This is awful. And announcing this late on a Friday is what news organizations call “taking out the trash,” publicizing something when people aren’t paying attention.
Clearly and obviously not the part people are upset about. Cmon mate.
You're not taking on LinkedIn, you're just trying to get a bigger piece of that good ole dark pattern pie.
I do think it's an urgent matter and something that can and will come to bite you later- HN Is how I found out myself and I don't really think right now is the moment to play silly games with people's privacy, and not everybody may keep in touch with Triplebyte after their assessments.
You didn’t launch anything. All you had to do was edit the “1 week” part of your email and you could have sent earlier
Also, are you genuinely surprised by this backlash? Did you really think making people’s info public was going to be a popular decision? It’s hard for me to understand how common sense doesn’t prevail in this situation.
How can we trust triplebite with our career, finance information and personal information when you pull these kinds of moves. Make a good product. If it's actually good people will sign up.
I have made a note of this singular action along with your repeated refusal in this thread to acknowledge the harm you are causing.
People don't want their current employer to know about their job searches, period. There's a difference in magnitude between this and the Ashley Madison leak, but it's the same concept. Having a profile at all is a clear sign to your current employer. It doesn't matter what you were doing with it or when you created the account.
I wonder, what future value will you find by giving away more private information? I know by this example that you won't even wait for the consent of your users before you exploit their private information.
The existence of the job search itself is the issue. I'm not sure what's not getting through about that.
Now if this blows up there is an even bigger target on Ammon's back and he may be panicking. That or he is a scumbag. Could be both.
It’s like explaining to your spouse of 5 years why you have a profile on a dating site that started 3 years ago.
Is that OK with you?
You are totally missing the point. You think the change significantly improves your product, but your users perceive the change as a massive breach of trust. Why? Because the underlying JTBD (job-to-be-done) for a lot of engineers is discreet job searching. IOW, for a lot of people, a public TB profile would be like having a private Ashley Madison profile [0] exposed to the public. Ashley Madison was a major source of embarrassment for many when they suffered a breach.
Rather than double-down, might be time to step back a bit. The aphorism "the market's perception is your reality" is especially instructive.
[0] The Ashley Madison metaphor used by this commenter is especially apt: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23280782
There will be some other time in the future where you’ll have to come back to opt out again.
Deletion of your account will be a soft delete, with the account popping back up again and again like a weed.
The sooner these types run out of VC money the better.
But not this way, not forcing all of your users into a public profile by default and making them provide gvmt ids to delete their accounts. Your users gave you their data for a specific purpose, and you took it and used it totally differently. This seems like a great violation of GDPR BTW.
AFAIK unlike the CCPA, there's no private right of action for the GDPR. That is to say, you can't actually sue the violators yourself, you need to complain to your country's national data protection authority, and they have to take action.
Call them on the phone right now before you make more bad decisions.
Classic non-apology apology. You should not be sorry that he thinks it is awful, you should be sorry that it is awful.
Nobody cares about how much work you put into what amounts to an illegal disclosure of personal data.
>In the politician’s apology, you apologize not for the offense itself, but for the fact that what you did offended someone. “I’m sorry you’re a hypersensitive crybaby.”
"I'm sorry you're an idiot."
Not an apology, an insult, and feigning to be apologizing about you (which is doubly insulting).
They are super interesting given the link, so why try and hide them?
Use your downvotes to hide irrelevant posts, not to display your disagreement. (It won’t really display anything)
Thanks for the entertainment!
People in this thread have carefully laid out the dark patterns you are using to trick your customers into allowing you to try and make more money. This is wildly unethical, and coming to defend it on here shows us clearly that you have not thought about this from any perspective but your own.
Good luck with your company, you’re going to need it.
This just jumped out at me. Doesn't every agreement/TOS document these days say they can unilaterally change the terms at any time and your only recourse is to stop using the service?
I mean, I guess my point is not that it's ok, but that it emphasizes how "agreements" in our society don't seem to be actual agreements and we go around with the certainty that most will never be enforced, but then people don't always agree.