Launch HN: 70MillionJobs (YC S17) – Job board for people with criminal records - <AUTHOR> Edit: Thank you everyone for the incredible wealth of insightful suggestions. To anyone who wants to continue the conversation, I'd appreciate your pinging me at email@example.com with your continuing ideas, so we can stay in touch. Many challenges lie ahead for us, but your help will keep us on the right track.
Again, on behalf of all the folks with records trying to get on with their lives, and myself personally, thanks again for your incredible support. Richard
<comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>-
Hi HN,
My name is Richard Bronson and I'm the founder/CEO of 70MillionJobs (https://www.70millionjobs.com). Our website is the Internet's first job board for 70 million Americans—1 in 3 adults—with criminal records.
I'm something of a domain expert in this area because I myself have a criminal record. In the early 1990s, I worked on Wall Street and some of what I did was illegal. For a time I was a partner at the infamous Wolf of Wall Street firm, Stratton Oakmont (Scorcese film). I ended up with a 2 year Federal prison sentence. I was guilty.
I experienced first hand how difficult it was to get on with life after going through the "system." I served as Director at Defy Ventures, a great non-profit in the reentry space, but was interested in a scalable solution to ex-offender unemployment and resultant recidivism. I felt a new, for-profit, tech-based approach was necessary, so I launched 70MillionJobs. We're seeking "double bottom-line" returns: make money and do social good.
Like most job boards, our business model is based upon employers paying to advertise their jobs. We expect additional revenue to come from municipalities, who spend tens of billions of dollars annually, when someone is rearrested.
You might not be surprised to learn that most formerly incarcerated men and women are petrified to discuss their background with prospective employers. So we created a "safe haven" where all parties knew the score, and applicants could relax knowing that jobs being offered were with companies that accepted their pasts.
Since many of our applicants don't have a laptop or easy access to the Internet, we send out text alerts they can easily respond to. Because most of these folks have limited work experience and limited formal education, we plan on building a video resume platform to accompany their resumes. In person, many of these folks are respectful, bright and personable, so this will show them at their best. </comment><comment><USER2> Former career criminal here. Spent 19 years of my adult life in a combination of jail and prison. Longest stint was for 14 consecutive years. Been working in IT for the last 17 years, mostly as a developer. Had a very hard time getting my foot in the door; was denied employment more than once because of my record. Not sure that my current employer is even aware that I have a record, and to be honest I have no plans to reveal that part of my life. Also, knowing that my criminal activities would have life-long consequences was never a deterrent. One thing I know for sure: I'm not what I used to be. Today I live a peaceful and productive life with my wife, enjoy the company of family and friends, and try to stay up-to-date with technology.

I think that what you are doing is a good thing an applaud you for it.

<comment><USER3> Don't you have to reveal that you're a felon by law?

I ask because we have a student in our CS academy who is in a very similar situation.

<comment><USER2> It probably depends by state. I was required to reveal I was a felon while on parole. Once I was off parole I no longer had this requirement but... I was constantly faced with the question on my job applications. My approach was always not to lie and only answer the questions asked, adding "will discuss during interview if needed". Twice I made it to the interview only to be rejected after the nature of my crimes were revealed. On two separate occasions I was offered employment, started work, and was later let go because of my felony conviction.

<comment><USER4> Happened to me too. Went straight to probation though, no prison time. Still, was given a job offer and worked for two weeks then the company asked everyone to do a background check. I was out in two days after that.

Now almost a year into my current full time job. I've been very lucky and fortunate but the threat of a background check will always look in the distance :/ will keep my chin up though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Hi Richard, great idea. I'm a UX designer and want to throw out some suggestions on how to improve the experience of the site.

First, use more cheerful/positive messages/visuals. It was a joykill when I checked out your website and there's a sad guy placing his hand on the forehead. Show what's possible. How successful people can be once they get a job.. rather than their current state (unemployment). Don't focus on the current stat, focus on the future desirable state.

Also, you need to put more focus on the jobs. List featured jobs to draw people in. Just list some jobs below the search. This will engage the user to explore the site.

<comment><AUTHOR> You are so right on all your comments. Soon we'll be re-doing the entire site. Perhaps we can talk in several weeks?

<comment><USER6> I'd add that framing the hiring decision as charity ("giving someone a second chance") could be improved. I'd go for more of a "diamond in the rough" angle.

"Find talent everyone else is missing."

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for this great message. It so simply expresses a very basic, affirmative goal to which we aspire. With your permission, I will incorporate it into our site's narrative.

<comment><USER6> Of course!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I went through an IT technical degree at a community college. Three of my classmates were timing their graduation to the year their felony fell off background checks.

These guys spent 5 years grinding it out at whatever shit job would hire them just to spend 2 more in school + working with the hope of getting a simple rack & stack job, all because of some mistake they made in their late teens/early twenties. It was the exact same story 3 times, and all involving drug offenses.

It really gave me a different perspective on the situation. I don't think these 3 people should've been sidelined for 7 years. They could've been productive members of society well before that. Keeping them out of the skilled/professional workforce is painful.

This could be a huge untapped pool of candidates, as long as companies are willing to take the risk. I hope it takes off.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for sharing that. It's a common story. Attitudes are changing quickly, so I hold out hope. I very much appreciate your support.

<comment><USER8> It would be so great if attitudes were changing quickly in a positive direction. In tech, it is still impossible to get your first job after a career change as a woman, a person of color, or a person over say 35. Many of these people fall into one or all three of these categories. In addition to that, they have this ridiculous other hurdle to clear, and tech is still trying to figure out if women can do any technical work at all. It is great that people are making resources like this-- and for veterans, but I'm afraid that without penalties or major financial advantages for companies supporting "equality" and "diversity" it's gonna take longer than anyone actually has before homelessness. i wish we could find a way to get financial penalties/incentives for moral action to amplify the voices of the marginalized in tech. Ideas? Any takers on a partnership toward this? I'm fed up with companies not being held to account on this score. I may have to join Rosie O'Donnel's womens' party, since it seems it may take that kind of measure.

<comment><USER9> Tech is far less sexist and racist than you think it is. This article isn't about tech specifically, but I think it does demonstrate that if anyone, there is positive-sexism [ed: for women] happening when it comes to recruitment in western workplaces. [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment- tria...](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to- improve-gender-equality-failing-study/8664888)

Right now the demographic make up of companies don't match the population, that's true, but these companies do tend to match the demographics of trained programmers. The difference in demographics is from people choosing not to enter tech. If you want to fix the problem, work on training pipelines into tech.

The best way to summarize our different viewpoints is probably "Wanting Equality of Opportunity vs. wanting Equality of Outcome". And-- you assume that if the outcome of tech-demographics is different than the population, then it must be due to racism/sexism. There are other cultural and socio- economic factors that influence the demographics of tech.

<comment><USER10> You're forgetting to account for people who would be starting out in tech then find an environment that's impossible to work in so they leave the field.

These smart, awesome people never get to be "trained programmers" because attitudes like this allow casual, often unintentional behaviors to ruin their days.

Claiming this is a funnel problem is short sighted. We definitely need people in the funnel, but we also need to ensure they have an amazing time as they integrate into tech culture.

<comment><USER11> The computer science graduation stats are heavily skewed male. It happens way before the company hiring and first job phase so taking punitive actions at the hiring level is idiotic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Just want to add support. One of my childhood friends has a felony from when he was an overly-rambunctious teenager that he still gets punished for - including being kicked off AirBnB - for something he stole more than 20 years ago. Despite this, he's a very successful leader in mental health services management.

So many people deserve a chance to redeem themselves from being 'branded', yet are denied the exact opportunities that would allow them to do so. This problem goes back a long, long ways.[1]

Anything you can do to help is great. Best of luck!

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branded_Man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branded_Man)

<comment><USER13> Unfortunately some states (eg: Texas) don't allow you to expunge a felony no matter how long ago it was. My sister-in-law's HS boyfriend was a criminal jerk and she got caught up and charged as an accessory for something stupid (theft IIRC). She fully admits she was rebelling by going after a bad-boy. She had a public defender who met with her once and told her to take the deal to get probation. Unfortunately the plea was for a felony.

It's been 20 years, she's married to a good guy and has a baby... yet that black mark still comes up on her record.

<comment><USER14> Arizona, too, and you'll find that's common in tough-on-crime red states. I can petition to have mine "set aside," but it sticks. I'm fortunate enough to have a great career in the Valley, but it comes up all the time as the upthread comment pointed out.

We are looking into gubernatorial pardon (Arizona has a decent process) but not holding my breath.

<comment><USER15> This is a pretty common American attitude found in many "non red" states as well: As soon as someone commits a crime--any crime and just once--they _become_ a criminal. It's as if their species permanently changed from human to something else. They're not a human that made a bad decision, they are an "other". Since this new thing they have become is not human, all kinds of inhumane and terrible things can be done to them and justified, including permanent removal of rights, brutalization and rape in prison, permanent loss of employability and access to normal livelihood. All of these things are seen as OK because it's a _criminal_ we're talking about, not an actual person.

<comment><USER16> The US criminal justice system focuses on punishment and not reform, "the box" on employment applications makes this patently obvious as does the removal of voting rights for felons. All of this stems from exactly what you mentioned, once convicted you are a criminal, that label follows you and there's little you can do to get rid of it.

The first step to improving any of this is changing deeply held beliefs by our society, and many days it feels like an impossible task.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Love what you are doing. This is the kind of startup I love to see being pushed forward.

