialize normally and then they'd probably get a girlfriend anyway.

<comment><USER7> Just curious...are you female or would you consider yourself extroverted?

<comment><USER6> No & yes. But I feel like a lot of guys confuse extroversion with being "alpha" or successful or whatever when in reality you can just be socially normal and not have such weird hangups.

<comment><USER7> I see well I learned by reading and a lot of trial and error not innate socialization. Extroversion means you get what's going on with social games and you care enough to play them. Also, you are energized by socializing with others. I get the games...mostly but most of the time I avoid playing them (stay quiet) or I simply am not present to be a participant. So when you say "hang up" us non-extroverts think (and im trying not to speak for everyone here) "Sure, but I bet you can't be alone by default." Typing this in a slight rush so not sure if my point comes across.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I think some of what hampers young guys love lives is the assumption that only "perfect" \- in situations as well as looks - girls are worth dating.

Generally, "peer" women - that is, women of the same age and social standing - are "sleeping up." Because they can.

That said, plenty of niches exist for the enterprising -

1) Single moms 2) Older women 3) Girls you knew in HS / college

</comment><comment><USER9> So basically inequality in any facet of life leads to dystopia (really winners and losers at extremes), but I also think trying to force equality in every facet of life will also lead to dystopia.

So what do we do when people have real grievances ? Is there any way for technology to solve it ? Lately I don't see technology has solving our human problems, but exacerbating them to incredibly dangerous levels.

We need to become post-humans.

</comment><comment><USER10> We should all take a look at Shimoneta. It's a great concept of a world where speech is restricted and knowledge dies out.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimoneta](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimoneta)</comment>


Ask HN: How do I write a resume after five years of a startup? - <AUTHOR> I'm asking this for several founders on our team who are getting deeper into our thirties and starting to think about moving to a larger more stable company. We have been working together for 4 years under the same company name during which time we have done 4 major projects that we were hoping would take off. We've been profitable the entire time and we all make decent salaries, and 3 of the projects still generate modest revenues.
The problem we are facing is that our resumes and Linkedins do not look impressive (to our eyes) because you don't see a progression through multiple companies with inflating job titles (example good profile https://www.linkedin.com/in/saadkhan02).
So, how does one communicate that they are hirable after running a semi-successful startup for years? Or, perhaps, is this undesirable? <comment><USER3> Do not fixate on job title progression alone; your co-founder titles are impressive enough. Outline your area(s) of responsibility on each project, especially if you all rotated roles once in a while.

Focus on growth of both top and bottom lines, and highlight margin improvements over the 4 years and 4 projects. Try to quantify your accomplishments in dollar figures since they stand out more. Statements such as "Grew revenues 50% YoY from $0 to $X million over 36 months" will quickly catch anybody's attention.

Throw in some specific, targeted technical phrases that are keyword friendly and you'll easily be an outstanding candidate.

Be prepared to explain why you'd want to join the target company and not stay at your current company.

TLDR: Hiring managers hone in on results, not only titles. Quantify your business impacts and list your technical accomplishments.

EDIT: Regarding my comment about quantifying your margin impact, for those that don't know, "margin" and "markup" are _not_ equivalent[1]. Thankfully it's really easy for technically inclined folks to grasp this insanely useful financial concept.

[1] [http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/102714/whats- differe...](http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/102714/whats-difference- between-profit-margin-and-markup.asp)

<comment><USER4> > Hiring managers hone in on results, not only titles.

A lot of them kind of don't, but you don't want to work at those places anyway. This is good advice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Hey! I'm an engineer involved in recruiting at Periscope Data. We see resumes/LI from people who've been doing startup things all the time. It's definitely not an issue, usually the opposite - I love talking to people with less structured backgrounds, they usually have interesting stories to tell. We recently hired someone who had been "technical co-founder" of a successful startup for the past six years. He wanted to join a larger team, and we were totally comfortable with him having been in a more jack-of-all trades scenario because he is very obviously brilliant.

Shamelessly, don't hesitate to reach out if you might be interested - we're hiring in all areas, and I would especially love to chat if you or your co- founders are looking for engineering, PM, or marketing roles :)

</comment><comment> lloyd-christmas > So, how does one communicate that they are hirable after running a semi- > successful startup for years

The fact that you've held a job for more than just 6 month stints is enough to push you all the way to the front of the line. Most applicants we see just do 6 months here and there. I refuse to hire anyone that hasn't stayed at a company at least 2 years (excluding new grads). 4 years is pretty much a unicorn nowadays.

<comment><USER6> Here's what the last 6 years of my resume look like:

* 1.5 years - Startup I joined crashed and burned

* 0.5 years - Contract work for web design firm while I went back to university, they couldn't get their clients to pay their invoices

* 1.0 years - Worked for the university while I finished my degree

* 1.0 years - Startup I joined crashed and burned

* 1.5 years - Small company that was doing well, but proceeded to have one of its worse years as it lost all but one of its clients, eventually laid off 75% of its staff

* 0.75 years - Contract work for department in enterprise corporation that decided to cancel its own internal development and fire everyone after the lead developer quit

* 1.1 years - Current job, Fortune 500 corporation, still going well for now, but I'm expecting the sky to fall at any minute considering my luck.

<comment><USER7> Hey now, keep your head up. I worked almost two years for a _government agency_ that went out of business. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I was in the same boat 1 year back. I had very diverse work experience across my 10 yr career, none very deep, none very relevant to my desired target industry (ecommerce)- I had worked majorly in manufacturing and finance. In my 30's, family and toddler to support, bootstrapped hardware startup failed after 2 yrs.

For the resume I focused on the journey's small wins, just bulleted. I had no revenue numbers to share, so just highlighted what was achieved in what time.

It was very hard, but what I figured quickly was that the resume mattered way less than the people i pushed it to.

What worked:

1\. Sent linkedIn connects to a crazy number of startup founders (50-100 daily), apart from the usual HR connects. side note : i bought linkedIn premium subscription at about $40 a month to cover my search limits.

2\. Whoever connected back (10-15%), I shot them a crisp email telling them I'd like to meet for startup advice and/or opportunities with a one liner.

3\. Whoever responded with 'No', I politely asked if they could recommend someone they knew who'd like to connect.

4\. Whoever responded with maybe/Yes (5-10% of the connects), immediately tried to set up a time within the next 2/3 days. Could be a call/meeting/skype/anything.

Note: the eMail always

a) had a touch of personalisation.

b) was no more than 3 lines

c) included my product snapshot as an attachment

d) ofc, had resume attached and contacts+linked in profile link included in signature.

Met great people along the way, will surely help in future. And met one of the best founders in my country - he made me join his company Nearbuy (Groupon India). The hunt took me 6 months, partly because I had 2 hard filters a) not going to wear a suit to office..so consulting/finance was out b) no politics..so most corporate jobs were out.

