News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by cocktailpeanuts on Friday July 22, 2016 @08:54PM (#12147829)
It's sad that nowadays people do whatever they can to get attention and one of the best ways is to capitalize on other people's misfortunes.

I just read through the original Medium post, and I can't really sympathize with any of you guys in this thread saying WeWork is the evil.

This guy hacked into their private API (legal or not doesn't matter), and used that information to write a blog post, and at the bottom writes:

"About Thinknum Thinknum indexes alternative web data for thousands of companies, capturing relevant information for financial analysts to use in their investment process. Thinknum has hundreds of institutional clients across hedge funds, investment banks and corporations."

Basically here's how I see it: this guy wanted attention, so betrayed their business partner (WeWork) and used the private information to get traffic to his product. I can't imagine myself ever doing something like this. What did WeWork do to this guy that harmed him? Every company has difficult times. I'm sure WeWork guys wanted nothing more than to build an organization that helps these little guys, but if I were in their position I would feel extremely sad. They don't deserve to be thrown under the bus by someone they're in partnership with, whom they did nothing bad to.

Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by ugwigr on Saturday July 23, 2016 @05:23PM (#12151059)
I am a cofounder of @Thinknum. Based on what evidence did you come to the conclusion that we hacked into an API? We did not hack into any private API. We had access to the API.
Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by minimaxir on Saturday July 23, 2016 @05:55PM (#12151142)
Having access to the API does not mean that it is public, and that you have permission to do whatever you want with it.
Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by ugwigr on Saturday July 23, 2016 @09:34PM (#12151804)
Having permission to use the API means we did not hack into the API - that is what I claimed. I never claimed that meant we had permission to do 'whatever' we want with it.
Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by gaius on Saturday July 23, 2016 @09:34AM (#12149411)
This guy hacked into their private API

This is called "growth hacking".

Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by cocktailpeanuts on Saturday July 23, 2016 @12:18PM (#12149938)
yuck!
Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by angryasian on Saturday July 23, 2016 @04:59AM (#12148872)
> hacked into their private API

an unpublished api is not the same thing. I think there needs to be more clarification on this, but if its just an unpublished api they've done nothing wrong.

Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by minimaxir on Saturday July 23, 2016 @11:55AM (#12149829)
> its just an unpublished api they've done nothing wrong.

Not correct. A published, documented API comes with instructions on how the API can use used, and how the data can be used. Do not assume that an unpublished/undocumented API is the same, especially when republishing the data.

Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by angryasian on Saturday July 23, 2016 @03:10PM (#12150622)
>A published, documented API comes with instructions on how the API

Agree and since it was undocumented there more than likely were no terms as to how it should be used.

Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by cocktailpeanuts on Saturday July 23, 2016 @12:17PM (#12149931)
Just because there's no law, doesn't mean it's "nothing wrong", this is what annoys me about many people's sentiment here.

Do you think if your friend who pretends to be all friendly with you in front of you went behind your back and talked behind your back for his own profit, you will still say "oh he did nothing wrong, there's nothing in the law that says you can't talk behind friend's back."?

Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by angryasian on Saturday July 23, 2016 @03:12PM (#12150630)
Your friends example makes 0 sense in this context. Weworks had an api. They didn't document and obviously didn't do enough to protect it nor monitor it for unauthorized usage. So someone used it for whatever they wanted to.
Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by cocktailpeanuts on Saturday July 23, 2016 @03:29PM (#12150696)
I don't know if you understand my point but just want to argue for the sake of winning over a conversation, or if you don't even agree with my point to begin with.

My point is, doing whatever you can just because you can is not always the right thing regardless of its legality. It is an asshole behavior on my book to betray someone's trust regardless of whether it's legally ok to do so or not. An asshole is an asshole. Feel free to defend that asshole if you want. I'm just not on that boat.

I have tons of other analogy I would like to use but you'll probably try to make counter arguments about those little expressions instead of the real point so I will stop here.

Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by angryasian on Sunday July 24, 2016 @01:14AM (#12152304)
I think the better analogy for this is like having a secret document on your desk and hoping no one walks in and reads it. Is it in good taste to share it with people, obviously no. Did they do anything wrong, no.
Re:WeWork evicted a startup after it published a negative bl... by cocktailpeanuts on Sunday July 24, 2016 @01:46AM (#12152359)
In my book, doing something of bad taste counts as wrong. I have no idea what kind of definition you're trying to use for "wrong".

If you really think walking into someone's room and taking a secret document on their desk without their permission and publicizing it to fuck them up so you can gain profit from it is NOT wrong, I have nothing more to say.