With lower entry barriers for tech startups, one would expect to see more startups that fight for a better world, instead of startups who fight for selling your data faster, or detecting your face better to overlay a duckface on top of it.

This is why seeing a startup like yours makes me hopeful.

Wish you best of luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks so much for your kind words! I appreciate it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> One of the first things I came across was "Police Officer" in Tallahassee, FL. It's an external link. Part of the description even says:

"Have no convictions for any felony, perjury, false statement, or domestic violence. No DUI convictions past ten years. Other arrest histories are reviewed on a case-by-case basis."

I love the idea, but it needs a bit more work.

<comment><USER19> What's the problem specifically with that listing?

<comment><USER20> Its a listing that excludes candidates with felonies on a job board specifically for candidates with felonies.

<comment><USER21> The OP specifies only "criminal record", which may include both misdemeanors and felonies, with varying degrees of each.

Some employers care about any criminal record at all, while others care about felony convictions only. The website itself only mentions "criminal record" and "formerly incarcerated".

Perhaps it would be prudent to make filtering easy for "misdemeanors only" jobs and "former felons wanted" jobs?

<comment><USER22> Many employers make a distinction between felony and misdemeanor convictions. I encourage more dissection than that. Anecdote: I once stood in front of a Judge who had recently gotten so drunk-->Then decided to drive-->he fell asleep in the middle of a busy intersection (misdemeanor dismissed, "improperly calibrated" portable BAC). I was represented by an attorney who was on probation for a misdemeanor at the time of my sentencing(obstruction of justice, helping facilitate the attempted payment of hush money to a rape victim).

It made my 1.5Lb sale of marijuana (felony) not seem so harmful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This presents an interesting dilemma here for an ex-con. Most people can eventually get their records expunged after they're out for a while, at which point we as a society demand that they start responding "no" to the questions about having a criminal record during the interview process. It's dishonest but it's how the legal system works.

If you're an ex-con who will eventually get his record expunged, is there any risk to participating in a job board like this? I'm guessing it is pretty small, and the advantages presented by the site will be worth it. Still, it's ironic that eventually users will probably be in a position (after expungement) where it is not in their interest to use the site anymore. I wonder if, when this site is successful, it will eventually want to team up with a more conventional job site to move some of those users over. Just a thought.

<comment><USER24> What's dishonest (and what's demanded?) about honestly stating that one has no criminal record (since the record was deleted)?

<comment><USER23> The question is sometimes phrased in a way that requires the applicant to lie. "Have you ever been convicted of a crime," etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> In a past job I was responsible for hiring a few warehouse workers, and in one case I was actually relieved to find that the applicant was on probation for a drug charge, and was required to submit to weekly urine tests. Basically the state was paying to guarantee that this worker was staying clean, and so I was pretty confident about hiring him. I wonder if other employers would be interested in that kind of info as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> Very interesting take on this

<comment><USER26> Urinalysis as a service has got to be a thing already. Probably a partnership deal. Maybe LabCorp or Quest. Just stay away from Theranos :) If not, we could probably russle you up a chemist if you're willing to front the immunoassays and mass spectrometer. Or microfluidics. Then Theranos might be interested...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I think this is awesome, and I was relieved to see the focus on non-white collar crime. Some questions that I think are systemic to the entire area -

The companies hiring are at somewhat of an advantage (they can hire anyone, the employees have more limited options). How do you ensure they get a fair offer, and not, like migrant labor, receive a below market offer? Would the marketplace effect here help prevent that? (edit - looking at the website, duh, it looks like you've solved this - awesome - and found good companies.)

Your revenue model is based on companies laying to get access to these prospective employees - how do you get past the stigma (without breaching q1 above)?

I like the municipality revenue model - it would be awesome to see them as "reverse recruiters" we're they pay every time someone gets a job.

<comment><USER28> >How do you ensure they get a fair offer, and not, like migrant labor, receive a below market offer?

This will be legal employment, so hopefully the abuses resulting from migrant employment won't happen, but the salary they are getting will be below the "normal" market price, at least for a long time - and this is a good thing, since they would otherwise not be hired at all.

<comment><AUTHOR> We can't ensure they get a fair offer, other than by providing information and access to resources to address such injustices. I judge our success one job at a time, and one repaired family at a time.

<comment><USER27> Oof - unsolicited advice, but that combined with your acknowledgement of racism in the system will have some people calling you the plantation market. Even though you're not saying it explicitly, what I just read is that implicitly your revenue model is based on giving companies access to a below market cost labor force that's predominantly POC. While I lean towards the idea that its better they have access to a job than not, I think it's also vital to pursue full wages, rather than partial wages despite their debt to society being paid.

<comment><AUTHOR> Not below market at all. There's great demand for this labor, and it's driving wages up, if anything. The real effective response, I think, is providing training for jobs that pay much more than minimum wage. That's something we're working on, at scale. More on this at a later date.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I just randomly came across this very relevant TED talk given by a prison inmate yesterday:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F89eycANUrQ](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F89eycANUrQ)

I definitely feel that American prison policy leans way too far on the side of moral judgement and retribution than rehabilitation. In my personal opinion, anyone who has served their term has already paid for their mistakes and we, as a society, should be more concerned with helping them get back on their feet than with further punishing them for their mistakes.

I also think the practice of denying former felons the right to vote is completely ridiculous. So if you commit a felony at 18, you can't vote even when you're a 100? What kind of sense does that make?

<comment><USER30> <So if you commit a felony at 18, you can't vote even when you're a 100?

I can tell you with 100% certainty that there are felons that vote. I believe the system in our county is not perfect and thus mails out a voter registration to a convicted murderer that served his time and is now free.

<comment><USER31> It also depends on the state.

<comment><USER32> Florida has a process for felons convicted of certain crimes to have their civil rights restored -- right to vote, own a gun, etc...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I'm super-excited to see this. I really hope it works out. Thanks for doing it.

Honestly I find how this country treats those with a felony record absolutely disgusting. The "Are you a convicted felon?" is a scarlet letter that never seems to disappear. While this might've originally been well-intentioned, IMHO it perpetuates criminality as I suspect what other choices do a lot of former felons have?

There was (is?) a campaign in Massachussetts to retroactively pardon a felony conviction for Mark Wahlberg. Apparently this makes it difficult to, say, get liquor licenses and so forth.

Personally I"m 100% against a commutation for the rich and famous. What we should be doing is freeing people from this stigma, particularly when the crime was a long time ago, especially nonviolent and likely not relevant to your job.

FYI Mark Wahlberg's felony conviction was violent and pretty egregious actually as it was IIRC a racially-motivated attack on a Vietnamese man.

<comment><USER34> yeah, Wahlberg's crime is an interesting case -- the kind of violent crime most people think merits a severe punishment. and yet, he's a wealthy movie star today. American justice, folks.

oddly enough, it happened in Massachusetts of all places, a state i expect to take this sort of hateful crime more seriously. maybe it would nowadays. that particular violent attack happened a while back.

regarding licensing: the rumor i heard (for what it's worth) was that Wahlberg recently wanted to become certified _as an actual officer on a local auxiliary or reserve police force_ for some new show he was planning. but, as a convicted felon, he is not eligible.

<comment><USER35> Boston. Ah Boston. For an entertaining account of some of Boston's history of racial conflict, I recommend the 2-part Dollop podcast about the bussing conflict:

[http://thedollop.libsyn.com/228-boston- busing-1974](http://thedollop.libsyn.com/228-boston-busing-1974)

[http://thedollop.libsyn.com/229-boston- busing-1975](http://thedollop.libsyn.com/229-boston-busing-1975)

It sounds more like a bad disaster movie than recent American history.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> > _So we created a "save haven" where all parties knew the score_

Does that mean that employers know _what_ offenses were committed, and how long ago? Or does it just mean that they know that the candidate has been convicted of _something_ , but figuring out whether that's a liability to the business or not needs to be discussed?

<comment><AUTHOR> Aside from any legal/HR consideration, we feel that everyone deserves a second chance, so we don't discriminate based upon the nature of the crime (but believe me, this is not an easy issue to reconcile). Ultimately, it'll be between the applicant and employer to resolve this. As it relates to liability to the business, there's a federal bonding program that has existed for decades, indemnifying employers from making at-risk hires. Interestingly, over this period of time, only just a few claims have every been made. The facts are that folks with jobs almost never recidivate. In fact, studies are now showing that these folks, for certain jobs, actually may be better employees. Hiring them is very good business.

<comment><USER37> My father owns a retail business that has four stores and employs a bunch of hourly workers. After growing up around the business and working there in my teens and twenties, I feel pretty confident that the risk of a second-chance felon is probably no more than the risk of any average off-the-street hourly worker. Bad apples show up all of the time. They steal a little money or some inventory, get fired, and life goes on. The risk is far greater for an ex-con: why would they risk going back to prison and losing a good job that gave them a second chance over a little money in the register or some inventory?

<comment><AUTHOR> Your father's experience is no exception, and you're right. Generally speaking, given the opportunity, these folks stay out of trouble.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I love the idea, and I really want your company to succeed. I don't really consider myself very easily offended or PC, but I thought it seemed a little stereotypical that the first two images in the hero were black people. I think that should be changed as quickly as possible if you don't want to get any backlash. My two cents : )

<comment><AUTHOR> I appreciate this observation, but our prisons are predominately filled with people of color.

