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

Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 335 posts

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#211

Post by Shivetya »

GrumpyYoungMan wrote: post #51
zardgiv wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as we're quoting someone with an obvious vested interest, how do you feel about what Gawker points to: "Hillary Clinton’s secret email account, Bill Cosby’s history with women, the mayor of Toronto as a crack smoker, Tom Cruise’s role within Scientology, the N.F.L. cover-up of domestic abuse by players and just this month the hidden power of Facebook to determine the news you see.” It's not so cut and dry, wh…

Just because they published things that have been good journalism allows them carte blanche to publish things that break the law and are morally reprehensible? I find this logic baffling.

the sex tape was reprehensible but outing? Aren't we like ten to twenty years past that point? Its not really different than the press publishing cheating stories these days.

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#212

Post by internaut »

gph wrote: post #64
darawk wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly what is unethical about his conduct here? I really don't understand what problem anyone has with this.

I don't think Thiel is being unethical and I think the decision in this case was valid. That said I do in general have a problem with all this. I mean what does it say about our justice system when a millionaire needs a billionaire to help seek justice for himself. Is that how it's going to be in the future? If you find yourself wronged by some massively wealthy or powerful entity you now have to find an equally mass…

> what does it say about our justice system when a millionaire needs a billionaire to help seek justice > "Yea that's a good way of handling things"

That's my view in a nutshell. Despite our reputation as supposed money grubbers perpetually on the side of Big Business I've yet to meet any libertarian who thinks the poor are less deserving of justice, or as we say here: 'a fair shake'.

The thing is a codebase overflowing with cruft.

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#213

Post by r0h1n »

darawk wrote: post #28
zorpner wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An important reminder of exactly what conduct, on Gawker's part, people are defending. This is a lousy strawman. It's possible to both find Gawker abhorrent and think that Thiel's conduct is deeply unethical.

Exactly what is unethical about his conduct here? I really don't understand what problem anyone has with this.

It's unethical because (a) Thiel was funding an unrelated case merely to exact a personal revenge, (b) he appears to be behind the decision to drop a certain charge from the lawsuit only so that Gawker wouldn't have insurance cover - it shows vindictiveness, (c) Thiel's goal seems to be to bankrupt and shut down Gawker.

Most of all, if this was indeed above board and ethical, why did Thiel feel the need to do this surreptitiously until outed by the NYT (is he going to fund someone to sue them too?).

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#214

Post by internaut »

sangnoir wrote: post #186
Natsu wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's Bollea's rights that would be violated, so he's the one to decide such. I highly doubt he will given the circumstances. That's why I can't take seriously anyone other than him suggesting such.

Other people get to 'decide' at appeal time: I were the judge / on a jury on a case were the complainant was tactically dropping charges with the aim of bankrupting the other party rather than seeking justice, I'd probably decide against them. I find using the justice system in pursuit of revenge at the cost of actual justice rather perverse.

> I find using the justice system in pursuit of revenge at the cost of actual justice rather perverse.

Its major function, crudely, is to prevent Hulk Hogan from visiting Nick Denton in character.

It isn't to prevent the pursuit of revenge. It is to prevent violence and vendetta by having a neutral third party arbitrate. The pursuit of revenge for wrongs committed is the notion and motivation behind the elaborate social institution we call justice.

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#215

Post by mhaymo »

owenversteeg wrote: post #61

I absolutely despise Gawker. The stories they run and the stuff they do would normally mean that I would love for them to be run into the ground. At the same time, they are the only independent online media outlet left in the world. Every other company that once prided itself on being "independent" from the large media network owned by ancient billionaires has now received at least hundreds of millions of dollars in…

Are you implying that Gawker's actions in this case were a twisted form of "editorial integrity", and not page-view-seeking? That is hard for me to believe.

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#216

Post by SixSigma »

darawk wrote: post #197
sangnoir wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other people get to 'decide' at appeal time: I were the judge / on a jury on a case were the complainant was tactically dropping charges with the aim of bankrupting the other party rather than seeking justice, I'd probably decide against them. I find using the justice system in pursuit of revenge at the cost of actual justice rather perverse.

You are misunderstanding the system, I think. If Bollea can win the case, and that judgment would bankrupt Gawker, then under our legal system Bollea has the right to bankrupt them. He also has the right to settle with them if he finds an offer they make advantageous. But that is completely up to him . Whatever he chooses, for whatever reasons he chooses, is justice. By definition. To be honest, if anything is a perv…

Agreed, it is settling which could be considered unjust.

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#217

Post by whatok »

zardgiv wrote: post #10
pkinsky wrote: post #4

>He added: “It’s not for me to decide what happens to Gawker. If America rallies around Gawker and decides we want more people to be outed and more sex tapes to be posted without consent, then they will find a way to save Gawker, and I can’t stop it.” An important reminder of exactly what conduct, on Gawker's part, people are defending. They have no moral high ground, noble principles, or higher purpose. They're scum…

As long as we're quoting someone with an obvious vested interest, how do you feel about what Gawker points to: "Hillary Clinton’s secret email account, Bill Cosby’s history with women, the mayor of Toronto as a crack smoker, Tom Cruise’s role within Scientology, the N.F.L. cover-up of domestic abuse by players and just this month the hidden power of Facebook to determine the news you see.” It's not so cut and dry, wh…

How many of these were things Gawker originally sourced and how many of them were things that they quoted a few paragraphs and added a snarky/self-righteous sentence or two to?

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#218

Post by whatok »

Thought experiment. Let's suppose I was previously the victim of police brutality. Later on in life, I became a billionaire and decided I wanted to do something with my money. I decide to fund every lawsuit in the country against all police departments. Is this okay?

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#219

Post by internaut »

FireBeyond wrote: post #107
darawk wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly what is unethical about his conduct here? I really don't understand what problem anyone has with this.

I wonder whether Hogan/Bollea was advised by "his" counsel about the ramifications of dropping one of the pieces of litigation - a piece that would have increased the ability for Bollea to collect that damage award. As it happens the particular tort that was dropped was the only one that would allow Gawker to use their insurance to cover the liability of the verdict awarded. Thiel's goal is to destroy Gawker. A Gawke…

These are reasonable questions but there is no evidence that Terry Bollea was an unwilling participant. Obviously Thiel wasn't in it for the money but (higher potential) compensation was not necessarily the main motivation for Bollea either. He's already a wealthy man by most standards and probably more concerned about his (Terry) honor and causing his character (Hulk) to lose face because if that hurts the macho public image he's deliberately developed then he loses both future income and public presence.

Some people will find the idea of Bollea having a moral code or honour to be facetious but I'd like to remind them that people have very different definitions of what that means.

Re: Peter Thiel, Tech Billionaire, Reveals Secret War with Gawker

#220

Post by kyrre »

whatok wrote: post #218

Thought experiment. Let's suppose I was previously the victim of police brutality. Later on in life, I became a billionaire and decided I wanted to do something with my money. I decide to fund every lawsuit in the country against all police departments. Is this okay?

yes. what peter thiel is doing is both OK and commendable
Post reply on HN