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

Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 383 posts

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#81

Post by saiya-jin »

roghummal wrote: post #40
saiya-jin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is getting too much into "... and he said, and then she said...". was something wrong done? is there some sort of justice being done? no need to go deeper than this, unless it's one's hobby to discuss famous people's private lives

Thanks for contributing! It's rare that someone contributes without adding anything worth reading. YOU are BETTER. RARE isn't just how you take your eggs. You're not a hypocrite. You're a trendsetter. It's so lame to discuss famous people's lives. Especially when they aren't SF-famous! You have set the tone for this thread and HN is better for it. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

well, thank you too :)

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#82

Post by actsasbuffoon »

further_tech wrote: post #72
plehoux wrote: post #14

This is totally BS. Litigation finance has been around for years, and has been done by all kind of people and organizations for all kind of purposes. Thiel is rich, he does things, there is no causality with 'tech' here. > Maybe it’s time for Silicon Valley to tone things down. To admit that, no, the Valley can’t solve all human problems -- not even close -- and never will. W T F.

> WTF I don't understand your indignation. Is it that obvious to you the Valley can solve ALL human problems?

Not the original poster, but I read the comment differently.

> Maybe it’s time for Silicon Valley to tone things down. To admit that, no, the Valley can’t solve all human problems -- not even close -- and never will.

I have a few problems with this quote. First, I don't think the people of SV ever got together and said, "We're going to solve all human problems!" The author is putting words into other people's mouths in order to make them look ridiculous.

Second, what does this quote have to do with the topic at hand? This is a discussion of whether or not it's okay for a billionaire to help fund someone else's litigation, and it suddenly veers into a weird attack on all of SV.

As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, the author of the article is a paid media relations person. This probably isn't journalism, it's more likely unmarked native advertising paid for by Gawker to drum up outrage in preparation for appealing the verdict of the lawsuit. I really thought Reuters was better than this.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#83

Post by sparkzilla »

Let's just stop the name calling. Theil is not a "robber-baron". He created his wealth by providing services in the free market for others' benefit. He neither robbed, nor did he gain his money through inheritance.

He did not use government funds to finance the Gawker case. He used his own money on a cause he believed in. If you don't like it, give your money in Gawker's defence, or work to a better solution: limiting the amount of damages a jury can award in such cases.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#84

Post by actsasbuffoon »

bionsuba wrote: post #80
further_tech wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> WTF I don't understand your indignation. Is it that obvious to you the Valley can solve ALL human problems?

No one ever said it would. There's a term for this (I forget it now), but what this person is doing is setting up an easy target to be torn down by creating a ridiculous opinion no one has. Then the author can be seen as the victor; it's really dishonest, and it should make everyone question the veracity of the whole article.

I believe you're looking for "Straw Man Argument": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man_argument

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#85

Post by sseveran »

maxerickson wrote: post #62
yummyfajitas wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe it was wrong for rich people to fund (via the Southern Poverty Law Center intermediary) Keenan vs Aryan Nations, on the basis of hating Aryan Nations? https://www.splcenter.org/seeking-justice/case-docket/keenan... If not, why not?

I bet it would be way less controversial if it came out that Thiel was openly funding an independent group that was focused on ethics in web journalism.

why? The result is the same. He probably could have used an "independent" organization but why bother? Organizations are only as independent as their control of their own funding. He could have just said to some organization "Here is the money. You will spend it suing gawker after taking your overhead." Personally I don't think this is a large issue. Neither SV nor in constitution is at stake here.

If he was suing The National Enquirer for publishing a sex tape and not gawker would we really still be discussing this?

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#86

Post by dimino »

further_tech wrote: post #73
supergirl wrote: post #11

I wonder what's the connection, if any, between the author of the article and Gawker. If he's the same guy I found on Linkedin, he seems to be working for some kind of PR company for hire; also confirmed by the article footnote. I hope nobody takes this article only for what it is but also questions why it is.

Even if so, I'd rather move beyond the Ad hominem.

It's not an ad hominem, because the article isn't making an argument, and someone questioning his motives isn't saying he's wrong because of his motives.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#87

Post by CaptainZapp »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #78
devishard wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't feel bad for Gawker at all. I do, however, feel concerned that a rich person like Thiel can buy litigation. That's a highly dangerous capability. He's using that power for good in this case, but I doubt he always will.

So, do you also disagree when the ACLU backs a lawsuit? Or, say, when the EFF does?

Usually they don't do that anonymously.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#88

Post by further_tech »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #37

Wait a minute. Gawker is no righteous hero here. Let's see if I understand correctly. Gawker outs Thiel (which is nobody's business, yet Gawker decided to make it people's business). Gawker at some point later posts an illegal SEX tape (again, nobody's business). Now, we're supposed to feel sorry for Gawker because Thiel wants to help out another person who was WRONGED by Gawker? Wow. Just wow.

Have you seen Gawker's piece on Thiel? (http://gawker.com/335894/peter-thiel-is-totally-gay-people)

Surely broke his privacy, but by no means was it offensive.

I get how HOGAN would be mad, but this seems like a whining billionaire without better ideas for his money. (irony much?)

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#89

Post by mark_l_watson »

What? People view Silicon Valley as idealistic and almost utopian?

Give me a break. Stupid article.

When I look at all the evil that the Economic Royalty have done to the world since the beginning of the Enlightenment, the funding of a law suit seems like nothing in comparison.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#90

Post by Artistry121 »

kelseyfrancis wrote: post #48
Xylakant wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody pretended so - which is the whole point. Thiel could have given his money to a foundation that openly sponsors lawsuits for media victioms. That would haven been for the public good. Instead he chose to sponsor the lawsuit (and other lawsuits) against gawker in secret because he feels wronged by them with the intent of punishing them. And that's not in the public interest because it can be considered a form of…

>it can be considered a form of vigilantism No. Vigilantism is extralegal. A lawsuit is by definition not vigilantism.

Boom! Exactly. He did something good using available means. Pragmatism is the ultimate move to make good things happen in the short term and he did it.

Had he not the risk of other people's information being leaked for the entertainment of the masses could be higher.

Post reply on HN