<comment><USER38> Really? From what I understand, the number of black inmates in prison is roughly equal to the number of white inmates (about 40%/40%). There is a large disparity in terms of the incarceration _rate_ of people of color, but your above statement is not true.

<comment><USER39> Yeah, but "people of color" doesn't only refer to black people--the other 20% are also people of color. So 60-40, and it's true that US prisons are predominantly populated with people of color.

<comment><USER38> That seems like splitting hairs. Obviously I can do the math, and I'm not saying there aren't _more_ people of color in prison, I'm saying that it's not _just_ black people, as the website would have you believe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Hey Richard, love this idea. I firmly believe in the notion that once you've paid your debt to society you should be able to participate in society as anyone else would. That this is not the fact is atrocious to me.

Do you need a remote full-stack programmer?

<comment><USER41> how is doing time "repaying a debt to society"? Seems to me incarceration is a proving ground to show you're no longer dangerous, _then_ one can begin to repay whatever injustices occurred?

<comment><USER42> That's not how it's framed in the US. Incarceration is purposefully made as horrible as possible (rape, beatings, inedible food, solitary confinement) to ensure full debt repayment prior to release.

I agree, it's disgusting, but that's the status quo.

<comment><USER41> Also how is eye for an eye "repayment" . If someone steals my car I dont want them raped-- I want my car back, plus a few bucks to cover the taxis I took while it was gone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Bravo.

The REAL problem, however, is the quality of jobs available to felons. If this board is filled with nothing more than labor and call-center jobs then, you've only solved part of the problem. The true goal is to connect felons with sympathetic employers in ALL manner of jobs. There is nothing like a felony to destroy a person's sense of self-worth and the system is completely rigged against a felon. This is bigger than a technological problem. It is a problem of humanity and forgiveness.

</comment><comment><USER44> Richard, another thought I had:

There is a tax break for businesses that hire a new parolee. Something like $4-5k tax credit for the first year of employment. Would be good to find out about that and let employers know - help encourage them to hire criminals.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, agreed, they're called WOTC's (Work Opportunity Tax Credits) and they are significant tax benefits. Some municipalities will also kick in money towards initial salaries, so there's compelling reasons to hire this population.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Do you employ people with criminal records?

As an employer, I want to hire the best people so my company can be successful. Why would I hire anyone from your site when there are plenty of other candidates elsewhere?

Do you think people will try to use your site to disqualify potential hires (i.e. use it as a do-not-hire list so those registered with the site can specifically be avoided)? How will you prevent this from occurring?

Why would a company that doesn't care about criminal records advertise with you? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to advertise on a generic job board, take the best resumes, and sort out criminal history issues as they arise?

Does your site allow employers to see what a job seeker's crime was, or any other info related to that that other job boards wouldn't provide?

<comment><USER46> "As an employer, I want to hire the best people so my company can be successful. Why would I hire anyone from your site when there are plenty of other candidates elsewhere?"

Not associated with that company but one reason to hire a convict is that you get a pretty decent tax break[0] out of it

[0][https://www.doleta.gov/business/incentives/opptax/](https://www.doleta.gov/business/incentives/opptax/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> > 1 in 3 adults—with criminal records

I must admit I haven't ever thought about these numbers but it strikes me as insanely high. How can this be explained? Is it a feature of just America or is it reproducible in other countries as well?

<comment><USER48> This is from 2002, but it makes the point:

"... that almost a third of men [in Britain] have a criminal conviction by the age of 30, according to the Home Office. Research on men born in 1953 showed that about 30 per cent had clocked up a standard list offence - one that is dealt with by the courts but excludes minor motoring offences - by their thirtieth birthday. Research in Scotland points in the same direction, suggesting that about 25 per cent of men have a record by age 24."

[https://www.theguardian.com/money/2002/apr/14/workandcareers...](https://www.theguardian.com/money/2002/apr/14/workandcareers.observercashsection)

<comment><USER49> Wow, and that was for people born in 1953(!!).

The net cast by law enforcement has not gotten smaller since then.

<comment><USER50> It's easier to rule over people who live in fear, so just make more things illegal, process people through the system, and you get your total state without anyone raising an eyebrow.

<comment><USER51> Oh they raise eyebrows. The kind that come along with thunderous applause.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> With the immigration crackdowns by the Trump administration, we've seen more and more stories about labor shortages in agricultural jobs often performed by immigrants. The problem has reached the point where wages have been increasing. Do those with criminal records consider these jobs? Why or why not?

I would imagine that agricultural jobs would be low-risk for those types of employers since those with criminal records are unlikely to be interacting with customers or exposed to high value inventory. Both of which are characteristics of a job that would give employers pause about hiring someone with a criminal record.

<comment><USER53> Unskilled agricultural work is the lowest-of-the-low. In Georgia they cracked down on using illegal immigrants, and it cost them their peach harvest, because locals won't do that kind of hard-to-reach (rural), low-paying, short- term/seasonal work.

A similar thing is happening here in my home state in Australia. The government introduced a new tax on the backpackers that traditionally filled out the fruit-picking workforce. The fruit-pickers cried foul about how the government was now strangling them... but this story has a twist: the fruit- pickers have been treating the backpackers like shit, withholding pay, for enough years for word to get around that it was no longer worth doing.

In short, local residents don't want to do short-term seasonal work under poor working conditions - unskilled agricultural jobs _really_ suck. Not to mention that you're not going to draw city-dwellers out to the farm if they're poor enough to be attracted to that kind of work - who is going to give up their home for short-term work? Only those folks who don't have any roots put down; that is, people who are already travellers of some kind.

Longer-term agricultural work can attract people more easily, since they'll have an ongoing income and can put roots down.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> I was curious about local jobs, so I put in "Minnesota" and get to [https://www.70millionjobs.com/search/-/Minnesota](https://www.70millionjobs.com/search/-/Minnesota) – but then when I put more search terms into keywords I keep getting the same results (including keywords that I can tell have associated jobs). I'm guessing it's falling back to ZipRecruiter entirely, but it's also not searching those entries.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for this question. We are not yet working in Minnesota (we're currently focused on CA and NY Metropolitan area), so search results outside those parameters are not good. We're working on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> I very much like what you're doing for those of us who've made wrong choices in the past. However, I am a little bit concerned what drives a company to go to a site -especially made for those people- looking for future employees.

<comment><USER56> The hardest workers are people who are (re)building their lives from nothing... Largely immigrants and ex-cons.

<comment><AUTHOR> In my experience, that's a very true observation

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Richard, a suggestion:

Have a way for parole/probation officers to search for jobs nearby for their charges. My PO was actually a helpful guy, as he figured if I was working, I was more likely to stay out of trouble. Just have some way for them to engage and provide assistance to new parolees.

<comment><AUTHOR> Another great suggestion. We have begun working with parole/probation offices who frequently are incredibly passionate professionals committed to making a difference. At some point we'll offer a white label platform for them to track employment opportunities, employers, etc. Many still operate off of an excel spread sheet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> Are you _sure_ those jobs all hire felons?

I browsed my State and saw jobs for physicians, pharmacists, and even a school psychiatrist.

<comment><USER58> was going to comment on this but will add on to yours. many states prohibit felons and even some non felons but with criminal records from certain fields that require occupational licensing.

do you have methods in place or planning to filter jobs with such restrictions as not all states adhere to the same rules.

great idea btw

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> Just curious, how do you know that the job postings you're listing accept those with criminal backgrounds?

Is this a list of curated companies? Or is there something that you're parsing out that denotes this acceptability?

<comment><USER60> There may be several factors going into this; for example, in the Bay Area, positions in the city of SF are prohibited from considering conviction history that is not "directly related" to the job. It also suggests specific language for including this information on job postings and corporate websites.

I would love to hear from company founders about what factors they use to discover this information in their external job listings that are not on jurisdictions like this.

Source: [http://www.millerlawgroup.com/publications/alerts/San- Franci...](http://www.millerlawgroup.com/publications/alerts/San-Franciscos- Fair-Chance-Ordinance.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> A friend of mine finally had his record cleared of incidents from when he was 19-20. He took courses to learn to program but even now it's still hard for him to get a job because people want to know about the huge gap in his employment history from when nobody would hire him.

<comment><USER62> "Personal crisis."

I was a homemaker for a lot of years. I also happened to be too sick to hold down a job during that time, but _homemaker_ sounds so much better on a resume.

Find a preferably true and accurate description that is palatable to employers. Then realize it is tough all over at the moment. LOTS of people are having trouble getting hired at all.

<comment><USER63> Do you mind if I ask if you're a woman? IIRC there's pretty substantial hiring discrimination against men who claim to be homemakers (because it's less common so people assume that they're lying). The other side of the coin obviously being that women with kids are discriminated against in hiring due to assumptions that they'll be distracted by their family obligations.

<comment><USER62> Yes, I am a woman. No need to ask: It is listed in my profile.

Also: I did not suggest a man call himself a _homemaker._ So, I am not sure what the point of your comment is.

<comment><USER63> > Also: I did not suggest a man call himself a homemaker. So, I am not sure > what the point of your comment is.

Uh, I'm not sure where this hostility is coming from. Just because someone responds to your comment doesn't mean they're disagreeing with you. I was just adding the context for anyone who sees your comment and interprets it narrowly as thinking that putting 'homemaker' on their resume gap is a useful way to explain it away without understanding the pitfall for 50% of the workforce.

