Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons • Hacker News Board

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

#241

Post by nostrademons » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:20 PM UTC

davesque wrote: post #227

grellas wrote: post #219

Extremely wealthy people are just like any other group of people in that they come in all shapes and sizes. Here, one very wealthy individual used his money to fund someone else's lawsuit. He did so secretly. He did so against an organization that had harmed him and against which he presumably wanted payback but that also had done a gratuitously damaging and sleazy act as part of a pattern of sleazy acts upon which i…

Actually, the main point of the article was not really that Thiel had done something wrong. The point was that, given the average person's (not tech nerds, mind you) understanding of silicon valley's utopian dreams, the revelation of Thiel's secrecy is not going to look good. It's a matter of public opinion, whether or not that's fair. I agree, actually. I think big tech would be wise to put its money where its mouth…

TBH, I know a fair number of non-techies, and very few of them know about or care about the Thiel/Gawker case. For the most part, they file it under the heading of "rich people behaving like middle-schoolers" and move on. It seems to be a much bigger deal in media & tech circles; I think many of the reporters covering this are projecting their own fear & anger at Silicon Valley onto the general public.

The press cycles that I actually hear people talking about are the UCLA shootings, gorilla baby, and Donald Trump. Baffling to me, but I think that in the Gandhi cycle, the general public is still stuck between the "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you", and it's only certain industries that are being directly disrupted by Silicon Valley (media & music, particularly) that are in the "then they fight you" stage.

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

#242

Post by further_tech » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:21 PM UTC

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #96

further_tech wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?)

1. What does a person's sexuality have ANYTHING AT ALL to do with VC funding? It blows my mind how much people care about who someone else is screwing!!! That's a private thing. Keep it at home. 2. If Thiel wanted anyone to know, it is his privilege to do so. It doesn't matter that it was not offensive to further_tech. Do you think it MAY have been offensive to Thiel?

1) First Amendment. Have you ever heard about celebrity gossips and VH1?

2) If it was offensive to Thiel, he clearly has an ego problem. Regardless, the article did not ATTACK him or MOCKED his sexuality. Any normal gay person would find other means to deal with this.

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

#243

Post by soperj » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:23 PM UTC

alexandercrohde wrote: post #239

grellas wrote: post #219

Extremely wealthy people are just like any other group of people in that they come in all shapes and sizes. Here, one very wealthy individual used his money to fund someone else's lawsuit. He did so secretly. He did so against an organization that had harmed him and against which he presumably wanted payback but that also had done a gratuitously damaging and sleazy act as part of a pattern of sleazy acts upon which i…

I largely agree with your overall point (that you can't overgeneralize), but I don't think this says "nothing." The fact of the matter is that billionaires wield a lot of power, and a lot of people trust billionaires to consistently behave more rationally and more cautiously than an average person. Personally I think it's scary that any of these giants will weaponize the legal system and use their disproportionate po…

Pretty sure Hulk Hogan won the suit no? If it was a series of illegitimate lawsuits to try to bankrupt a legitimate news organization then I think there would be a case.

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

#244

Post by jdminhbg » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:24 PM UTC

criley2 wrote: post #218

bko wrote: post #17

> Litigation finance is typically a business venture. It doesn’t become charity because a wealthy person uses it as a template for a personal crusade and then insists he’s doing everyone else a favor. Why? Many cases brought by individuals or groups on moral grounds have led the way to better governance. A lot of good work has been done by groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Why should individuals or g…

>"Gawker wasn't speaking truth to power and criticizing individuals. Gawker posted an illegally obtained sex-tape. " Nice deflection! No one cared about the sex tape, they cared about the racist rant contained therein. Tony did not sue Gawker because of a sex tape (although that was the vector Thiel's lawyers chose), he sued them for exposing a racist rant of his. To claim that exposing his racist rant isn't criticiz…

As another poster noted, you have the facts backwards. Gawker posted the racist rant as retribution for Hogan's lawsuit. The sex tape was published because it was a sex tape of a famous person.

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

#245

Post by lotso » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:25 PM UTC

emblem21 wrote: post #176

lotso wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It is a blog designed to shift the Overton Window for Jon Stewart's fanbase into normalizing extreme political agendas. Like Jezebel being pro-feminism. What an extreme political agenda!

Only privileged white people think Jezebel represents feminism. Let me know when they give full-time coverage of the challenges of poverty that routinely face WoC instead of hyperventilating about how sexist a handful of pixels are. Or are feminists only those who have minable consumer behavior? Looks like the Overton window shifting worked on you.

