91–100 of 117 posts
I think a reason it so over represented by douchebags is because the awardees — unlike McArthur winners — are very involved in the nomination process and work to game the system.
https://thegenzeoclub.substack.com/p/forbes-30-under-30-nomi...
Some of these really don't make sense. The implication that Cursor is a fraudulent company is a little weird considering they actually have real users. Like sure, is it a VS code fork with agents stapled to it? Yes. But are they on the same scale as most of the people mentioned? Ehh probably not. It reads more like a hit piece from someone with a grudge against random SF companies than anything else.
> The implication that Cursor is a fraudulent company is a little weird To my reading the premise of the site is pretty straightforward: 30 Under 30 is a warning sign, not a positive signal. Therefore, as a company with 4 founders who were in 30 Under 30, Cursor is a risk. It’s a silly little satire site, there’s a danger of reading into it too deeply.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s because it’s slightly obvious it was vibe(coded && written). Starts looking like low effort libel, punching down, more than some clever joke x a statistics exercise Put another way: the Drake equation, this ain’t.
Punching down? To companies worth twenties of billions of dollars? The impulse to label everything a “startup” and thus a smolbean little guy is fascinating.
Alternatively, you think it's okay to make up stuff about young people because they got a seed round. That's stock-human behavior but it's not rational or kind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Punching down? To companies worth twenties of billions of dollars? The impulse to label everything a “startup” and thus a smolbean little guy is fascinating.
Maybe you missed the bottom section? There's plenty of comments taking umbrage at it. Alternatively, you think it's okay to make up stuff about young people because they got a seed round. That's stock-human behavior but it's not rational or kind .
My point, as I think was clear, was that criticising the founders of billion dollar companies via satire is not “punching down” by any means. Nor is it libel. You are throwing words around without meaning.
(and “young people”, there we go with the smolbean stuff again. If they’re too young to face criticism then they’re too young to be CEOs of billion dollar companies. You can’t have it both ways)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, I think selection effects are more prevalent than an earnest good faith actor who got swept up into perverse incentives. Forbes 30u30 is a clarion call for the most ambitiously Machiavellian among us. They’re not subject to any different incentives than the rest of us. But they’d certainly have a higher rate of sociopaths and more garden variety Machiavellis than genpop.
I was curious to pin down the definition of Machiavellian: > Manipulation & Deceit: Using charm, lies, and calculated moves to influence others. > Lack of Empathy: A cold, detached, and unemotional demeanor that disregards the feelings of others. > Strategic Long-Term Planning: Unlike impulsive psychopaths, high-Machs are patient, planning, and can delay gratification to ensure success. > Cynical Worldview: Believing…
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, I think selection effects are more prevalent than an earnest good faith actor who got swept up into perverse incentives. Forbes 30u30 is a clarion call for the most ambitiously Machiavellian among us. They’re not subject to any different incentives than the rest of us. But they’d certainly have a higher rate of sociopaths and more garden variety Machiavellis than genpop.
30u30 are an artifact of networking not directly Machiavellianism/sociopathy; pals promote them (often as children of their pals) to the list.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was curious to pin down the definition of Machiavellian: > Manipulation & Deceit: Using charm, lies, and calculated moves to influence others. > Lack of Empathy: A cold, detached, and unemotional demeanor that disregards the feelings of others. > Strategic Long-Term Planning: Unlike impulsive psychopaths, high-Machs are patient, planning, and can delay gratification to ensure success. > Cynical Worldview: Believing…
> 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.
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.
What is a person who makes a site like this thinking about when they do it? What is their motivation? What are they trying to achieve?
They’re pointing out fraud. Is that a bad thing now? I think it’s fair game to point out that the the 30 under 30 hype list is just that: hype. And there’s often very little substance underneath hype. And sometimes there’s outright deceit under it.
I have encountered many instances of fraud being highlighted. Generally it is a valuable journalistic service that I have no problem with. Most don't send the message that they have a vindictive axe to grind like this one does.