Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: 30u30.fyi – Is your startup founder on Forbes' most fraudulent list?

30u30.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–117 of 117 posts

Re: Show HN: 30u30.fyi – Is your startup founder on Forbes' most fraudulent list?

#111

Post by fc417fc802 »

lostmsu wrote: post #98
fc417fc802 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Using charm and calculated moves to influence others isn’t a bad thing. It’s the basis of flattery. Flattery doesn't have to be calculated. As to calculated moves, distinct things can fit the same labels. Intent, context, and execution are all important.

I would argue that flattery without calculation is just poorly calculated flattery. Same applies to many other traits in the list. Low achievements people lie right and left just as well. Are cynical when convenient, yada yada. Basically, the list says that these 30s are just like an average Joe, but smart. Which should be a surprise to no one.

They're only the same thing if you ignore intent.

Not everyone lies or is cynical when convenient. Skill, rate of success, and personal ethics are all orthogonal concepts.

Above all, intent matters. I do not treat someone who I perceive to be manipulative the same as I would other people.

Re: Show HN: 30u30.fyi – Is your startup founder on Forbes' most fraudulent list?

#112

Post by wrsh07 »

jedberg wrote: post #76

This is funny, because I know a bunch of 30 under 30s, and I've invested in a few. There is a strong overlap between 30 under 30 and YC founders. I consider myself a good judge of character, because not one of the one's I've invested in has committed fraud!

I somewhat expect that if Forbes is tracking people working on some of the trendiest / most exciting stuff and also trends attract frauds then this is sort of inevitable

I don't have strong feelings about the watch list (use and like several of the products on there so not that worried about them all being frauds), and I think the concept is kind of humorous

Seems easy to read the wrong way though

Re: Show HN: 30u30.fyi – Is your startup founder on Forbes' most fraudulent list?

#113

Post by CobrastanJorji »

worik wrote: post #60
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #56

Seems like there should be an incarcerated stamp for people who were in jail for fraud but later got out, like Shkreli.

Tattooed on their forehead?

I'm not saying they need to remain social pariahs. I'm saying that if you set out to collect a list of people who have doing shady things, and you are explicitly creating a category of those people who have been convicted of crimes and sent to jail, it makes little sense to break that down into "currently in jail" and "done being in jail." They are equally 30 under 30 people who were later convicted of crimes and sent to jail.

Re: Show HN: 30u30.fyi – Is your startup founder on Forbes' most fraudulent list?

#114

Post by jacquesm »

jedberg wrote: post #76

This is funny, because I know a bunch of 30 under 30s, and I've invested in a few. There is a strong overlap between 30 under 30 and YC founders. I consider myself a good judge of character, because not one of the one's I've invested in has committed fraud!

You should get yourself invited into YCs inner circle then, they could do with some help in that department.

Re: Show HN: 30u30.fyi – Is your startup founder on Forbes' most fraudulent list?

#115

Post by lostmsu »

estearum wrote: post #105
lostmsu wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that flattery without calculation is just poorly calculated flattery. Same applies to many other traits in the list. Low achievements people lie right and left just as well. Are cynical when convenient, yada yada. Basically, the list says that these 30s are just like an average Joe, but smart. Which should be a surprise to no one.

No, because smart people realize they are playing an iterated game and that behaving in a way that people identify as Machiavellian is actually suboptimal in the long run. So they're smart enough to be calculated and stupid enough not to be so calculated that they look untrustworthy.

> No, because smart people realize they are playing an iterated game and that behaving in a way that people identify as Machiavellian is actually suboptimal in the long run.

Even if you are right coincidentally (which I wouldn't be so sure about), that's still poor argument assuming you realize your belief in what optimal strategy is what it is - just an educated guess.

Re: Show HN: 30u30.fyi – Is your startup founder on Forbes' most fraudulent list?

#116

Post by lostmsu »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #111
lostmsu wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that flattery without calculation is just poorly calculated flattery. Same applies to many other traits in the list. Low achievements people lie right and left just as well. Are cynical when convenient, yada yada. Basically, the list says that these 30s are just like an average Joe, but smart. Which should be a surprise to no one.

They're only the same thing if you ignore intent. Not everyone lies or is cynical when convenient. Skill, rate of success, and personal ethics are all orthogonal concepts. Above all, intent matters. I do not treat someone who I perceive to be manipulative the same as I would other people.

> all orthogonal concepts

That's my point exactly. I just also assume the % of liars in 30s is the same as in general population by default.

Re: Show HN: 30u30.fyi – Is your startup founder on Forbes' most fraudulent list?

#117

Post by estearum »

lostmsu wrote: post #115
estearum wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because smart people realize they are playing an iterated game and that behaving in a way that people identify as Machiavellian is actually suboptimal in the long run. So they're smart enough to be calculated and stupid enough not to be so calculated that they look untrustworthy.

> No, because smart people realize they are playing an iterated game and that behaving in a way that people identify as Machiavellian is actually suboptimal in the long run. Even if you are right coincidentally (which I wouldn't be so sure about), that's still poor argument assuming you realize your belief in what optimal strategy is what it is - just an educated guess.

Why does that matter?
Post reply on HN