<comment><USER62> I don't see why you are calling that _hostility._ You could have made the point you made here without implying I was suggesting that some man should go with that framing.

I am quite open about my gender. Lots of people recognize that I am female. Those that don't can easily determine my gender by clicking into my profile. I have zero reason to believe people will interpret my remark to mean that _men_ should call themselves _homemakers._

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> Isn't yet another case that startup is trying to fix systematic screwup of law in the USA?

In USA once you got criminal record, by default it stays for rest of life with you. Implications of that may be even more severe than actual punishment.

On the other hand in most of the European countries criminal records are limited and after X years they disappear and you can't legally discriminate based on that.

Some ppl will do something stupid at some point in their life and get a criminal record. Not giving them another chance is a major problem and actually can cause a lot of damage for everyone.

<comment><USER65> >Isn't yet another case that startup is trying to fix systematic screwup of law in the USA?

Two thoughts:

1) "systematic screwup of law in the USA" is a pretty good description; another might be "massive market opportunity"

2) "startup trying to [take advantage of market inefficiencies created by] systematic screwup of law in the USA" is also a pretty good description of drug traffickers of all kinds. (I'm not passing judgment; just making an observation. The meta observation is that you can't cheat reality, so when law gets out of whack the gap between Ideal and Actual creates an inefficiency, which savvy entrepreneurs can profit by bridging).

<comment><USER66> >systematic screwup of law in the USA" is a pretty good description; another might be "massive market opportunity"

The way Americans have the capacity to acknowledge something intrinsically fucked up about their society, and see it as a business opportunity regardless is something I both admire, and despair over.

<comment><USER51> Glad I'm not the only one that feels that way..

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> > our business model is based upon employers paying to advertise their jobs.

The only question I have is: why would they? I can see the reason why the job seekers would subscribe to your website but I don't see why employers would prefer it to other alternatives. Actually I can see one: to be able to identify which candidates have a criminal record and eliminate them from their pool.

Registering there as an employer can be an act of good will and generosity but that seems a bit awkward to make them pay for it, no?

BTW, you have to have a very solid security from the beginning. A leak of your database would not only threaten your business but negate most of the good you did.

<comment><USER68> Because it expands the pool of applicants. It's a way of getting access to people who otherwise might not apply (and who are probably willing to work for less).

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I'm looking forward to hearing your feedback and am happy to answer any questions about 70millionjobs, the challenges faced by people with criminal records, and ideas you may have to improve our site.

</comment><comment><USER69> I gotta say, as fucking annoying as I find most of you people on other topics, I am so thrilled to see your support for a cause such as this one. You almost killed the cynic in me :) Go hackers!

<comment><AUTHOR> And as someone new to both HN and the tech culture in general, I'm stunned by both the intelligence of the comments offered and the soul behind them. Doing this work has definitely done my heart good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> Testing out the Job Search functionality, there seems to be some room for improvement for returning more relevant results first. Doing a quick test against a keyword search for "developer", I would much rather see all results with developer in the job title first. Instead seeing a lot of top results that are not relevant, some which I can't find a form of the word "develop" anywhere in the full job description, much less the job title.

Great concept and great start!

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, the job search functionality needs lots of work. Like pretty much all job boards, we engage in scraping of other sites (along with our own jobs). While we try to filter based on geography, job type and "second-chance friendly," we get results that don't conform. Like you, I see all that needs improvement, and promise to make it much better. Please make sure to check in periodically and share what we can be doing better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> Hey, thanks for sharing this. I actually just wrote an article (not yet published) for an organization that helps inmates learn how to code while in prison so they can have some life skills for when they are done serving their time and get out in the real world.

I'm not talking about murderers or pedophiles or people who just probably don't belong in society at all, but when it comes to people with lesser crimes -- people who got greedy, people who were stupid and stole something, or even were involved with drugs (I'm an advocate for decriminalization), people who can be given a second chance and not resort to a life of returning to old habits.

The organization's URL is: [https://thelastmile.org/](https://thelastmile.org/)

Another URL I came across: [http://jobsthathirefelons.org/](http://jobsthathirefelons.org/)

Anyways, hope you don't mind, but I've added your URL to my article as well. I'd rather see productive ex-cons/former felons contribute to our society and not be relegated to a position at a minimum wage job for the rest of their lives, despite having massive amounts of skills and talents that can be used elsewhere.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't mind at all, and I'm very familiar w/The Last Mile, and consider it good company to be in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER72> >> We expect additional revenue to come from municipalities, who spend tens of billions of dollars annually, when someone is rearrested.

I'm curious - while I agree that it also benefits the municipalities to help former criminals reintegrate into productive society, through what channel do you see expect this revenue to come? I know some tax breaks exist for hiring ex-cons, but dishing out funds to a service like this would be entirely new, right?

</comment><comment><USER73> I ran a search and a few banking jobs came up, one of which mentioned going through a fingerprint background check. I find it hard to believe the US Bank in SF would take me seriously for a teller opening if I had any sort of hangups in my background.

I guess this is more of a feature request but... It would be great if you could filter out job postings that were likely just scraped or aggregated from other places!

Nice work btw, a great start for a much needed service

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your kind words. Yeah, our search algorithm needs lots of work. It'll get there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER74> In the UK, Timpson[0] are a well known example of a national employer not only willing to hire ex-offenders but one that does so proudly, and indeed offer training to prisoners before they are even released. They have tried to convince other companies to follow their lead but with limited success. That said, we also have Clean Sheet[1] through which employers can expressly publicise their willingness to employ ex-offenders.

I find it extremely admirable. Best of luck with your approach.

[0] See for example this archived blog post: [https://web.archive.org/web/20150222003545/http://www.timpso...](https://web.archive.org/web/20150222003545/http://www.timpson.co.uk/blog/article/79/john- timpson-we-are-making-a-difference-to-the-lives-of-ex-offenders-) or a search for "Timpson ex-offenders" [https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=timpson+ex- offenders](https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=timpson+ex-offenders)

[1] [http://cleansheet.org.uk/](http://cleansheet.org.uk/)

</comment><comment><USER75> 1/3 adults with a criminal record in a developed country seems absolutely insane to me.

Edit: Well I need to get off my horse because it seems to be similar here in the UK as well: [https://www.theguardian.com/money/2002/apr/14/workandcareers...](https://www.theguardian.com/money/2002/apr/14/workandcareers.observercashsection)

<comment><USER76> I was surprised by this statistic as well. If guess the prisons are very large...

</comment></comment><comment><USER77> Um, why are all of the photos on the site of African Americans? Yes, it's true that African Americans make up 40% of the prison population, but whites make up 39% and hispanics 19%. It seems the images you have chosen are an unfair stereotype.

<comment><USER78> Some studies* have found that black men with a conviction experience significantly more hiring discrimination than white men, so the pool of "people with convictions struggling to get a job" is probably even more skewed towards black people.

* random example form googling, but I've seen a few on the topic [https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2015/04/03/race-crimin...](https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2015/04/03/race-criminal-background-and-employment/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER79> The work that you are doing warms my heart and I wish you the best of growth and prosperity.

</comment><comment><USER80> Can you filter candididates by the type of crime they did?

I'd be fine with hiring people previously incarcerated for drugs offenses and other minor crimes.

However, there's no way I'm hiring any rapists or pedophiles, or other such scum.

</comment><comment><USER81> I think this is an important endeavor. In the U.S. we tend to be too much focused on punishment and retribution. No one benefits by preventing ex convicts from an attempt at a normal life. I hope you succeed and wish you well.

I do think you ought to remove the phrase, "...but despite having paid everyone back..." That phrasing comes off to me as a bit of a justification for what you did and seems to indicate a feeling that you should not have been sentenced. I don't know if this is your intent or if indeed such a belief is justified. It may be off putting to some.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think you're right, and it's probably my last ditch attempt to defend myself. I need to omit that and move on. thanks

Edit: removed that bit as well as "I went on to build a large financial services firm". Thanks for pointing this out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER82> Business wise: what make a company want to hire someone with a criminal record?

<comment><USER83> They are cheaper?

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> Awesome idea! And a noble cause. But one word of advice - since this is a niche market you guys should focus on natural growth and profitability instead of getting too much VC money to fuel explosive growth.

<comment><USER85> I don't understand how 30% of Americans is a niche market? Can you elaborate some more?

<comment><USER84> Its niche because the idea can be easily replicated by the incumbents in the industry. And it will be hard to scale at a global scale because the perception about ex-cons varies a lot in different countries.

As such the profits wont be able to keep up with VCs expectations if they invest 100s of millions of dollars. OP has a great first mover advantage and knowledge of the market, and they can capitalize that but the idea isn't worth billions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> Richard,

Thanks for your effort in the reentry space! The struggle for returning citizens is real and constant and I love seeing things like this on HN. At one point I worked for a company apploi.com that had a similar business model but targeting a different demographic. I would love to share some things I learned from that experience. I also started a similar venture corestaffing.us that is hyper-focused on the Baltimore/Washington area. Let me know if you are interested in chatting!

<comment><AUTHOR> I am indeed. I'm at firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Will it be possible to limit job postings to groups of offenders? Eg only non- violent offenders, only people who have been out for at least x years with no new crimes, etc?

</comment><comment><USER87> Hey Richard, I'm really glad to see you working on this. A family member of mine made some mistakes, and ended up spending time in prison. It's been really painful to watch him struggle to get a job, even though he's paid his debts and is a genuinely good person. I have tremendous sympathy for people in this position.