Takeaways: Seek help like crazy. Your passion and hardwork at your startup is your resume, nothing else will matter.

</comment><comment><USER9> I had a similar experience. My suggestions are:

\- have a clear, simple story to answer "why are you (single person) leaving the startup". You'll be asked at every interview (and if multiple people apply to the same company, you want a coherent answer). Include that you all are leaving if this is the case -- the risk is that you (single person) are seen as one giving up

\- list down 4-5 main achievements. Make sure there are 1-2 which are not co- done, but you can state "this was mostly my own achievement". This is the hardest part, but if you're still working together you can easily agree on how to split

\- make sure to clearly tell 1 story, which doesn't need to be the one of the startup, but the one for which you're seeking the new job position -- if I'm looking for a position as data scientist I'll focus on my research experience, if I'm looking for devops I'll focus on security, etc.

\- in linkedin specifically, if it applies, link some press or some blog post, or anything I could spend time digging in to get to know you more -- if you feel that the list of jobs is not enough, help me finding more info about you

From the other side of the table, when I look for people to source/interview, I look at the total working experience. Wether it's 4y in a single company or 2+2 it doesn't make any difference. I _personally_ (I see others can disagree, but this is me) see as a yellow flag a 1+1+1+1 experience, simply because I fear you'll leave my company after a sole year.

(If you'd like to chat more feel free to ping me via email.)

</comment><comment><USER10> You can also break out job titles under the company. So, if you worked on one project as the tech lead and program manager as another. or break out responsibilities under job titles. Hiring managers could respond to this but seems like:

Awesome Great Company I started: 2014 - <USER2>

CEO/HR - I was responsible for ...

CEO/VP Sales - I successfully sold 4 large projects which resulted in ... sales ...

CTO/Tech Lead - I designed, built, tested ... Also, created a complete automated test suite... using NoSQL, Android...

</comment><comment><USER11> I'd be happy to spend ten minutes giving you pointers. I've a tech recruiter in Chicago and I've worked with a number of CTO's from 1871 (local co working space/tech incubator) to transition from their startup to a new role.

But like many have said here if you write on your resume what you have actually been building over the last couple years you should be fine. Being able to clearly talk about your experience is more important.

<comment><USER12> I'm open to such advice as well (going through similar experience). Feel free to ping me at firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Figure out the intersection of what you want to do, and what you can do, and emphasize that. So, for an experienced technical founder at a successful company, think about...

\- this job for which I'm applying, what do they REALLY need, and which 3 to 5 bullet points capture my competence and accomplishment in this area

\- how is this company like mine, and how can I communicate the similarities to my experience working w/ others, building a certain type of product, applying domain expertise, etc.

\- what story will I tell if/when they ask, "So do why do you want a job when you've been your own boss for so long?" Maybe something like "You know, what I really like to do is make an impact doing X, and that's something I get to do in any position with responsibilities A, B, and C."

And my generic resume writing advice is... try writing your resume without adjectives. It forces you to focus on highlighting what you've really done. Let your awesomeness sell itself. Calling yourself awesome doesn't do much for you.

</comment><comment><USER14> You don't need that. Anyone with basic understanding of how business works will know that you have far more profound experiences than most corporate ladder climbers.

<comment><USER15> Not true. To most corporate recruiters 'doing a startup' for a couple of years is almost the same as being unemployed. I faced this myself after years of slogging away at an unsuccessful project and then trying to get back into the job market.

<comment><USER16> I have heard it referred to as being in a band.

Things that people in start ups don't know: getting technical things done in complex environments. I would focus my CV on showing interaction with corporates outside the firm - show you have some game.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I don't think it matters as much as you think. If anything it shows that you are a more stable employee that won't jump ship.

Put all 4 projects on there and try to sell them as technically as possible.

I was at an unknown company (nationally) for 7 years before I left. I had no issues whatsoever getting interviews.

</comment><comment><USER18> It's weird, my experiences were more the opposite to what most people wrote. I only did my own gig (2-3 people) for a bit more than a year but until now it affects my career to that level that I want to exclude it from my resume, or at least make it look like a normal company.

When people talk to me about what I did they think it's impressive and love the technical challenges I tell them about, but most of the times the rejection happens only because of fear that I will create my startup again after a short time of working at company x. I got this confirmed multiple times after asking about the reason.

I'm living in Asia and it might be a thing here but it is very frustrating.

</comment><comment><USER19> For what it's worth, I think your experience is a strong point to have on your resume. You have collectively demonstrated an ability to run profitable projects, over an extended period, doing everything that is necessary between you since there was no-one else to hide behind. That is more than many people in our business will achieve in their entire career. As long as you were all contributing substantially and can show that, just to avoid any perception that your team was actually built around one key person or anything along those lines, I expect you'll do just fine.

As an aside, not everyone is on LinkedIn, and those of us who aren't apparently can't see the profile you linked.

Also, full disclosure, it sounds like I'm a bit older than you but my background is somewhat similar, so my views here may be biased. But having sat on the hiring side of the table in various roles, I'd take demonstrated ability to get things done and build successful projects over some random progression of short term jobs with increasingly impressive-sounding job titles any day of the week.

</comment><comment><USER20> Just do a "functional" resume. instead of titles "from 2010-2016", do "Selected Accomplishments" and categorize them.

Technical

* Implemented xyz process to reduce pdq by x%

Leadership

* Developed market strategy for team of y teams to improve market share by z% in 3 months

etc

</comment><comment><USER21> If your a developer with a good amount of experience and stuff/projects to show then you have nothing to worry about.

If you didn't pick up any coding or tech skills during running your start-ups you may or may not have issues.

For me my start-ups were like going to school to pick up a new/in-demand skill that I could fall back on if my startup dreams fell flat.

</comment><comment><USER22> Do you know your shit? If yes, you have nothing to worry about.

If no, work on that.

There're so many unqualified job candidates out there, you can rise above the crowd just by being good at what you do.

<comment><USER23> As a former hiring manager at a company that got way more resumes than qualified candidates (Rdio), I totally disagree with this. Candidates have to be able to communicate why they are good at what they do concisely, otherwise their resume won't even make it to the hiring managers inboxes at most companies.

This is pretty similar to the elevator pitch for a startup. I'm amazed that anybody has a hard time keeping their resume to a single page when any founder can describe their startup in a paragraph. In both cases, you're just trying to get a meeting, not tell your life story.

It's not enough to be good, you have to be able to say why you're good.

