The uBeam FAQ

[brainwash]

It does sound like there is some personal stuff involved there and/or some missed business opportunity. However, it's just a reminder that anything you post on the Internet will follow you forever.
2/ Why do these people have to underline their PC in their profile? I thought their business was to make money, does PC somehow give a business advantage? Or does it draw in more investors? Or is it just a friendly warning?
3. Fighting in PUBLIC internet is worse than even doing it over the company email. Are followers impressed somehow by displays of bravado? Why not launch into a private email discussion or (gasp) a face-to-face one?

That was just my small rant on how I don't understand this newfangled stuff.

[daqq]

And as many people predicted how this would end, out comes to the misogyny card 

Next up: How racist is math? Is gravity discriminating fat people?

[Fungus]

So, Matt Ocko wants me to take down my tweet of the screen shot of his tweet above:

What a wuss.

PS: Is Meredith on Twitter all day, leaping in whenever anybody says anything bad about her?

[mikeselectricstuff]

And as many people predicted how this would end, out comes to the misogyny card 

Next up: How racist is math? Is gravity discriminating fat people?

Apparently, carbon fibre is sexist :
https://www.avoiceformen.com/featured/crazy-academic-feminist-thinks-carbon-fibers-are-misogynistic
Original paper : http://research.gold.ac.uk/11135/

[EEVblog]

2/ Why do these people have to underline their PC in their profile? I thought their business was to make money, does PC somehow give a business advantage? Or does it draw in more investors? Or is it just a friendly warning?

It's important to remember that VC's spend other people's money.
Their entire business is built around networking and not pissing people off or rocking the boat, otherwise the money might dry up.
Seems like in this case he spoke the truth and what he really thought (that uBeam numbers didn't add up, and Perry was too snarky), and then realised that could potentially hurt his business (no doubt people he knows invested in uBeam). Hence his request for me to delete my tweet so it doesn't show up in his timeline.

3. Fighting in PUBLIC internet is worse than even doing it over the company email. Are followers impressed somehow by displays of bravado? Why not launch into a private email discussion or (gasp) a face-to-face one?

He asked me to take the discussion to private PM (I didn't), and a few hours his tweets were all gone.

[EEVblog]

What a wuss.
PS: Is Meredith on Twitter all day, leaping in whenever anybody says anything bad about her?

Don't know, she blocked me way back 
I need to Shift-Ctrl-N to watch the show.

[daqq]

And as many people predicted how this would end, out comes to the misogyny card 

Next up: How racist is math? Is gravity discriminating fat people?

Apparently, carbon fibre is sexist :
https://www.avoiceformen.com/featured/crazy-academic-feminist-thinks-carbon-fibers-are-misogynistic
Original paper : http://research.gold.ac.uk/11135/

...wow... just wow...I mean, wow?

[brainwash]

3. Fighting in PUBLIC internet is worse than even doing it over the company email. Are followers impressed somehow by displays of bravado? Why not launch into a private email discussion or (gasp) a face-to-face one?

He asked me to take the discussion to private PM (I didn't), and a few hours his tweets were all gone.

Well, I don't mean your discussion, I think that was pretty civil on both sides.

And as many people predicted how this would end, out comes to the misogyny card 

Next up: How racist is math? Is gravity discriminating fat people?

Apparently, carbon fibre is sexist :
https://www.avoiceformen.com/featured/crazy-academic-feminist-thinks-carbon-fibers-are-misogynistic
Original paper : http://research.gold.ac.uk/11135/

Ok, I was initially ready to dismiss this, as "avoiceformen" sounds pretty biased. But the article seems written by a woman. Then I started reading the abstract and article paper and it made references to masculinity, which doesn't sound too bad/biased, it's just a quality, like 'sensual'. I thought it would be one of those wank studies on literature that we had to do in highschool and read into stuff that wasn't there. But then the article paper shows a standard picture of a cyclist crossing the finish line and adds this:

"For example, the advertising image selling bicycle helmets (Fig. 1) literally positions the bicycle as the penis/phallus, the man triumphantly holding his hands in the air, framing the object between his legs as the centre of his own and others’ attention. The man pictured is producing himself around the object in between his legs. the semiotics of the image suggests that the bike (like the man’s penis?) is to be celebrated for helping him dominate other men. This is a clear example of power being produced by matter (the light, fast nature of the carbon fibre) and by bodies (the winning man) and through competitive intimacy between men."