If any of your members are experts at embedded systems / firmware / cryptography, send them my way!

<comment><AUTHOR> ok, I will. Thx

</comment></comment><comment><USER88> this is great stuff, I wish you success.

One minor suggestion: review the assets on your website, the second background image[0] for example is 12 megabytes, you can probably compress it to much smaller size.

[0] [https://jobboardhq.blob.core.windows.net/assets/prod/2ttp/sh...](https://jobboardhq.blob.core.windows.net/assets/prod/2ttp/shutterstock_129614768.jpg)

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks for the suggestion

</comment></comment><comment><USER89> This is a great idea and I hope it does well.

From an economic standpoint, why IS it a problem? The lack of sense of safety could come with a discount that eventually evens out. I.E. a felon gets an offer with 30% discount, and after a year or so that he proves as normal as any other get his wages back. Not feasible with minimum wage jobs, and one could think this is really unfair, but its better than a straight no.

</comment><comment><USER90> Have you thought about collaborating with CEO works?

[https://ceoworks.org/](https://ceoworks.org/)

<comment><AUTHOR> We are currently doing just that, in NY and CA. Their NY director of Workforce Development is on our Advisory Board.

</comment></comment><comment><USER91> Wow, this is great! I was convicted of a crime in my late teens and spent a few years in the federal system because of my conviction. It was an interesting process attempting to gain employment.

It warms to my heart to see jobs that are more open to people with previous convictions - they're some of the most loyal and hardworking people I've encountered.

Keep up the great work!

<comment><AUTHOR> I will keep up the work--I hope it approaches great. thanks

</comment></comment><comment><USER92> Richard,

I think this is a terrific idea and can see the need. Do you foresee any difficulties obtaining VC? Just a bit curious given the in depth background checks they complete on founders. I hope that you get the funding that you may need for growth because I think this meets a tremendous need.

Kudos to you for making the changes you have made and then using that to help others.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your support. This space seems to resonate w/the VC community, all things being equal. Ultimately, it falls upon me and my team to execute and make it a business that's worthy of investment. Good intentions will not drive their involvement, nor should it. The rubber meets the road if we can provide a viable, sustainable HR solution. If we can't/don't, then we don't deserve investment nor to remain in business. But my VC dealings thus far have been very positive, starting with YC

<comment><USER92> I am glad to hear that VCs are supportive and are showing that they can do what you are trying to do, give someone a second chance. Again, kudos. I hope your venture is a huge success.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER93> What is the incentive for employers to use this site?

"Doing the right thing and second chances" doesn't count in this case because it's rare when talking business and isn't dependable.

One possible incentive, (and this is a bit concerning), is employers looking for people who can be paid less and abused more because they don't have many options.

</comment><comment><USER94> I can see this concept being a huge success because it is solving a real problem. The difficult lift is the employer buyin.

</comment><comment><USER95> I'd definitely consider hiring ex-cons, as long as they had some sort of 'come to Jesus' moment where they changed their life. I used to do a lot of bad stuff, just didn't get caught for it ( mostly doing drugs ). I wouldn't want to hire former me, but now that I've changed...

</comment><comment><USER96> _I went on to build a large financial services firm, but despite having paid everyone back, I ended up with a 2 year Federal prison sentence._

Ummm.... This sounds like a huge rationalization. "I'm sorry for breaking in and robbing your house. Despite giving the money back, I ended up going to jail."

<comment><USER97> Read the next sentence:

 _I was guilty._

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> quick FYI, Your og:image is broken because I just tried sharing your site on facebook and all I saw were logos from other companies. When I go directly to the image you set in your og:image meta tag I get an error response

[https://jobboardhq.blob.core.windows.net/assets/prod/2ttp/lo...](https://jobboardhq.blob.core.windows.net/assets/prod/2ttp/logo_social.png)

here's a direct link to FB's open graph debugger with your site already loaded into it: [https://developers.facebook.com/tools/debug/sharing/?q=https...](https://developers.facebook.com/tools/debug/sharing/?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.70millionjobs.com%2F)

<comment><USER99> Another broken page is your "For Formerly Incarcerated->Gain Certification" page:

[https://www.70millionjobs.com/page/Certification](https://www.70millionjobs.com/page/Certification)

I see nothing but some share buttons, the standard header and footer, and a blank white page. There's a Sumo login tab that slides out of the scroll bar if you mouseover near the top right corner.

It's perhaps only caused by the Show HN DDOS/hug of death, but better to learn now than later that the Sumo Listbuilder popup takes at least 30-60 seconds to load. I only waited long enough to notice it because I had to disable UBlock and reloaded watching the Network tab of the dev tools.

</comment></comment><comment><USER100> YES!!!! This is exactly the kind of innovation we need. Great work! Let us know if we can help. We are at very beginning stages of supporting people that are re-entering and getting folks lined up with jobs in a safe and supportive way is a big part of that. Again, hats off!

<comment><AUTHOR> And right back at you for your efforts!

</comment></comment><comment><USER101> This is a beautiful project.

Have you met the guys behind [https://pigeon.ly/](https://pigeon.ly/)?

Are there any other problem areas related to the criminal justice system that you are not addressing, that you think a startup could help with?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I know them well

</comment></comment><comment><USER102> Shot you guys an email, but would love to offer your users free months on Boost ([https://getboost.io](https://getboost.io)). We're the only on-demand career coach that's affordable for all.

</comment><comment><USER103> Hi Richard,

This is a great idea with a nice social cause. Also,from a business perspective this is a good niche and large scale. Aside the mission and the targeted niche, how do you expect/plan to diferentiate in your product offering?

<comment><AUTHOR> We need to find a much better product market fit. This job board was our first pass at it, but we've learned lots and look forward to being far more engaging for our users in the future. There's been so much great feedback here alone, I can't wait to iterate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER104> i'm also working on the jobs problem (not in your niche however) and really don't find the idea of another job board very compelling. can i ask why you went that route?

in any case, best of luck! it's important work to be doing.

as a society, we should do everything possible to help people who make mistakes and want to get back on the happy path. (as a side note, i think punishment is way out of whack. we need more carrot and less stick for low- level offenders, and more stick and less carrot for white-collar crimes that affect many more lives, though it seems like you got a fair amount of stick in your case.)

</comment><comment><USER105> It may be simplistic, but I believe if you've done the time, you should not have a criminal record hanging over your head when trying to find employment. For a third or fourth time offender, I may give pause, though.

</comment><comment><USER106> I don't come from the US but I also gained a record and it changed how I viewed life and how I was viewed for opportunities. Punishment is the worst way for people to move on. This is a great idea, well done.

</comment><comment><USER107> Goodness! This seems like an amazing opportunity - I have charges that will never go away under New Zealand's Clean Slate Act for buying from Silk Road when I was 17 years of age. This is truly progressive.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks

</comment></comment><comment><USER108> for branding, i would consider not using a fixed # in the name - as that will fluctuate. instead consider the spirit of the idea : perhaps "SecondChances.io" or better.. keep up the good work!

</comment><comment><USER109> First time creating an account on HN. Wanted to to say what you're doing is important. I will be sure word gets around about this in the appropriate circles where it would be useful.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for joining us here

</comment></comment><comment><USER110> This is a great initiative and hopefully will lead to a positive change for everyone involved. Will you also be thinking about training/education opportunities for applicants?

<comment><AUTHOR> That is something that has occupied more and more of my thoughts. thanks for asking

<comment><USER110> Not a problem. I've always genuinely felt that all people are good people and that when given a chance to integrate and succeed in society, they can make it. Some are just less fortunate to not acquire skills that are needed for jobs today but give them training and more importantly, give them confidence in themselves that there is always hope and I am sure their lives can be transformed.

I just read this story and thought it might be interesting for you: [http://www.sgi.org/people-and-perspectives/changing-lives- in...](http://www.sgi.org/people-and-perspectives/changing-lives-in- prison.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER111> This is a fantastic effort. It is absolutely crucial that we do a better job of helping those who have served their time have a chance to become productive members of society.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you

</comment></comment><comment><USER112> Richard, amazing idea and appreciate the candor from your personal experience. HN is a great community to spread the word of your launch, so thanks. Let me know how I can help

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks, Mark. We need all the help we can get. What are you good at?

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> Great business concept and social good all in one.

With the unemployed persons per job opening at such a low present level (~11-12 year low), I bet you see a lot of employer interest.

<comment><AUTHOR> There's great demand, exacerbated by our administration's crack-down on illegal aliens

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I would imagine the difficult aspect of this two-sided market would be employers.

Not to be obtuse, but what incentive would an employer have to hire someone with criminal records?

<comment><USER46> I commented this somewhere else, but I figured I would drop this link here for you too, [https://www.doleta.gov/business/incentives/opptax/](https://www.doleta.gov/business/incentives/opptax/). You can get a pretty decent tax break if you hire a felon.

<comment><AUTHOR> very true

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER113> >I felt a new, for-profit, tech-based approach was necessary, so I launched 70MillionJobs.

I understand why you preferred to make more money, but what made it necessary?

</comment><comment><USER114> seems like a lot of what you'll need to do is on the employer education. please excuse my ignorance, I hope their not offensive, I'm just trying to help.

1\. is there any extra liability for the employer if they knowingly hire someone formerly incarcerated and they commit a crime while working for them.

2\. aren't some kind of tax credits for hiring formerly incarcerated incarcerated people.