<comment><USER24> > has a hard time keeping their resume to a single page

Last time I did that I got complaints that my CV was not detailed enough

<comment><USER25> I am not clear why people think a resume needs to be one page. I tend to prefer about two pages. That's enough room to list where you worked along with the highlights. One page normally means just a list of employers and almost no detail. Three pages typically feels rambling or padded.

I don't consider a resume and a CV to be equivalent, though. A CV is generally a lot more exhaustive than a resume. I would put together a CV if and only if applying for a research or academic position.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I went through this a few years ago.

Ran a semi-successful web / mobile app development company. We were a small team of four, hitting early to mid thirties. From the outside anyone would have thought our company was successful. Good brand recognition in our geographic region, finding clients was easy. They found us.

We paid ourselves decent salaries, paid the bills on our dev infrastructure, we all worked in the trenches, at our own pace, and we all generally loved what we were doing.

However, after about five years we got that itch. In a way we were too comfortable. Our finances looked the same year after year. We purposely weren't growing. Or maybe we just didn't want to take that risk. I guess we peaked early and got comfortable staying there.

At first no one really talked about it. You could feel it though. As we got older. Being so close to the business administration became a chore. Planning summer vacations with a small team became a chore. Riding out December became a chore. Maintaining apps over a five+ year lifecycle became a chore. Dealing with dev infrastructure maintenance became a chore. Wearing too many hats became a chore.

Life outside of work becomes more important as you get older. Family and that sort of thing.

So we decided to shut it down. Lots of emotion, soul searching, panic, joy.

Anyhow ...

I personally had the same feeling you did. Does co-founder look good on a resume? What the hell did I do for the past five years? Will I fit in with corporate culture? How do I transfer my skills to the corporate world?

What I learned is that you've got nothing to worry about.

Working on a small team, and staying profitable, and paying the bills means that you understand the value of money. You wear multiple hats. You're skilled at sticking to a budget and meeting deadlines. You had to "show up" every day. You worked the trenches and enjoyed getting your hands dirty. You worked twice as hard and twice as fast. You stayed the course for four years. You're loyal. You're reliable. You understand the entire lifecycle of building something from start to finish. And you've done it successfully multiple times over. You understand failure too, and know how to bounce back. You have an amazing combination of business savvy and technical smarts that's difficult to find. You're entrepreneurial. You've got vision. You're an ideas person. You've got real-world experience. And a track record of success. Most startups crash and burn early, you didn't, and you're leaving it on your own terms. Knowing when to exit is an extraordinary skill in itself. You understand how it all works. You haven't lost touch.

Don't scare potential employers with big fake C-level job titles. In a company of four you never really had a specific job title anyways. Use that to your advantage.

Custom tailor your resume for different roles. You've got so much to offer your challenge will be figuring out what to "leave out". You've got volumes of specific examples and accomplishments to draw from, which you can talk about for hours.

You're still young. In fact you're in your prime. You'll be a massive positive addition to any team.

Look for a larger (than yours) company that hasn't lost their entrepreneurial spirit. You'll be right at home. Don't settle and don't be surprised if five or six years from now you get the itch to embark on another startup.

It's all good.

<comment><USER27> I'm partners with @boxcardavin (OP) and this is pretty much us exactly. Thanks for a great response!

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I'm someone who has recruited mostly for startups for almost 20 years, and two years ago I launched a resume review and writing service (resumeraiders.com). My focus is on tech resumes, and I've done work for at least a few HN readers.

You don't need to show a ton of progression. You just need to know how to market the skills and experience that you have. If you've been profitable and are getting paid well, and have four substantial projects over four years, you're marketable.

Feel free to inquire if you'd like professional help.

</comment><comment><USER29> Just skip the resume. They're worthless anyways.

If you find a position you like, send an email. Tell them why you're interested, what you could bring to the table. You can mention your history if it's relevant, casually, just like you wrote it up here.

If they don't like it, fck them, their loss, try a different company.

edit: Just to be clear, i'm not suggesting you skip the resume because of your specific history, rather because the whole concept of presenting resumes is utterly inhumane and counter-productive.

<comment><USER30> I can only speak for myself, but as someone who interviews developers for a small-medium company (<20 in my office, ~100 total), I have to say that this is bad advice if applying to a place like mine.

I need some formalized experience document, even if your resume just looks like bullet points. It gives me discrete items/events/projects/education/skills that I can consider and discuss with you. If I don't have that as a reference point when talking with you, all I can say is "So, tell me why you're awesome", which is not useful.

If I'm not starting out with some idea of what we can drill down into, some table of contents, I have too little to work with and I'm not going to bother. Perhaps more relevantly, HR probably won't even bring you to my attention.

<comment><USER29> I'm not suggesting that the applicant should withhold any relevant information. Obviously, the whole point of the application process is to get to know each other.

I believe if I see your job posting, research your company a bit and get in touch describing why I'm interested in that specific position and what I think I could bring to the table, that's a better starting point for a discussion than me sending a generic list of buzzwords, positions, qualities, etc. trying to sell myself.

And maybe the next step could be grabbing a coffee rather than an overly formal interview where we're both trying to see through each other's distortion of reality.

We're human after all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I've noticed given absolute numbers works great also. Like "Built a back end for a video game that was doing ~5M active players"

</comment><comment><USER32> Are you guys all agreeing to disband? I have heard that selling yourselves as a qualified, functional team can bring a higher value than each person solo. I guess acqui-hires are an example of that; maybe some of the recruiter types that have responded here have thoughts about how to initiate that dance.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think we're going to apply for Stripes Bring Your Own Team where they hire functional teams. Haven't decided to disband yet, we based it on time and revenue requirements for ourselves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> recruiter/sourcer, 4 years exp.

\- don't worry about inflated job title, especially in the bay area.

\- resumes are targeted to its audience.

\- know what you want to do (engineering, product management, etc).

\- reach out to managers at companies that you'd like to work at. ask them what they need (don't go by job postings, too generic most of the time). fill resume with relevant info if you have them.

\- communicating that you're a desirable hire is done in the interview stage. resume is a tool to get you the interview if you have zero connection inside that company (don't blow it off though, since it's usually shown to a hiring board for final decisions).

</comment><comment><USER34> Are you behind snap2print.me? Looks super cool. A good idea for sure.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yep, it is pretty cool but the decision-makers at most of our client companies are slow to approve budgets for Snapchat. It has been fun to work on, it's our first big push into hardware so I've had a ball. We'd like to push our prices way down to hit weddings but our hardware needs to be overbuilt as all hell to handle the rigors of being shipped and handled by half-drunk wedding photographers :P

<comment><USER35> We shipped our hardware in Pelican Cases. They are indestructible, and they come with foam liners that can pretty much be custom molded or "plucked" to fit the object your are shipping.