Wow.
So my executive summary: the man looks like a dick, points to his dick, rides the bicycle between his legs because he wants to hump other men.

[EEVblog]

More from Matt Ocko
Again he wants me to delete information from one part of the Internet (Twitter), but not another (this forum).

[EEVblog]

More on why he wants me to delete the tweet, and Paul's forum post:

[Rbastler]

More from Matt Ocko
Again he wants me to delete information from one part of the Internet (Twitter), but not another (this forum).

Woudn't count this forum as a third party ?

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[StillTrying]

"the founder has the right for her work to be vetted by customers at this point,"

I can see a slight problem there.

After 6 years and $30m have uBeen sold even $0.01 yet. (selling old furniture doesn't count!)

[Fungus]

Oh, dear, he's making it much worse!   

At this rate it'll be on every major news site within 24 hours.

[Fungus]

More from Matt Ocko
Again he wants me to delete information from one part of the Internet (Twitter), but not another (this forum).

How will he delete it from the internet archive?

[EEVblog]

"the founder has the right for her work to be vetted by customers at this point,"
I can see a slight problem there.
After 6 years and $30m have uBeen sold even $0.01 yet. (old furniture doesn't count!)

Nope, and they aren't even close to a pre-production prototype.
Also, they refuse to publish any information on efficiency or any real performance data, nor have they ever addressed any technical criticism.

Matt's problem is that he has broken the golden rule of VC club, you don't diss another VC's investments. Because the entire VC process is predicated on the need to sell to the next (non VC) sucker up the money pyramid. So you don't ruin another VC's chances at doing that, that's bad form.
uBeam are still looking for the next bigger round of funding (probably desperately so at this point), so it wouldn't surprise me if someone has tapped him on the shoulder and reminded him of that.

[helius]

VCs depend entirely on "deal flow": a constant stream of entrepreneurs coming to them to pitch business plans. If for whatever reason a VC annoys a founder, they risk getting a bad reputation and founders deciding to pitch somewhere else.
This is also the reason it's so hard to get an honest "no" from a VC. They prefer to string you along with vague encouragement, never telling you they have already invested in a rival company to yours. The more they can enforce a one-way flow of real, actionable information, the better their position is. Telling you what they really think is out of character.

[Howardlong]

Something I was wondering whether to draw attention to or not is the positive discrimination Perry has used to her advantage, but now she's pulled the sexism/misogyny card, it seems a reasonable time to do so.

At least one of her VC investors, and uBeam board member, Mark Suster, appears to regard her blondeness as a key reason to invest, meanwhile taking the opportunity to throw in a string of pejorative stereotypes in the process. Had the Jimmy Choo been on the other foot, you can be sure there'd have been an outrage. Irrespective I find the following statement to be rather cringeworthy to say the least,and ironically, rather awkward:

Were she a shy, pimply, awkward male engineer with a pocket protector she would fit an archetype that would make sense to observers. But she’s not. She’s confident, communicative, outspoken, young and blonde.

(From Suster's blog https://bothsidesofthetable.com/what-is-it-like-to-wake-up-and-have-the-press-ready-to-torpedo-your-business-351f27ca6d67)

If I were a betting person, I'd also suggest that Marissa Mayer, among others, wouldn't have invested either, had the self-described "inventor" not been female.

While I have been wary to bring this up, I strongly suspect she'd never have received funding had she been a bloke.

[Fungus]

VCs depend entirely on "deal flow": a constant stream of entrepreneurs coming to them to pitch business plans. If for whatever reason a VC annoys a founder, they risk getting a bad reputation and founders deciding to pitch somewhere else.