3\. is it only w2 or do you allow 1099 opportunities.

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually, a federal bonding program has existed for decades, to indemnify employers making "at-risk" hires. Interestingly, on a very few claims have ever been filed. It's a myth that these folks will be criminals on the job. In fact, studies out of Harvard and U of Mass suggest that they actually can make better employees than those without records. There are indeed federal tax credits (Work Opportunity Tax Credits) available. Generally, we're talking w2 jobs (which are also a requirement of parole/probation, generally)

<comment><USER114> Thanks for the clarifications.

\- It's a myth that these folks will be criminals on the job.

I wasn't trying to imply they were, I was more thinking of a company getting dragged into a witch hunt. Regardless of the population there's always a bad apple just like there's a diamond.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER115> Hi Richard,

What's your plan when the number of people with criminal records reaches 80 million, 90 million, etc? Have you already acquired the other domain names?

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually, I think the numbers will go down rather than up (our present administration notwithstanding). About the only thing that Republicans and Democrats can agree on is that the criminal justice system is seriously broken. Longer sentences and more jails hasn't worked. The war on drugs? We lost that long ago. So many lives wasted on mandatory minimum sentences (eliminating all judicial discretion), drug arrests (many for a drug that's being widely decriminalized). I have experienced positive changes in the 15 years since I was released. The cultural zeitgeist is evolving rapidly, for the better. There's reason to be optimistic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER116> I love seeing startups who can actually transform lives. Its sad being a developer with no technical limitations but have no useful ideas.

</comment><comment><USER117> I did a double take when I read the first 4 words: Richard Branson is in YC? Launching a job platform?

Anyways, this is a great idea, I hope you succeed!

<comment><AUTHOR> What a big difference one letter can make. thanks for your thoughts.

<comment><USER118> I read exactly the same.

Mind playing tricks on us.

And then... Wolf of Wolf Street.

I'll make an insider joke and update my LinkedIn profile for "Stratton Oakmont Chief Compliance Officer"...

Good energy, much love!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER119> Possibly interesting trivia: There was an '80s British TV series called Inside Out, about people doing what you're doing.

<comment><AUTHOR> really? I love British TV!

<comment><USER119> It's [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2674348/?ref_=fn_tt_tt_17](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2674348/?ref_=fn_tt_tt_17) , although sadly it seems to have mostly vanished into the analogue void. I remember it being pretty good, but I probably had dreadful taste at the time.

[http://www.rochellestevens.com/wp/wp- content/uploads/2013/01...](http://www.rochellestevens.com/wp/wp- content/uploads/2013/01/Credits-Moore.pdf) has a very slightly better summary (at least enough to prove I'm not making it up).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER120> I'm impressed by the "1 in 3 adults" thing. I should check the numbers for my country.

Am I wrong or all that people can't vote?

</comment><comment><USER30> Is anyone elses reaction "What will they think of next?"

Anyone also surprised at the scope of positive and admission-comments?

Anyway, best of luck!!

<comment><AUTHOR> thank you. And yeah, the number and intelligence of the comments has been incredibly gratifying. it does my heart real good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER121> How bout a separate site for individuals who are falsely accused of heinous crimes(murder, rape) without evidence?

</comment><comment><USER122> There are pictures african-american people on frontpage, about and guiding principles.

People MAY be offended. Just a suggestion.

<comment><USER123> What do you mean? The reality is that African-American people are incarcerated and convincted at very high rates, in great part thanks to policies that very specifically designed to target them (re: war on drugs).

<comment><USER38> I don't think he's arguing the disparity of the rate, but rather the implied generalization that former-convict = African-American. Look at the statistics posted above, that is not true. I agree, it needs redesign.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER121> How bout a separate site for those falsely accused of heinous crimes without any evidence(like Brian banks)

</comment><comment><USER124> Just wanted to be another HN-er voicing my support for what you're doing :)

Good luck and i hope you're successful!

<comment><AUTHOR> thank you very much

</comment></comment><comment><USER125> Silicon Valley CMO with a record here - would love to offer pro bono marketing help if needed.

<comment><AUTHOR> Please get in touch: email@example.com

</comment></comment><comment><USER126> "Richard Bronson" is an awesome name for this. It has real gravitas.

<comment><USER127> Strangely similar to Richard Branson!

<comment><USER126> And Charles Bronson!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER128> The good thing about people with a criminal record: you know what they did! You will never know this of the people around you who got away not being caught. Do I know if my neighbour did not rob a bank 10 years ago? No. So working with ex-criminals can be an encounter with honesty.

<comment><USER129> Uh, you don't know what the ex-con _hasn 't_ been caught for either. Maybe they got away with murder 10 years ago, but where only caught for their petty theft 5 years later.

<comment><USER130> Which also undermines the usefulness of judging based on criminal record...

<comment><USER19> How is that? It seems reasonable to believe, all else being equal, that someone that's been convicted of a crime has committed more crimes than someone that hasn't been convicted.

<comment><USER130> Why? Being caught committing a crime is less a sign of committing a crime but in doing it in a way that got you caught. Serial committers often go years uncaught... from petty burglars to assaulters.. a lot of people get caught their first time, its the ones who dont get caught that are more dangerous...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER131> Important (and inglorious) work. I wish you the best Richard, genuinely.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks for the encouragement!

</comment></comment><comment><USER132> Minor things like small drug offences etc. fine but major crimes? No.

<comment><USER72> So are you of the opinion that people who commit major crimes should just be unemployed for life, and no effort should be made to cater to their job search? You don't realize that's a recipe for virtually guaranteed repeat offenders?

<comment><USER51> There will always be a segment of society that were bullied as kids and get their rocks off being as cruel as possible to those they believe deserve it.

People like that are not part of this conversation.

<comment><USER133> But, the comment you addressed is talking about people who commit major crimes.

That is not the same group you are referring to.

<comment><USER78> I believe he is referring to the person who posted that comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER134> Can you sort by criminal record? e.g. Only white collar crimes.

<comment><AUTHOR> No, we believe everyone deserves a second chance. It's a challenging moral quandary, I admit, but I for one am no one to pass judgement.

<comment><USER135> What about cases such as people who commit crimes against children? Would at the very least you say they don't deserve a second chance at working with children?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER136> One in three adults have a criminal record in the US? Wow.

</comment><comment><USER137> How come 1 in 3 adults in the USA have a criminal record?

</comment><comment><USER138> This is awesome, congratulations on your launch!

<comment><AUTHOR> thank you!

</comment></comment><comment><USER139> Bless you, sir.

<comment><AUTHOR> bless you, too

</comment></comment><comment><USER140> That's nothing short of awesome.

</comment><comment><USER141> very interesting concept, all the best :-), hope it picks up, we need more love in our society

<comment><AUTHOR> indeed we do! thanks

</comment></comment><comment><USER142> A terrific long overdue idea

</comment><comment><USER142> Terrific idea. Long overdue

</comment><comment><USER143> Love the idea. Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER144> this is cool. you should get in touch with Pigeonly (YC W15).

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm very familiar with those folks, thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER145> Best of luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks very much

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Love it

</comment><comment><USER146> State and federal governments do not get as much tax revenue either because these people are not earning at their full potential. So basically, it hurts everyone involved as well as society as a whole.

<comment><USER147> So I have mixed feelings about this situation. On the one hand, if the sentences were for drug possession, yes, I think its really shitty to incarcerate people for that. But if their felony was due to burglary or something more serious/violent, I do think they deserve the punishment.

I also agree that once the sentence has been served, people should not be punished any further, except where the occupation requires a clean record. e.g. I would be OK with pharmacies requiring no arrest for drugs etc. as a condition for employment, or drivers without DWI convictions etc.

I guess my point is: its not a purely economic decision. Sure you're losing tax revenue, but that's because you're:

1) Protecting society from a person who has demonstrates some lack of understanding/acceptance of its rules.

2) Cause significant discomfort/pain to the perpetrator of the crime so that they realize the consequences of breaking the law and hopefully never do it again.

<comment><USER62> [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact- checker/wp/2015/04/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact- checker/wp/2015/04/30/does-the-united-states-really-have-five-percent-of- worlds-population-and-one-quarter-of-the-worlds- prisoners/?utm_term=.1335c5e4202b)

The US has about 4.4 percent of the global population and about 22 percent of the global prison population. So either we are seriously fucking up as a country and incapable of producing decent human beings, or our entire justice system is broken.

Something needs to be done differently at the systemic level that doesn't involved holding every individual fucked over by the U.S. personally accountable for being crushed under the wheels of the goddamn system.

<comment><USER148> > The US has about 4.4 percent of the global population and about 22 percent > of the global prison population. So either we are seriously fucking up as a > country and incapable of producing decent human beings, or our entire > justice system is broken.

Note that that's not an exclusive or; both can be true, and it's even plausible that there's a positive feedback loop between the two—that is, we have worse people _because_ of our massive imprisonment, and can't get political support to end mass imprisonment because people _correctly_ fear the near-term results given the way in which those in in prison are socialized (and even often preferring more imprisonment from perfectly legitimate fears of the way many people not in prison are socialized _due to_ our mass imprisonment system.)

Which isn't to say we shouldn't bite the bullet and end the system, but just that we'll have lots of near term problems when we do and lots of political difficulty in actually doing it.