I could almost guarantee what we were shipping was more fragile than your printers, (not a pissing contest) but it was precision instrumentation that needed to not get jittered around. Pelicans worked great for us. [http://www.pelican.com/us/en/](http://www.pelican.com/us/en/)

And they arent even that expensive.

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh yes, I love our Pelican's, we use them for our printers as well. The problem was the first few iterations of our printer were fragile once outside the protective cocoon of the pelican and in the hands of live-event people. As a result, we've beefed up our gear but it's expensive to do as such a small scale (dozens not thousands).

<comment><USER36> Have you reached out to snapchat about your product? Anything come out of that?

Product looks really cool!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I have started startups before and now, am in a senior role in a large corporate. My gentle suggestion is that don't sweat it and just reflect what you have built in your resume.

Your work will speak for you, and discerning employers will find you.

More and more large corporates value what you have, and in cases, are willing to pay a premium for startup skills. They are also sophisticated enough to separate the company's failure from your skill.

Really, don't sweat it.

All the best.

</comment><comment><USER38> I've been there, and this is a real concern. My cofounder and I both didn't succeed to get our experience really recognised and we both got to start again with entry level jobs. However, we've found that we got up in the ladder quickly. My cofounder is almost CTO again now after _only_ 4-5 years.

<comment><USER39> How old were you when you switched?

<comment><USER38> 28

<comment><USER39> That's still rather young.

Thanks for answering.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I guess I'm really naive.

Isn't 5 years at a startup doing [presumably] technical work pretty much the _best_ thing you could possibly put on a resume?

I guess if you were a bizdev-type, then maybe the negative here is: why was still a startup after 5 years?

5 years at a startup, for a technical person, sounds awesome.

</comment><comment><USER41> Tell the hiring manager that companies aren't built to show career progression/build a resume, they're built to fill a customer need. You prefer to spend your time thinking about how to better fulfill your customer's needs than checking off boxes for your resume.

</comment><comment><USER42> I have a very small company / startup mindset but to me co-founder is really as impressive as titles get. I'd just focus your resume on what you did there. To me that experience counts for a ton since founders have so much less supporting them.

<comment><USER43> I strongly suspect most people here on HN have a startup mindset. HN's direct and obvious connection to YC filters for it.

When my startup failed and I was looking for a new role most hiring managers I spoke to were impressed enough with my resume but also had reservations about hiring me as they thought I'd get bored and want to do another startup within a year or two. Playing up the co-founder title might not be such a good idea. Everything else is spot on though - experience is far more important than anything else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> I built a project-focused résumé builder geared toward exactly this problem. Perhaps it can help out! [https://makerslate.io](https://makerslate.io)

</comment><comment><USER45> It depends on where you are located? I've found recruiters/HR in silicon valley being cognizant about the fact that titles do not really matter if you are in a startup.

</comment><comment><USER46> I think this is very desirable. 5 years of solid engineering under the same title / company is desirable when looking for a mature developer.

</comment><comment><USER47> """we have done 4 major projects"""

+

"""We've been profitable the entire time"""

Just communicate that and you should be fine.

</comment><comment><USER48> Do some marketing of your brand, if technical team members are excited about you the titles and stuff don't matter as much.

</comment><comment><USER49> personally i don't think it's that big of a deal. on my resume i just call myself a co-founder of my company, X years. i don't even put a title on my linked in because i don't want people to try to pitch to me.

otherwise, give yourself a different title for different periods of time, and list your co-founders or customers as references.

</comment><comment><USER50> I'd say you make it very short, but be sure to study up on algorithms, algorithms, and more algorithms.

</comment><comment><USER51> the definition of impressive resume depends on the purpose you want to achieve. There is not such a thing as THE impressive resume.

If you are looking for a certain job, you don't want a resume with a bunch of empty titles. You need a strong resume addressing the specific requirements of that particular job, in terms of skills and relevant experience.

Large organizations need both people that take care of the "ordinary business" and people that take care of "special projects", that are the doers, that figure things out by themselves: your startup experience automatically qualifies you for all the activities that require this second type of people.

</comment><comment><USER52> Customize your resume to the relevant opening;</comment>


Airbnb Competitor Checks IDs: 'We Don't Want to Trade Security for Volume' - <AUTHOR> http://www.betabeat.com/2011/07/29/airbnb-competitor-roomorama-we-dont-want-to-trade-security-for-volume/

<comment><USER2> Is anyone else finding it interesting to see how a bootstrapped startup is implementing tighter security standards and accepts slower growth as a consequence while the startup du hour, fueled by massive amounts of other people's money, is pursuing growth at all cost and with little regard for the consumer? Reminds me a little of the YouTube founders who wanted to grow and be acquired as fast as possible and willingly accepted pirated content.

I think this has nothing to do with Roomorama taking advantage of the situation for their own profit. If anything, these guys have every right to be pissed off that a careless competitor is tarnishing the whole industry.

<comment><USER3> They have every right to promote their differentiation. Speaking as someone who lives in a great part of Manhattan and is often out of town, I've never used AirBnb because I don't trust their verification. I will definitely look for a competitor that does more thorough screening, even if the volume and rental price is lower. It's worth it to me.

<comment><USER4> There's a fine line, though. If the cost goes too high, why not just stay in a hotel? They have a specific budgetary window to aim for.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Any of Airbnb's competitors are going to use this to their advantage. Rightfully so too... I didn't even know about Roomorama until this story.

The biggest part of the story though was thrown in at the end:

 _The harrowing story of the Airbnb user EJ prompted Ms. En Teo to reach out to her competitors in order to set a precedent for sharing information about sketchy users, so if she gets a report about misbehavior she can send an alert to get him or her banned from other sites. Incidents like this hurt the entire market as well as individual users, she said._

Some kind of data sharing would be a great thing for this industry as they are all vulnerable to the same problems (theft, etc...).

<comment><USER6> They have to be careful, though, as this kind of thing can be considered libel or slander if not 100% true, and collusion even if it is true. Having an industry-wide blacklist will almost definitely run afoul of the law.

<comment><USER7> Bars do this all the time in areas where there are problems - they scan your ID and then share the information with other bars, particularly if you get booted.

In the United States, if you make a good faith claim about someone, it's pretty hard to win a libel suit, and, I suspect, it would be even harder to claim that grading an individual rises to the level of slander/libel, particularly if you provide a mechanism to challenge the claims.

If this were not the cases, then credit rating agencies would have a difficult time existing.

<comment><USER8> the sites just have to remember to put that sign "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" and they are covered.

<comment><USER9> Put up that sign and then refuse service to blacks, and you're not fine.

Put up that sign, implement the described policy, receive disproportionate numbers of complaints about blacks (because landlords are racist?), enforce the described policy equally irrespective of race, and you are walking a fine line. You could be sued for that and might not be fine.

