Please don't take threads further into flamewar (edit: or cross into personal attack).

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I am surprised by your comment. Posting a single sentence without any context other than what appears to be nothing more than a personal insult (how do you know about Jamie's sources of income?) is unusually rude for this community.

Their profile says "Now: Investing/Consulting" which implies salesmanship for income.

Ok, they didn't Google their name, but instead clicked on their profile and researched them "only within the HN web domain." Still feels personal and unnecessary.

Edit: nevermind, they did Google him.

Haha, I just updated my profile after I read that comment, so they definitely Googled my name.

Lambda's customers (students who want to learn how to code and are negatively impacted by this deception) are builders too.

We're talking about a single section in a probably lengthy contract in an area of law (ISAs) that barely existed until a few years ago. I feel like half of HN is picturing a cigar smoking villain, the reality of it is probably far more boring.

People are critical because "world changer builders" can often be found skirting rules that the rest of us have to play in. You're a self described growth hacker, which likely means you too have probably bent a few rules in your day. That's not a criticism of you - you can do your business how you like - but don't be surprised when a bunch of aspiring hackers/techies get annoyed when they see people who do bend the rules to their gain (financial or otherwise) despite having access to the worlds most prominent investors (read -> resources) and seemingly don't do their homework. It challenges the average joe's assumption about what is right and wrong in the tech startup world.

Like does Lambda not have access to Wilson Sonsini lawyers like the rest of their cohort? Or more plausibly, are they just willfully ignorant towards wanting to make sure they play by every rule (e.g. hire lawyers) that comes into their chosen market? Move fast and break things am I right?

> You're a self described growth hacker

I don't describe myself as a "growth hacker" anywhere that I'm aware of.

> don't be surprised when a bunch of aspiring hackers/techies get annoyed when they see people who do bend the rules to their gain (financial or otherwise) despite having access to the worlds most prominent investors (read -> resources) and seemingly don't do their homework.

Not everything is so black and white. What is more likely is that some lawyer gave an opinion that Lambda School's offering could be interpreted as an educational loan and qualify as such (pretty clearly actually, given that the contract was written by a lawyer), and maybe even said that if they got sued here the remedy would likely be to just clarify the definition.

> Like does Lambda not have access to Wilson Sonsini lawyers like the rest of their cohort?

YC has in-house legal counsel now, and Lambda is an old enough company to have their own counsel. In any case, obviously a lawyer wrote the contract and gave an opinion that doesn't agree with your own expert legal opinion.

> Move fast and break things am I right?

Hopefully! We need a lot more of that in the world. More Zuckerbergs, more Travis Kalaniks. The more the better.

> I don't describe myself as a "growth hacker" anywhere that I'm aware of.

Sorry, growth consultant. Maybe it's fair to say the two are interchangeable, maybe not. I'd at least assume the same when someone uses the word growth instead of revenue/sales/marketing. Might help to not pontificate about what the term "growth hacking" is if you don't want to be associated with it: https://jamiequint.substack.com/p/growth-hacking-a-primer

> In any case, obviously a lawyer wrote the contract and gave an opinion that doesn't agree with your own expert legal opinion.

Where did I give my legal opinion? The fact is they had to settle to "undergo a review of its marketing materials to ensure that the information is accurate". This case wasn't about some doubt about legalese, but rather about how they presented themselves, hence the word "deception". It doesn't take a lawyer to know what that word means.

> More Zuckerbergs, more Travis Kalaniks. The more the better.

I think you'll understand why people are being critical of you now.