> The points about Pinker etc are not that these aren't impressive people, but rather what do they have to do with the technology or business of Counsyl other than snob appeal?
Ah, I see your concern. That's an understandable critique coming from outside of this industry. I had similar thoughts before I got more familiar with why we have the advisors that we do. Our industry (that is, genetic testing) is a minefield. Lots of people have strong opinions about it and there are many unanswered ethical questions. We need ethicists as advisors to help us make the right decisions. I can't tell you the number of times I've heard the question "So you're like GATTACA?" (For the record: No!) When your customer base is primed for strong negative reactions you need great minds to help inform both the public and your own decisions.
> What disturbs me is the seemingly coordinated release of the article, with the overwhelmingly positive comments by employees here, and rapid defense of any criticism.
Heh, I promise nothing suspicious is afoot here. TechCrunch came by a few weeks ago in preparation of writing a story. We've all been eagerly awaiting its release and as soon as it was up it got announced on our internal "chatter" email list. As you can imagine, when your startup gets profiled on TC it causes a bunch of excitement and we all immediately went to HN to upvote and comment (incidentally, I think we set off the voting ring detector on one of the submissions since we were all voting from the same IP). We love this place and all believe in what we're doing. Nobody was instructed to say nice things or defend the company.
disclosure: I'm a software developer at Counsyl. The above are just my opinions, I am not speaking on behalf of Counsyl, &c. &c.
Ok, points taken. I understand the optimism .. its usually a great thing, and I could be being overly paranoid. All the same TC is so 00's, just launch yourself on HN.
Regardless of my criticisms, I do hope that every startup working in good faith to change the world does so, so good luck!
Ah, I see your concern. That's an understandable critique coming from outside of this industry. I had similar thoughts before I got more familiar with why we have the advisors that we do. Our industry (that is, genetic testing) is a minefield. Lots of people have strong opinions about it and there are many unanswered ethical questions. We need ethicists as advisors to help us make the right decisions. I can't tell you the number of times I've heard the question "So you're like GATTACA?" (For the record: No!) When your customer base is primed for strong negative reactions you need great minds to help inform both the public and your own decisions.
> What disturbs me is the seemingly coordinated release of the article, with the overwhelmingly positive comments by employees here, and rapid defense of any criticism.
Heh, I promise nothing suspicious is afoot here. TechCrunch came by a few weeks ago in preparation of writing a story. We've all been eagerly awaiting its release and as soon as it was up it got announced on our internal "chatter" email list. As you can imagine, when your startup gets profiled on TC it causes a bunch of excitement and we all immediately went to HN to upvote and comment (incidentally, I think we set off the voting ring detector on one of the submissions since we were all voting from the same IP). We love this place and all believe in what we're doing. Nobody was instructed to say nice things or defend the company.
disclosure: I'm a software developer at Counsyl. The above are just my opinions, I am not speaking on behalf of Counsyl, &c. &c.