<comment><USER8> the point of the comment i was first replying to was that 'it always worked for brick and mortar shops'

here in LA it's impossible to walk into a bar or restaurant and not see that sign.

but yes, i see your point too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Honest question: how is Airbnb or any of their competitors different than vacation rentals?

You rent a house for a week when the owners aren't using it. Often the key's in a combo box or they mail it to you. The only real protection is a security deposit which you pay upfront. The concept has been around for ages.

<comment><USER11> They aren't, it's just a "smaller" scale using the internet.

The business idea is proven, AirBnB is just leveraging technology to stake out a significant market share.

Nothing wrong with this at all.

<comment><USER12> No, it's quite different. Vacation properties are set up for that purpose, with insurance, limited on-site personal property, etc.

There have been online vacation property rental sites for years.

AirBNB, however, sells itself as a mechanism for making some extra cash on your own actual day-to-day residence.

<comment><USER11> It doesn't really matter whether the property you are letting is your primary residence or not, really. What matters is that you aren't using it.

AirBnB caters to shorter, less formal stays than a normal rental site. It also presents a much improved User experience. It also _implies_ that you can get in on this game if you don't actually own the property, but whether or not you can legally do this is up to you to know, not AirBnb.

<comment><USER12> _It doesn't really matter whether the property you are letting is your primary residence or not, really._

It matters in terms of security. If you're using the property, that either means that you have a considerable amount of personal information and valuables on-site, or that you'll have to take them off-site to secure them.

If the property is a dedicated vacation home, then this will generally not be the case, and coupled with deposits, property insurance, etc, the risk to the owner is significantly reduced.

Good luck getting property insurance on an apartment you sublet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Expect to see a lot more of this. AirBnb are vulnerable right now, and in a very competitive marketplace. They really need to step up their efforts to contain the issue, or competitors are going to walk all over them.

<comment><USER13> I for one expect AirBnB to come out winners after the dust settles. I don't see their competitors' names on the cover of FT, and the way human memory works, people will soon forget the negative reason why they originally heard of AirBnB.

This of course supposes that the AirBnB guys handle the rest of this right.

<comment><USER14> Even if they don't, they'll come out stronger.

<comment><USER15> That is easily the silliest thing I've heard about this so far, and this is after reading AirBnB's PR statement.

If they fuck this up, they won't "come out stronger", they'll come out with a sufficiently heavy PR backlash that people won't use them anymore. And that'll be that. As it stands now, the only thing people are hearing are negative things about AirBnB, and unless they take huge steps to fix that, there's going to be a lot of people who won't touch them with a 10 foot pole.

<comment><USER16> I think we're over-estimating how big and widespread this story is, because it's all over the HN front page. Sure, plenty of people are going to hear about it and it's gonna be damaging for airbnb. But a whole lot of people _aren't_ going to hear about it because they don't read HN _or_ the Financial Times.

It's bad for airbnb, but shouldn't be a killer. From my point of view, my only surprise is that it didn't happen sooner.

<comment><USER4> Yes, but it could yet get worse. With the (slow news) weekend coming up, if the tabloids ran out of fodder and decided to run with this story, it could get very big indeed.

<comment><USER4> Bah, hit the reply limit. I wasn't specifically thinking about US media- UK tabloids would have a field day with this, for one. AirBnb is a presence in Europe as well...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> There's no real security in the process described. If they stole a wallet with a credit card, they also have the ID. I'd categorize it as actually harmful because it gives more of an illusion of security.

Couchsurfing apparently has someone capable of logical thinking on staff. The round trip of verifying an address adds real security.

<comment><USER18> It helps, but it still wouldn't protect you from someone serious on bullying a host or the system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Meh. I'm sure when this is all over, AirBnb will have put some measures in place to add additional security (from a pr perspective at least). Really, nothing short of legitimate insurance is going to make using a service like this "safe" (id's are easy enough to steal/fake) and I'm sure that the people likely to use something like this (who were already ignoring the common sense dangers involved) are not going to be deterred by ej's story (she claims on her blog to have been the type of person to leap first and wait for a net to appear).

In the end, many people who were never going to use AirBnB to begin with will feel more certain in their (probably wise) decision, and many new people who will be open to the idea will now have heard of it for the first time.

</comment><comment><USER20> I am a fairly frequent renter through these types of services (mostly use VRBO) because we have way too many kids and hotels are way too expensive.

Nobody has /ever/ asked me for ID. "Key is in the lockbox, here is the code! Have fun!" is the typical greeting.

<comment><USER21> I've been asked for an ID for both vacation rentals (through VRBO) and from most places overseas through AirBnB. Each time it was when there were some valuable items inside.

In fact, every time I've gotten a place through AirBnB, the owner met me in person. Of course, I always rent higher priced places (I look for places nicer than a hotel for the same price).

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm surprised that scanning IDs is much of a deterrent. If would-be thieves are going to the trouble of booking rooms on AirBNB and the like, they are obviously more than casual criminals, and probably fairly technically adept ones at that. Taking the next logical step to Photoshop the image doesn't seem like much of an obstacle for someone so motivated.

<comment><USER23> Indeed, if Nigerian 419 scammers have already picked up photoshopping IDs [1], you can imagine what a low barrier this will be. The real question is if you can verify the ID electronically from the image, and the answer will generally be no.

[1] <http://www.419eater.com/html/hall_of_shame4.htm>

<comment><USER24> You might be able to use Hany Farid's work on doctored photographs to show they've been tampered with. See, eg, this interesting transcript of his Nova appearance.

<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/hany-farid.html>

Steganography/image manipulation is an arms race but you'll keep the low end fake IDs out. At some point in the race master criminals are going to go for higher value targets than random apartments on AirBnB. And... problem solved.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Some friends of mine started <http://Tripping.com>, which isn't about room rentals, it's about meeting strangers while traveling globally.

But, even since the beginning, their focus has been on security. I suspect that this is the advantage of having a female CEO / Founder. She grokked that as a potential problem from the very beginning.

Jen O'Neil, is one of the most fantastic young CEO's I know. The whole team is simply amazing.

</comment><comment><USER26> As others have alluded to, it's trivial to photoshop an ID with different info and photo. You could use a stolen credit card and a modified ID to make a reservation.

That said, I'm more concerned with "email a scanned photo ID". Are they seriously having users send scanned IDs through email? Email is completely insecure and should NEVER be used for sensitive information such as an ID. IDs should be treated in the same manner as credit cards. Would you ever ask a customer to email you scans of their credit card? You'd lose your merchant account faster than you can say law suit.

