I read this story exactly the opposite: it doesn’t have to be perfect at the start. You just build something people want, and then hire a team to improve the back end (without destroying what people wanted it for in the first place).

Major companies have had security issues (such as Adobe) but that doesn’t make them a fraud.

Don't see whats fraudulent about building something people want, use and presumably get value from.

"Really nice person who wants you to succeed."

Well they have already succeeded so we're good here.

You seem the opposite of "chill".

I'm a NYer.

What is fraudulent about that?

Plain text passwords.

Plain text passwords are a poor security practice, not fraud per se.

There’s no sense it was intentional, nor that any customers were impacted.

I used the Adobe example since 38 million customers had personal information exfiltrated in 2013 (including me).

Adobe knew better (or should have). But that still is not fraud.

They have enhanced their security practices since then, and I am still a customer of theirs.

FWIW, at that time Adobe was already properly handling the password - what leaked was an old backup. Where passwords were hashed, just not properly.

Adobe did mess up on that one - it's just not on the same level, not even close. The main thing that makes it worse was that Adobe has a lot of customer data (likely unlike this guy, who probably didn't have many customers)

I didn’t have any idea what I was doing. When my cofounder arrived and looked at the code base... he looked like he was going to puke. Took him less than 5 minutes to decide that there wasn’t even a line worth keeping.

I don't think you understand the definition of the words that you are saying. Consider looking up the definition of e.g. fraud

I'm not bound by your rules, but thanks.