<comment><USER62> [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/03/identity- the...](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/03/identity-theft-racial- justice)

 _The tickets had something else in common. Brownsville, the South Bronx, East Harlem, Bed-Stuy (at least eight years ago, when the ticket was issued), all of them are neighborhoods with large black or Hispanic, and very small white, populations. It was then that it became clear to me: the reason for the tickets wasn't that these Lisa Davises were petty criminals._

If you are the wrong color and live in the wrong part of town, you get criminalized for existing. Then when something does go really wrong, you can be railroaded.

Derreck Hamilton* was a black kid guilty of minor bullshit who spent years and years in prison for a murder he did not commit (because some asshole cop was out to get him and he got railroaded). So, acting like not sending poor, non- whites to prison for basically existing somehow will make life scarier is basically racist bullshit. Or perhaps simply clueless about how things work in this country.

* [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/20/derrick-hamilto...](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/20/derrick-hamilton-jailhouse-lawyer)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER149> Just because I believe the number of reported violent crimes suggests our prison population is underpopulated, doesn't mean I don't also believe the system may currently be overpopulated with the wrong sorts.

That's why I used numbers for sex crimes only, but more broadly we have ~2.2M inmates and 1.2M reported violent crimes per year, throwing out all non violent offenders it would still be hard to conclude our prisons are overfilled unless All cases had a max sentence of 1 year.

<comment><USER150> We detached this subthread from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14914006](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14914006) and marked it off-topic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER151> Why buy a domain name for a number that will fluctuate over time?

<comment><AUTHOR> My greatest pleasure will be the day I have to buy 60millionjobs.com, 50mill....

</comment></comment><comment><USER152> This is great. Not much else to say about it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you

</comment></comment><comment><USER153> This is really cool, and I hope that your platform takes off! The SMS integration for texting is also a nice touch. :)

One thing I wonder about is if folks in our industry would be more willing to have an felon of some variety working with them than somebody who's been tarred with the racist/sexist/conservative label?

<comment><USER154> Same question I had! Likely answer is YES (at least on HN boards and opinions to drive appearances, maybe not hiring for real).

</comment></comment><comment><USER155> Love it. Doing good and making money at the same time. What a great idea.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm hopin'

<comment><USER118> I like that you've used phrase "double bottom line"

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

Yes... Helping people, communities, over the generations.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER156> happy to see you made it to YC, good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> thank you The YC experience has been great and everyone's been very supportive

</comment></comment><comment><USER157> p.s. it's a safe haven.

<comment><USER150> Ah yes. Typo fixed. Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER158> >Attitudes are changing quickly

Are they now? Tell me, which political party is planning on decriminalizing drug offenses?

<comment><USER159> Unnecessarily bitchy defeatism aside, the answer to your question is the Democratic Party[1].

[1] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/01/cory-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/01/cory- booker-puts-marijuana-legalization-at-the-center-of-his-new-racial-justice- bil/)

<comment><USER158> It's neither, just correcting misconceptions. It's tiring to constantly hear people saying we're "making progress" while we continue to perpetuate the same policy problems that have obviously caused issues for decades and decades.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the bill you mentioned only seems to deal with marijuana, which I don't think is how most people get drug felonies.

<comment><USER160> It may not be most, but according to statistics[1] from 2015, marijuana accounted for 24% of the drug case sentences. Reducing or eliminating these would be a major step in the right direction and would in my book count as "making progress".

1 - [https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and- pu...](https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and- publications/research- publications/2016/FY15_Overview_Federal_Criminal_Cases.pdf) (top of page 9)

<comment><USER158> Another tepid form of progress is fewer "mandatory minimum" sentences, on page 8. That's nice to see at least, thank you for the PDF.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER161> > along with a healthy dose of racism

Er, when is racism ever healthy?

<comment><USER150> We detached this subthread from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14912145](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14912145) and marked it off-topic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER162> I wish we heard more stories like these. It might dissuade people from getting involved in drugs in the first place.

<comment><USER150> We detached this subthread from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14911995](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14911995) and marked it off-topic.

<comment><USER162> How is this off-topic? Do you mean "off message"?

<comment><USER150> 'Dissuading people from using drugs in the first place' is pretty far from the topic of a job board for felons. There's a connection, but it's a generic one. We've learned that generic tangents aren't good for discussion here.

This is standard HN moderation. When a subthread veers away from the original topic _and also toward something more generic or ideological_ , we moderate the subthread as off topic. That caveat is important, since off-topic tangents can also be whimsical and sometimes more interesting than the original discussion. But on HN, 'generic' and 'interesting' are incompatible, and the generic stuff tends to take over the concrete if you let it (+10x when the material is flammable). Therefore we don't let it.

<comment><USER162> Thank you for the explanation. Since I have your attention momentarily, would it be possible to delete my entire HN history from the beginning of time? Posts and comments.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Do you consider a slow hiring process a red flag? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> I'd say it depends on the industry. Startups? probably a red flag. Airline industry, Government agencies? probably not.

<comment><USER3> Given that agility is supposed to be the one thing startups have going for them, yup.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> At the interview, ask how long before they plan to make a decision. If it is longer, then you are likely their 2nd choice as the first one (or two) did not pan out.

I worked for one company that could not seem to schedule an interview before a resume was 2 months old. They missed out on a lot of people, although the company was very stable.

I agree with Epiddy that government can be VERY long process. If you are unemployeed, I would not set your heart on a government job, as you might starve.

</comment><comment><USER5> A lot depends on what part of the hiring process is slow. My general expectation is that the time between first phone call and final onsite interview will be 3 weeks at a minimum and 12 weeks max. After onsite, verbal notice should occur within a week although the actual offer may take much, much longer (annoying but expected in some organizations).

The red flag is when you are told one thing and then another thing happens. In my experience that only happens about 100% of the time.

</comment><comment><USER6> It really seems like the hiring process ought to be a good indicator of how the internals of the company works. However, inexplicably but empirically, I can see no correlation (in my own experience).

</comment><comment><USER7> Absolutely.

Back when Google did it in 1999, it was cool and new and exotic and made you feel special.

Now it's almost always a (poor) signaling mechanism of value.

</comment><comment><USER8> yes. smart startups use small test projects to test workers out quickly without over-committing</comment>


Hardcoding - <AUTHOR> http://miguelsalazar.mx/2014/09/02/basura-para-unos-tesoro-para-otros-hardcoding/

<comment><USER2> TL;DR: He started scraping some website and found a hardcoded SQL query with DB connection parameters. He recommends against such practice.</comment>


Thoughts on Horses - <AUTHOR> http://axian.tumblr.com/post/560040213 <comment><USER2> Readable: <http://whenwillapple.com/thoughts-on-horses/>

<comment><USER3> Finishing move: <http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Strange, a whole passage about how he developed several steam tractors has been cut out between the left and right column (the non-sequitur is pretty obvious).

Full text here, starting just under middle of p.25: [http://books.google.be/books?id=DeYw_wMlwqoC&lpg=PA26...](http://books.google.be/books?id=DeYw_wMlwqoC&lpg=PA26&ots=6k1yc5g7un&hl=en&pg=PA25#v=twopage&q&f=false)

<comment><USER5> Ford's _My Life and Work_ for Kindle is free: <http://www.amazon.com/My-Life- and-Work-ebook/dp/B000JQUSUW>

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> "That is the way with wise people – they are so wise and practical that they always know to a dot just why something cannot be done; they always know the limitations."

</comment><comment><USER7> Where's page 2?

</comment><comment><USER8> The last two sentences were the best part:

> All the wise people demonstrated conclusively that the engine could not > compete with steam. They never thought that it might carve out a career for > itself. That is the way with wise people - they are so wise and practical > that they always know to a dot just why something cannot be done; they > always know the limitations.</comment>


Do not use Syncthing (2019) - <AUTHOR> https://www.gkayaalp.com/blog/20190102_syncthing.html <comment><USER2> > The other takeaway is that, backup, and backup often

I feel like that's the bigger takeaway. I've had issues with MEGA and Dropbox not syncing things correctly or getting caught in weird loops. I started using Syncing and now I have three tools.

Always do regular backups with something like duplicity. duplicity + backblaze works pretty well, and put a calendar event down to try a manual restore every month too. You can tell duplicity to discard older stuff and it will organize your snapshots correctly.

I need to do this myself too.</comment>


WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel - <AUTHOR> https://kotaku.com/popular-wow-streamer-hires-youtubers-who-leeched-off-hi-1840377137 <comment><USER2> Note: I don't know anything about games or livestreaming. This is a genuine question about something that confuses me.

Can someone explain why livestreamers can claim their stream as their own original content, but reuploaders can't? I mean, someone who livestreams a game is primarily showing off the artwork and level design and everything put in by the game company. There's like 90% derived content plus 10% original. A reuploader does exactly that: take 90% of their content from elsewhere (the livestreamer) and add 10% (good editing).

I understand that all this is in everybody's benefit: a game company likes livestreamers because it helps market their game, and a livestreamer likes reuploaders because it helps market their stream. So the amount of cease-and- desists going about is low. But still, why does the livestreamer get to own the content, and not the reuploader? I really don't see the difference to be frank.

<comment><USER3> People don't watch live streamers for the game, they watch them for the streamer. On the contrary, 90% of the value of the stream comes from the personality playing the game and 10% comes from the game itself. It is common for streamers to jump around many games because it was never about which game was being played.