</comment><comment><USER27> When the major media picks up this whole rent-a-room-to-a-stranger-fiasco the bad guys will be AirBNB and the good guys will be the roomorama (and other competitors that capitalize on it)

<comment><USER28> No, when mass media picks it up, the hotel industry will be made to look like knights in shining armor... the hotel lobby is big and powerful and media is corrupt.

AirBnB's fiasco is not a long-term benefit for their direct competitors either.

<comment><USER29> Spot on observation. So, it is idiotic for the competitors to hit on AirBnB, since that is the biggest company in their budding niche and if that falls, well, nothing will remain. They should all try to minimize the damage to their biz model.

EDIT: Let me elaborate: Firms compete among themselves in a given field and all's fair in this competition. However, when the whole industry is threatened, you should gather forces, or else not to try to make your competitor look bad, because that will rub on you. Well-known example is the tobacco industry (their PR is relatively unified). If the consumer's trust in the whole industry is shaken (as in AirBnB) then it doesn't matter you are better than your competitors in this or that regard, people don't care.

<comment><USER28> I think roomorama.com's idea to increase vetting is a good start (along with black-list sharing, as nasty as that sounds to me)... but it's only a start.

It doesn't, for example, deal with stolen identity. A recently stolen card+ID would bypass all of those protections, and easily lead to a quick buck for meth-lab operations (which is what EJ's situation sounds like it was).

<comment><USER30> Has anyone elaborated on the meth-lab scenario? I'd like to hear the economics on that. Wouldn't it be a lot of effort, planning, and personal risk for the bad guys to book the room through airbnb and then just trash it seemingly maliciously like they did?

If this really was a case of some kind of mobile meth-lab operation, shouldn't we expect a number of other cases like this going on with airbnb rentals?

I suspect one of the reasons that airbnb was slow to reimburse EJ is that details are so bizarre on the surface. I think the hotel industry conspiracy theories are absurd. But I am curious to find out what was really go on in that apartment for a week whatever it was.

<comment><USER28> I was just going with jonknee's assessment: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2814395>

My parents' rental house which got used as a methlab when the original tenants left without notice (and apparently left it open). Some of the imagery seemed familiar.

Conspiracy theories aside, I'm sure most folks familiar with airbnb were wondering when this moment would occur, and what the response would be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> This should be their slogan. It minds me of Avis' old slogan "We try harder" (because we're second).

</comment><comment><USER27> Unfortunately as good as the intent is, a malicious user with devious intentions can simply forge an ID or use one of the many IDs they've already stolen from their unsuspecting AirBNB hosts.

<comment><USER32> I believe the best solution for fraud is to require the user to take a webcam shot of yourself while holding the ID next to your head. I had to do that once to verify my identity.

<comment><USER33> The effort required to photoshop such an image (or paste your own picture on top of a stolen ID) is trivial compared to the effort required to forge or steal the ID in the first place. Thus, I don't understand how this would be anything other than an inconvenience to honest users.

<comment><USER34> Requiring IDs like this might actually facilitate ID theft because criminals could create fake host listings and then request all sorts of information like this in order to steal identities. Much easier than breaking into houses to steal them.

<comment><USER35> It's the roomorama service requesting proof not the users.

<comment><USER34> Oh I know it is in that service but I don't think that's what the poster I was replying to was suggesting. He's suggesting as a host that you do that (although perhaps I misunderstood).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Roomorama doesn't scale. You could try to crowdsource some of the vetting responsibilities, or appoint community members to "check IDs", but then you get into uncomfortable privacy issues.

</comment><comment><USER37> In a country with widespread use of fake ids, this doesn't mean a lot. Once you're past 21, what do you do with the IDs? Keep them for younger friends or throw them away?

</comment><comment><USER38> Something like <http://www.trustcloud.com> could help in situations like these.

</comment><comment><USER39> Another sign that AirBnb could care less about its customers.

When first AirBnb heard about this, they could've

a.) Choose to protect her and other users from future incidents

b.) Hide and hope it goes away

If they choose a, 5 weeks ago, they would've already either changed the business process, or blogged about it to their community to warn them of danger (heck, the perp hasn't been caught/IDed yet).

But because nothing was done, the fact that they kept outputting PR responses, and offered no tangible amount/receipt/proof that they helped her, tells me that AirBnb is all about the $1 billion valuation. Nothing more.

<comment><USER40> Actually, someone has been arrested in connection with this case: [http://allthingsd.com/20110729/airbnbs-rental-nightmare- ends...](http://allthingsd.com/20110729/airbnbs-rental-nightmare-ends-in- arrest-and-one-still-very-unlucky-renter/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> The victim is such a great writer Roomarama should hire her for copy and PR

</comment><comment><USER42> This whole air bnb story is blown out of proportions.

Yea, when you open up your house for people you don't know, it can happen that you will get it trashed (honestly I am surprised this is the first time that it happened).

</comment><comment><USER14> There is no such thing as bad press, and AirBnB is only going to get more exposure and users from this. Case in point : Godaddy <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2822946>

<comment><USER4> Hardly a valid comparison. The CEO shooting an elephant has zero to do with the product GoDaddy offers, so there was no way that the negative PR would end up affecting perception of their actual product.

The AirBnb fiasco is totally different- it's not the errant actions of a CEO (although they hardly helped), it's an exposure of danger in the core of AirBnb's product.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> 'We Don't Want to Trade Security for Volume' = 'we don't want to be successful'.

<comment><USER44> Wrong.

"We don't want to trade security for volume" == "Your screw up is our marketing"

As someone else noted, I'd never heard of this company before, but now I have. Currently my only real impression is that they're NY focused and are security conscious. I think they'll take that introduction.

<comment><USER45> That's the wrong way of looking at the situation.

For many observers, airbnb debacle is the first exposure they have to the online personal rental market. Roomarama is trying to remind people that the industry as a whole is not broken (it's airbnb being screwy, not the entire business model). And if they get positive marketing from it, c'est la vie.

I would agree with that statement in a much more mature industry, but in this new area its easy for ill opinion of a firm to translate to ill opinion of the industry as a whole.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> > "He made no inquiry into my current emotional state, my safety or my well > being."

Airbnb definitely screwed up here, but she just sounds like a professional victim. Lots of homes get burglarized every day. On a smaller scale, everyone probably had a car broken into at least once. Yes, it feels bad. Very bad. But it's not THAT BAD. Not on a scale when you expect someone to inquire about your "emotional state, safety, or well-being" a month after it happened. Airbnb's handling of this case is a big failure, but it's not fair to blame them for someone being so damn sensitive.