From the exchange with Meredith it looks like she'd already rejected him, so... 

While I have been wary to bring this up, I strongly suspect she'd never have received funding had she been a bloke.

It's certainly a weird game of cat and mouse they play. One side trying to pull a scam (Meredith), the other trying to build a reputation as a "winner" by choosing the right sort of scammers.

The quality of the product doesn't seem to enter into it. It's all about appearances.

I assume all the worthwhile ideas go right past the VC system, they don't really need it.

[EEVblog]

Something I was wondering whether to draw attention to or not is the positive discrimination Perry has used to her advantage, but now she's pulled the sexism/misogyny card, it seems a reasonable time to do so.

At least one of her VC investors, and uBeam board member, Mark Suster, appears to regard her blondeness as a key reason to invest, meanwhile taking the opportunity to throw in a string of pejorative stereotypes in the process. Had the Jimmy Choo been on the other foot, you can be sure there'd have been an outrage. Irrespective I find the following statement to be rather cringeworthy to say the least,and ironically, rather awkward:

Were she a shy, pimply, awkward male engineer with a pocket protector she would fit an archetype that would make sense to observers. But she’s not. She’s confident, communicative, outspoken, young and blonde.

(From Suster's blog https://bothsidesofthetable.com/what-is-it-like-to-wake-up-and-have-the-press-ready-to-torpedo-your-business-351f27ca6d67)

If I were a betting person, I'd also suggest that Marissa Mayer, among others, wouldn't have invested either, had the self-described "inventor" not been female.

While I have been wary to bring this up, I strongly suspect she'd never have received funding had she been a bloke.

Careful now, Matt Ocko has already basically implied that all her critics like me, Paul, the tech media, and everyone here are misogynist 
Everyone's so misogynistic that she got $28M

[EEVblog]

If I were a betting person, I'd also suggest that Marissa Mayer, among others, wouldn't have invested either, had the self-described "inventor" not been female.

A huge part of the VC game is publicity, and you get publicity by being different and being able to make a juicy tech headline. Not fitting existing sterotypes plays a big part in that. They know this, she had a good back story the media would lap up - no engineering background, just "stumbled" upon the idea, struggled against the expert naysayers, won a contest, and yep, you guessed it, being female and attractive in media photos.
People want to believe that someone who doesn't fit the sterotype can be a success.
Not misogyny, it can in fact be a huge advantage to female in the business, it's the realistic world of how the media works. And it happens to those technically worthy and based on merit, and also those not.
It could happen in other appearance ways too, like having orange hair and face tattoos or something, the media want a photo and a story headline people will click on.
Of course that's not to say her tenacity, gift of the gab, and belief in the idea didn't pay a big part. She wasn't handed $28M on a silver platter just for being female.
Had she been an ultrasonics researcher at MIT with no backstory struggle it's unlikely she would have gotten the money either. Her entire TED talk is a textbook narcissistic rant about that.

[brainwash]

Were she a shy, pimply, awkward male engineer with a pocket protector she would fit an archetype that would make sense to observers. But she’s not. She’s confident, communicative, outspoken, young and blonde.

(From Suster's blog https://bothsidesofthetable.com/what-is-it-like-to-wake-up-and-have-the-press-ready-to-torpedo-your-business-351f27ca6d67)

...
While I have been wary to bring this up, I strongly suspect she'd never have received funding had she been a bloke.

I hate to say it but it's taken a bit out of context. He says that she is a geek on the inside but looks nothing like one. That's all I could read.
However, that's just his description, a true geek would use the facts and science, which doesn't seem the case here. I feel the geek word is being thrown around too lightly these days, without being earned. Just like 'rockstar'.
I also agree with Dave, looks make a sale a lot of the time, it's just how stuff has worked since forever. Any attractive person will get a lot more attention and have a definite advantage. Or is that also discrimination? I should file a complaint or write a paper, feeling left outside as a pimply nerd...