A good example of this is DayZ, a game that was very buggy and had a lot of negative criticism, and yet it became very popular _because_ streamers pushed it so hard. Even bugs and broken mechanics can be fun if you are watching streamers laugh at it

You could also consider the game to be a "set," i.e. a digital space that the livestream is filmed within.

<comment><USER4> If that was true, they would be doing it without games - they would just be sitting there and chatting for example. But since they don't, it mostly means that for those streamers people would not have watched them without the game being played, so the question of whether the game or streamer is at 90% of value it quite open.

<comment><USER5> "Just Chatting" is so popular on Twitch there's an entire category for it: [https://www.twitch.tv/directory/game/Just%20Chatting](https://www.twitch.tv/directory/game/Just%20Chatting)

<comment><USER4> Exactly, it is a different category with usually different people in it. And likely different people watching this category than the ones watching games.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm honestly surprised at how bad Youtube is at policing reuploaded content. Compare this to, say, music rights enforcement, where a car with a loud stereo passing you in the street can cause your video to be demonetized or taken down for rights violations.

This goes beyond reuploading. There are a ton of videos that use some clickbait-y title, the likeness of a creator and have inaccurate titles about what they contain. They then have 30-90 seconds of a clips from the creator followed by nonsensical filler to get it to the magical 10 minute duration. I'm not sure the significance of 10 minutes but there clearly is one. Better monetization? Another ad break?

And the onus of policing this is put entirely on the creator.

Honestly these regurgitation channels should be incredibly easy to detect and demonetize (if not take down entirely). They're bad for the ecosystem and just give pages of garbage results when you search for anything.

Now some people are actually good at taking long content and cutting it up into bite sized pieces. Good for them and it's smart of Asmongold to leverage them. The onus just shouldn't be on the creator to police this.

<comment><USER7> How is your magic algorithm will distinguish "bad" channels from game reviewers,movie critics and other reviwers? Or should they all be banned too? Also how it will detect that something is fair use?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Don't know if he reads HN, but a guy I knew long ago did the Beastie Boy fan website. Beastie at the time just went with his vs their own since it was better and had a lot of traffic. Would have expected lawsuits for branding, etc. Was a fun guy and wicked smart. Dude passed crazy comp sci classes without studying much.

</comment><comment><USER9> It already became a thing. At least in Germany there are a couple bigger Twitch streamers, which hired the persons who already made good, unofficial montages or "Best-Of" videos about them. If I am correct they get a share of the YouTube revenue.

In my opinion this is a great deal for both. The streamer can broaden his audience by having an official stream highlight YouTube channel, the fans have more content and won't miss anything and the amateur video editors are getting a chance to do their passion more professionally (well, most of them had already good, YouTube focused editing skills)

</comment><comment><USER10> This has been happening for quite some time. Especially in MOBA like dota2. There was a problem of other uploaders ripping off original uploaders by just covering their watermarks and such. Turns out, taking streams that's hours in length, editing it to just have "good" stuff and uploading it to youtube is considerable amount of time. Youtube being youtube was even letting re- uploader claim the original upload and such.(As an example) I think SingSing just gave access to his youtube account "WehSing" to the guy who was making clips and they have an arrangement where he pays him (not sure how the arrangement works).

Side observation: these youtube videos seem to have sponsered messages from skin,items etc trading type website.The videos also do raffle so users can "win skins" and such if they like/subscribe/comment. But youtubes recent policy chances apparently frowns up give-aways in exchange for subscribes and like and is causing a new wave of ruckus.

</comment><comment><USER11> Technically, that's how I had found about Asmongold in the first place. The real money -for streamers- is in Twitch. What he's doing, is logical and smart for his bottom-line.

<comment><USER12> Yeah, I found about Asmongold on YouTube as well. Watched some clips, amusing stuff. But where that failed was that I didn't go on Twitch to watch his streams. I think an important question is what's the conversion rate from YouTube to Twitch. And what kind of an incentive is there for people to go on Twitch if the "best bits" go on YouTube anyways?

<comment><USER13> I think it depends on the audience.

Personally I don't watch sports because I don't find it very interesting at all. Seriously, I would rather watch paint dry than most sports.

But I would (and sometimes do) watch a few minute highlight clips of someone who is extremely talented just schooling the competition at a professional level. It caters towards a different type of perspective. I don't care who wins or loses or even what sport it is. I just like seeing people excel at their craft, and it's super interesting to see how big of a skill gap there is between a really legendary player and an average player at the pro level.

A sports network will never get a dime from me, I'll never purchase tickets to a game and I would never wear any merchandise related to that player or sport. But in the end, I'm now aware of that player for something positive and I think for something to really take off that general awareness is critical.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Asmongold made a good move. I follow his stream since 2017 and it's one of the best. He did something interesting that no one (companies, individuals) normally does: he has let several of his fans create their own videos using his image, something unthinkable for today's brands that just for the sake of mentioning them already take you down the content. When these fans already amassed the popularity, instead of canceling them, he made them the best proposal: to be part of their world. This should be an example for all those brands that make things wrong.

<comment><USER15> I always wondered with big brands never did this. Seems like a win-win: let them do free work and the market select for the best to hire.

<comment><USER16> Because it means losing control over their brand. Who knows what some random youtuber will do, who they are, etc. It's just not worth all the legal headache.

<comment><USER15> They do it anyway. And it saves you the cost of the cat and mouse game. You cannot win this unless you create a dictature. There is Mickey porn and fascist Pepa pig anyway. So why not collect the benefit of having real fans making great content instead attacking them.

E.g: nintendo killed an incredible fan made metroid game. It seems so short sighted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> A lot of streamers actually do this. There was a streamer house that did this exact thing a month ago. And also the biggest female streamer also employed an "editor" who was previously ripping content straight from her stream.

<comment><USER18> Are you talking about OfflineTV?

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Does anyone have recommendations for good resources to learn about video editing? Perhaps something specifically geared towards YouTube. I have some videos I want to publish and would like them to seem at least somewhat well- produced.

<comment><USER20> Buy some software and start playing with it, then try to mimic the feel (length of cuts, length of or absence of fades, lighting style, sound levels and EQ, etc.) of a show you like.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Same I've heard (but have no proof of) that clothing brands don't mind knock offs of limited edition items, because that helps to spread the hype. But they do care very much about knock offs of their bread and butter inventory which is mass produced, because that hurts their bottom line.

</comment><comment><USER22> Last year I created an extension just for that. All it does is turn let you know that the video you are watching is a reupload and provides a link to the original.

[https://www.youdupe.app/](https://www.youdupe.app/)

<comment><USER23> Just what we need more MFA spam - did you not think even for on second about the ethics of what you are doing.

<comment><USER24> What's MFA spam?

<comment><USER23> Made for AdSense

<comment><USER24> Thanks! Where's the AdSense component in this? Not doubting you, just want to know how it works.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> > He explained that, in the wake of a YouTube monetization change that targets > videos featuring the same content, a handful of "reuploaders,

Does anyone have a link or more information on the specifics of this change?</comment>


Review: EFiX Dongle Perfectly Transforms PC to Mac - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/5049756/review-efix-dongle-perfectly-transforms-pc-to-mac <comment><USER2> For a certain value of "perfectly". He had to acquire and install a 32 bit copy of Windows Vista to update the firmware of the dongle for it to work with his video card, even then it can only find half of his video RAM. His machine only runs at 800MHz FSB despite being a 1066MHz machine and though he claims it to be a Mac Pro now he is missing one processor (two cores) off the low end configuration. But when he compares his new machine to an old Mac Pro benchmark he can beat it in most categories.

I assume he is stealing the copy of OS X since in his dollars and cents calculations he only counts the cost of the dongle. He is certainly violating the license.

On the more interesting side... the dongle is perhaps just a USB drive (with nifty anti copying technology), but packaged so it has to go inside the computer so you won't be tempted to share it around between machines.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's just a bootable USB flash disk with an EFI emulator on it.

It's not remotely effective as a 'dongle' if there isn't any special hardware -- the best it could do is check the USB device identifier in software as it boots up. Expect a disk image to be available via public trackers soon.

</comment><comment><USER4> So basically if you use hardware identical (or almost identical) to what Apple sells, you can build a machine on your own that runs? Maybe it's just me, but this seems to be more of an exercise in how to stick it to Apple, rather then a legit reason (is there any?) for running osx86.</comment>


A Supersonic Jump, From 23 Miles in the Air - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/science/16tier.html

<comment><USER2> The Red Bull Stratos video is pretty cool, especially in HD - <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyGmTV0q2kY></comment>


Do we really need a wi-fi enabled water pitcher? - <AUTHOR> https://www.brita.com/water-pitchers/infinity <comment><USER2> Oh wow. This has to be a ploy to get people to buy filters more often. We regularly use filters much longer than the window specified because they still work!

Also, days until someone finds a huge security hole and triggers a purchase of 1000 filters for someone...

</comment><comment><USER3> To the mods: might want to add ?locale=us to the URL as non-US users are redirected to the /intl page first.

</comment><comment><USER4> I think the IOT just jumped the shark.

</comment><comment><USER5> AKA "what's wrong with these people?"</comment>


I Started My Online Empire With $0. Yes, It Is Possible - <AUTHOR> http://www.profitbaron.com/i-started-my-online-empire-with-0-yes-it-is-possible/

<comment><USER2> Do we really need another "ZOMGWTFBBQ! I started a blog and made real money on it!" article? Is there anything new here? I did not find it if there was.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't make money on the blog, there are no adverts on it.</comment></comment>