Let's face it, she didn't do it out of sheer goodness of her heart. She did it for money. Letting strangers into your home does and always will involve some risk. If you're so vulnerable that you can't possibly take that risk - don't do it, period. It's simply not the right way for you to earn a quick buck.</comment>


Coinbase Runs from One Fire to the Next - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-19/coinbase-runs-from-one-fire-to-the-next <comment><USER2> heard so many negative things about coinbase. they grew too quickly and neglected customer service, security, and other factors.</comment>


FBI Kept Demanding Email Records Despite DOJ Saying It Needed a Warrant - <AUTHOR> https://theintercept.com/2016/06/02/fbi-kept-demanding-email-records-despite-doj-saying-it-needed-a-warrant/ <comment><USER2> _" In 2008, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel concluded that the FBI was only entitled to get the name, address, length of service, and toll billing records from companies without a warrant. Opinions issued by the OLC are generally treated as binding and final within the executive branch."_

 _" The FBI has said it disagrees with that conclusion, and interprets the opinion differently, according to a 2014 inspector general report. It sees the question as more of an "impasse" than an actual legal barrier."_

It's madness to me that the FBI can just say "na, we see it differently" and until the Supreme Court tells them to stop (and even then?) they'll do whatever they want.

<comment><USER3> At what point will the public realize the truth of rogue agencies and corruption of power in the military and FBI/CIA?

<comment><USER4> The public realizes the truth. But what can we do as individuals? The best we can do is, what, teach our children the value of philosophy and a common humanity and hopefully have them occupy these leadership roles in a capacity that follows the rule of law and the greater goals?

How do individuals change a system that rewards loyalty, secrecy, and praise to higher ups who run with the status quo way of thinking? Shit, I even recognize that if I was put into a middling position at the CIA/FBI/ETC that I would probably forgo several of my personal moral/political positions to keep and progress in my job.

Changes can come externally through art and civil demonstrations of our power, but really, it may be that our best path is the slow one through education, which is slow, and long, and again, very slow. And very painful.

<comment><USER5> I think you also have to organize and get money out of and honest people into politics. Just consider Stav Shaffir, who near the end of this video makes some very good points about idealists and their aversion to power:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eqCprXn_UY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eqCprXn_UY)

If more people were "more like that", and if more of them would manage the "quantum leap" into serious politics, that would still be slow and painful, but at least more than _asking_ for things or _offering_ facts. Don't get me wrong, that is all very necessary and good, but it's not quite enough IMHO.

<comment><USER6> >organize

If only there were not an agency dedicated to the disruption of organized opposition.

It's incredibly simple to disrupt emerging organizations in to chaos when you have access to everyone's metadata. You don't have to assassinate anyone, you don't even have to discredit all of the important nodes, although that's a useful tool. Many of the critical nodes won't recognize themselves as such. Divert them to other interests, personal, professional, philosophical/moral or legal... And a movement sputters and scatters in to emephera instead of transitioning in to an effective force for change.

Social judo is vastly more effective than jackboots ever dream of being.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This stuff is becoming more and more maddening to hear after my recent FOIA adventures.

I requested this from Chicago's Mayor's office last week:

 _Please provide to me all communications or records of communication (phone, email, receipts of phone /email, etc) from those in the mayor's office for the below companies. Please limit the search to Oct, Nov, Dec of 2014.

Aura - Prestige Club (of verycoolrooms.com)

Kennealy & O Callaghan

Statewide Investigative Services

Azura Investigations_

Their response, which reeks of complete bullshit:

 _In order to run an email search, the Mayor's Office needs the names or email accounts that you wish searched. The email system's tool set cannot identify the department where an email user works, and therefore, a search cannot be based on a department. Parameters that would assist the Mayor's Office in conducting an email search include: (1) the e-mail address of the account you wish searched; and (2) the e-mail address of each individual's mailbox, if you seek e-mail correspondence to and from two individuals.

Without email addresses, search terms, or a time frame, the Mayor's Office would have to retrieve each and every email for every employee from October – December, 2014, which is both unduly burdensome and costly. After retrieving these e-mails, each and every e-mail message a Mayor's Office employee received or sent would have to be downloaded and reviewed to determine if it is responsive to your request or is exempt from disclosure. If any exemptions were to apply, the Mayor's Office would need to redact such information. The entire process of retrieval of the emails, finding responsive records, reviewing for exempt information, and then redacting the materials would be onerous._

<comment><USER8> How do you propose the mayor's office identify senders and recipients from e.g. that law firm without combing through every message? What if their email domain has changed? What if someone used their personal email address? If they left out any records, you could sue them.

The remaining reasons, mainly an inability to filter emails by department, sound normal. If you're designing a database, can you build an efficient index for every possible query? No. The mayor's office has not optimized their records for random people making FOIA requests. Nor should they. I'd rather my tax dollars go to potholes, rather than axe-grinders.

You'll have better luck with more legwork on your end.

<comment><USER7> I'm not asking for a complicated query system, really. An upgraded version of outlook would probably do the job. Or an email to their IT department who could do it. That's what I ended up doing last time which ended up turning into a year and a half battle to prove that the numbers were releasable under FOIA.

The judge ended up telling them to JFGI [0], since not googling it was costing the city thousands in court fees. That should address your concerns. It probably didn't get me every releasable number, but I'm sure as hell not going to sue and waste another six months. It takes too long to sue, they know it, and it's a huge factor in why this is all so difficult to do.

Please realize that paving the way for others to obtain this data is a huge part of the end goal. In some ways, I'm trying to fix the potholes of FOIA.

[0] "Next, DoIT and its counsel conducted online research on each remaining responsive phone number — in other words,they "googled" each number to determine whether that number was publically listed, and, if so, to whom it belonged."

Edit: Cleaned up (a couple times).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The casual disregard with which the FBI has always treated the law is disgusting, and unfortunately, the true face of our country.

<comment><USER10> It surely didn't start in the last decade, and it won't stop this decade, either.

Just look at COINTELPRO in the 1960s:

COINTELPRO (a portmanteau derived from COunter INTELligence PROgram) was a series of covert, and at times illegal, projects conducted by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) aimed at surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting and disrupting domestic political organizations.

<comment><USER9> Jean Seberg, never forget that name.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The FBI was founded by a man who believed in secretive abuses of power. There will always be those who believe it is their purpose to protect us from ourselves. What those in power don't get is that all suffering can't be eliminated without creating a whole new level of suffering at lower levels of society as a result. Or do they?

<comment><USER12> Not only that the FBI continues honoring his memory with his name on their building. That they keep up that public honor to his memory is consistent with their continued behavior.

It is sad we continue to elect people that allow that type of thinking to direct behavior of such a powerful organization but it is pretty clear we have elected very few people that are interested in changing the actions they continue to engage in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> It's always tragic when people expect law enforcement to actually obey the law themselves.

It's not just an FBI problem, it's anyone in an authoritarian position, from individuals to entire organizations.