Definitely agree that Jezebel and many other publications in general don't give provide enough perspective of feminism and LGBT issues from PoC (for what its worth, I'm a PoC), but I disagree with the fact that Gawker does not provide some legitimate journalism. Does Gawker have an issue here? Yes. Does Gawker produce a bunch of drivel around issues that are probably trivial in the grand scheme of things? Yes, but I think you could apply the same critique to almost every major liberal news publication. The difference for me is that Gawker has reach and is willing to take on very powerful people (for better or for worse), unlike other publications.

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

#246

Post by st3v3r » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:26 PM UTC

adamlett wrote: post #107

bko wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course money matters in justice, as it matters with everything else. I can't imagine a system in which it doesn't matter. Perhaps if the Bar Association cartel was broken, lawyers would be less expensive, but there needs to be a kind of mechanism to allocate the judicial resources of the state.

You really can't imagine? What if for example the losing party in a law suit was automatically forced to pay the legal expenses of the winning party? That is actually how it works many places outside of the US. It's quite effective at discouraging frivolous lawsuits, and it means that a rich person can't bankrupt a someone by waging a legal attrition war.

All that would do is cause a lot of poor people to not bring lawsuits that are just, out of fear that another company with more money and lawyers will be able to out lawyer them.

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

#247

Post by lotso » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

Teeboo wrote: post #172

lotso wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you be Team Thiel and have these opinions when Thiel financially supported the person who made the acorn videos? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe

Source for Thiel's involvement? Cannot find any reference to Thiel in the associated articles. A better question might be, if you are against Thiel in the matter of Hogan v Gawker; what thinking has led you to a defence of the Gawker behaviour?

>http://www.villagevoice.com/news/conservative-facebook-inves...

Look, I agree Gawker crosses the line time to time and is seen as a garbage blog by many people. What's worrisome to me is that Thiel has orchestrated a shadow campaign based on what to me seems like personal revenge than actually wanting to right a wrong or to discourage unethical behavior.

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

#248

Post by abalone » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

GVIrish wrote: post #134

wrsh07 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither side here looks great. It's reasonable for someone to sue Gawker because of what they publish. It's a bit scary to have someone attempt to take down a publishing company just because of a long-held grudge. That's a template for private censorship by the rich.

To me it would only be scary if a media company was taken down by a rich entity simply litigating them until they couldn't afford to fight the lawsuits anymore. In this case, Gawker lost because they were in the wrong. A media company operating with integrity has nothing to fear here.

That is like saying law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear from discretionary enforcement.

What is your feeling on discretionary enforcement that targets a someone, or a population, because they are undesirable? If such enforcement uncovers crime (but was not motivated by crime), is it just?

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

#249

Post by Zak » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #184

bko wrote: post #17

> Litigation finance is typically a business venture. It doesn’t become charity because a wealthy person uses it as a template for a personal crusade and then insists he’s doing everyone else a favor. Why? Many cases brought by individuals or groups on moral grounds have led the way to better governance. A lot of good work has been done by groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Why should individuals or g…

The subject of the case is a red herring. Typically in these situations, a settlement is reached or insurance covers the damages. That didn't happen. Thiel had an axe to grind against Gawker, invested $10m in the litigation, and pushed the case past settlement offers - even removing a claim that allowed insurance to cover damages. It focused on maximizing the damage to Gawker, which isn't what civil court is typicall…

I won't pretend Thiel's behavior in this matter is unambiguously good, but Gawker is a habitual bad actor, assisting stalkers, violating privacy on numerous occasions for reasons most reasonable people wouldn't consider newsworthy and offering bounties for stolen property. Several of those behaviors are illegal, and the last is likely criminal.

Viewed in a favorable light, Thiel wants to discourage gawker and companies like it by offsetting some of the risk of taking legal action. Viewed in an unfavorable light, he wants to take revenge on Gawker for invading his privacy and that of his friends. Even in the worst case, I can't say I blame him.

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

#250

Post by rayiner » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #17

> Litigation finance is typically a business venture. It doesn’t become charity because a wealthy person uses it as a template for a personal crusade and then insists he’s doing everyone else a favor. Why? Many cases brought by individuals or groups on moral grounds have led the way to better governance. A lot of good work has been done by groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Why should individuals or g…

> The question should be why you need a billionaire to fund a lawsuit to get some sort of justice.

You don't need a billionaire to get "some sort of justice." Bollea could have found someone to do this on contingency. But you may need a billionaire if your goal is to destroy a multi-million dollar media organization.