[EEVblog]

I hate to say it but it's taken a bit out of context. He says that she is a geek on the inside but looks nothing like one. That's all I could read.
However, that's just his description, a true geek would use the facts and science, which doesn't seem the case here. I feel the geek word is being thrown around too lightly these days, without being earned. Just like 'rockstar'.

The word Nerd is reserved for this purpose.

I also agree with Dave, looks make a sale a lot of the time, it's just how stuff has worked since forever. Any attractive person will get a lot more attention and have a definite advantage. Or is that also discrimination?

It's definitely not sexist in any case, as it applies pretty equally to men and women.
Due to the politically correct culture these days kids are being taught that you shouldn't use your looks etc to try and get ahead. Bull, you should use every advantage you have in life. If you are tall, look like Brad Pitt, speak like Tony Robbins etc then you are a fool not to take advantage of that. Doesn't mean you'll be a success, but everything helps you up the ladder.

But anyway, enough about that, how about that ridiculous concept of consumer power transfer by ultrasound...

[Howardlong]

Were she a shy, pimply, awkward male engineer with a pocket protector she would fit an archetype that would make sense to observers. But she’s not. She’s confident, communicative, outspoken, young and blonde.

(From Suster's blog https://bothsidesofthetable.com/what-is-it-like-to-wake-up-and-have-the-press-ready-to-torpedo-your-business-351f27ca6d67)

...
While I have been wary to bring this up, I strongly suspect she'd never have received funding had she been a bloke.

I hate to say it but it's taken a bit out of context.

Yeah, I was afraid that someone might suggest that, but I think that anyone who uses the word "blonde" nowadays as a means to justify they deserve different treatment is asking for trouble. I just found Suster's comment unnecessary, ill conceived, and rather creepy, particularly bearing in mind the nature of the current wave of criticism levelled in the tech industry, and VCs in particular.

I was trying to be extremely careful with my comments, as I personally find it frustrating that half of the population feel that STEM isn't for them, on the face of it due to an accident of birth. While I firmly believe that everyone needs to be encouraged into STEM careers, sugar daddy style handouts that Suster's enabled and promoted I find rather distasteful, especially as it's not even his money, but I also regretfully understand that appearance (as opposed to substance) is unfortunately a key part of the VC modus operandi.

Anyway, I agree, let's get back to the technology.

[brainwash]

I also avoided the heavy subject, but here it goes: I come from a former 3rd world country, now battling around the 2nds, even though my profile says Germany.
The issue there is: there is still domestic violence with a definite bias on men against women, there is still tacit discrimination ("a woman can't handle this job") and other stuff that's fuel for the current 'war on sexism'. But in the IT and other STEM fields the women have an almost 50% ratio of jobs. They fight harder because they know that it might not be a level field. Also, this kind of discrimination I've seen duplicated, in closed quarters, throughout the world, from 1st to 3rd world countries. Having a strict law, a strong movement or any other deterrent against this just softens the voices, almost quiets them, but it does not shut them up. Get people drunk or angry and you will know their true opinion.
My point is, all this talking about 'potential discrimination', 'meeting the quota' and other stuff happens only in 1st world countries, but achieves almost nothing, quite the opposite. On the other hand, in my home country, economics, fair game and competition helps sort these things out. Again, I'm talking about 'potential', under-the-veil, my-father-told-me stuff, not the evident infractions (like O'Reilly). For the former, it is your responsibility to curb the bias, for the latter is a matter of justice.
Now think about the female job share in US or Germany (as examples) in the STEM or IT field (with which I am familiar) which is hovering below 15%.

If you (as a random reader) are still nodding your head in disbelief, come meet me, or chat with me on private and I will take you on a tour. I'll happily admit to living in a dream, if that's the case.

SUMMARY: in situations where economics and fair prevail, the best people will be chosen for the position, regardless of gender, race or disabilities. If you try to skew that distribution it might end up going the wrong way.

[Bud]

Being fat nullifies the advantage of being blonde.