</comment><comment><USER14> Suppose I'm a user whose information was disclosed by Yahoo! under these illegal requests. Would I have standing against Yahoo!? What about against the U.S. government?

<comment><USER15> You generally can't sue the government unless it lets you. Sovereign immunity.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity#United_Stat...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity#United_States)

<comment><USER16> or unless you are a multinational corporation.

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/10/obscure- leg...](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/10/obscure-legal-system- lets-corportations-sue-states-ttip-icsid)

<comment><USER17> No, that's still a case where the government has agreed that you can sue them. Every government being sued has agreed to investor-state dispute resolution in one or more treaties that they've signed (to encourage foreign investment).

The ICSID does not hear cases against countries that have not agreed to abide by its rulings.. so if you invest in a country that has not signed, you're SOL... they're not going to help you.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor- state_dispute_settlem...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor- state_dispute_settlement)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Centre_for_Settl...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Centre_for_Settlement_of_Investment_Disputes)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> What happens if a government agency demand something they don't have the authority to do, but they get it.

If FBI wants from your isp your name, address and contents of your emails. But they are entitled only to the first two. Your ISP though complies on all 3 counts. What is the state of the information gathered by the content of your email since it was surrendered voluntarily by your ISP?

</comment><comment><USER19> I'm repeatedly astounded by the FBI's overreach (though I oughtn't at this point). I'm also always surprised how much people wanna take swings at NSA when FBI are the ones abusing everything domestically (though certainly NSA are helping them, and they shouldn't.)

</comment><comment><USER20> Just. Get. A. Warrant.

</comment><comment><USER21> The FBI is really long past its prime and needs to be done away with.

<comment><USER22> It would just be replaced with a new shiny organization having a new name, more freedom to do more harm (given its lack of baggage) and probably end up employing the same people.

Sadly being on the brink of destruction is likely going to be the only motivator for real change.

<comment><USER23> FTFY: _It would just be replaced with a new shiny organization having_ no name

..the kicker being that the organization probably already exists

<comment><USER24> Oh come on, surely there's no such agency. ;)

<comment><USER22> Sure there is. I've seen them. They wear back suits, black sunglasses, and drive big black oil guzzling SUVs that move in tight groups travelling at the exact same speed. I've also seen their leader too: [http://bit.ly/1Y5Irgs](http://bit.ly/1Y5Irgs) (whom is shown reading this thread).

<comment><USER25> Please don't post unsubstantive comments here.

<comment><USER22> Pfft... Reminder to self: sense of humour not allowed on HN unless you're part of the clique, when then becomes permitted.

<comment><USER26> Comments for the sake of humor are generally frowned upon on HN. The exact same topics are usually posted on reddit, where anyone is welcome to meme and joke all day. HN tries to stick with substantive, interesting commenting. I am not trying to speak for everyone, this is just what I have viewed.

Jokes will sometimes fly, but it's usually in pretty inactive subjects and they aren't political like yours.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Vote. Raise money. Spread it around.

</comment><comment><USER28> _"The FBI asks for so much, because it is banking that some companies won't know the law and will disclose more than they have to. … The FBI is preying on small companies who don't have the resources to hire national security law experts," he argued._

This is something police officers routinely do, to people with vastly less resources than companies like Yahoo. It is sanctioned because all the "bad guys" must be caught. Why is it a problem when the FBI does it?

<comment><USER29> Why is this not a problem when the police does it?

<comment><USER30> The 6th District described the practice of police lying about having DNA, "a regrettable but frequent practice of law enforcement was not unconstitutional," citing to People v. Jones (1998) 17 Cal.4th 279, 299 - which allow police deception as long as it is not unlikely to produce an untruthful confession.

[http://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/people-v- jones-31413](http://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/people-v-jones-31413)</comment></comment></comment>


Easy terminate instance from within the instance - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/omerh/terminate-from-aws-autoscale <comment><AUTHOR> Easy way to terminate instance from within it. Making sure you are terminating the right one without autosclae policies</comment>


Ask HN: Why is Stripe's 'Remember Me' considered secure? Or Lyft's sign up flow? - <AUTHOR> Traditionally an account is secure when the user gives something publicly available (email) coupled with something only they know (password).
With Stripe's Remember Me feature (https://stripe.com/checkout/info) an invisible 'account' is created for you by the unique between the email and phone number. Then when you type in your email the next time, you get texted a code that you can use to auto fill in your payment methods. Why is this considered a secure experience? Can the code be thought of as a one time password? It seems a little crazy that two publicly available pieces of information can be used to authenticate (although admittedly you would have to intercept the text message code).
Even worse is Lyft. When you install the app you enter a phone number, verify with a code, and then enter your credit card info -- no password anywhere. What happens if you change phone numbers and it gets recycled? Now a new user installs Lyft and my credit card is already on file! How can this possibly be justified? <comment><USER2> > although admittedly you would have to intercept the text message code

This is the key. Unless you are the mobile operator or a government entity, your only other options are fake cell phone towers, i.e. stingrays, which are monopolized by government, or incredible circumstantial luck (the user happens to use a virtual phone number for texting, so SMS is going over WiFi, and you have man-in-the-middled the router). I guess you could also root user's phone or gain access to Stripe's/Lyft's infrastructure, but then the question of intercepting a confirmation SMS wouldn't pop up.

The next level for either of those services is to support message-less second- factor auth (Authy, Google Authenticator, Microsoft Authenticator).

</comment><comment><USER3> re Lyft: We detect recycled phone numbers, and we'll challenge you (or "not you") for further identification.

Phone recycling has been a much bigger problem for non-fraudulent cases, e.g. you pop-in a new SIM card and naively sign up for Lyft, getting the account of someone else (e.g. a tourist's). Fraudulent takeover of passengers' Lyft accounts hasn't been happening that much — fraudsters have a much easier time stealing credit card numbers than Lyft accounts.

</comment><comment><USER4> < What happens if you change phone numbers and it gets recycled? Now a new user installs Lyft and my credit card is already on file! How can this possibly be justified?

There's an account you may access if you know the username and respective password or if you may access account's primary email.

So, just think of the account as your locker in Lyft's building. When someone with your telephone number enters that number and enters back received code, that implies he's the owner of the number.

The credit card is still under your account and there could be no relation to the other user's telephone number. The triggered routine would confirm the connection of the user and their telephone and nothing else.</comment>


People begin to believe in wealth redistribution while unemployed - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/04/being-unemployed-makes-you-more-willing-to-share-the-wealth/ <comment><USER2> Cites a poorly conducted research that draws erroneously general conclusions. Propaganda/spam.

<comment><USER3> Yep, for all the evidence this article presented the title could have been, "unemployed people realize how shitty the social safety net is and support more general wealth distribution".</comment></comment>