Live data from Hacker News

Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

nytimes.com

171–180 of 223 posts

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#171
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Mexican isn't a race - it is a nationality. There are people of all races that are Mexican. 2) Curiels parents were illegal immigrants, and exactly the kind of people that Trump says he would deport. 3) Curiel has mentioned in the past (in a NYT article from the early 2000s, I can find a link if you like) that his Mexican heritage has had an impact in his practice of the law. 4) Curiel isn't a robot. Imagine if he…

I'm not sure what you said discounts the fact that what he said is racism. The post he is replying to is asking for an example and he gave one. Also, how is 5 related to this event?

OP was giving reasons why what Trump said in that case was not racism. I'm guessing 5 is related because it shows a sitting supreme court justice saying that her "race"(if we are defining heritage/ethnicity as race) plays an important role in her judicial decisions.

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic income actually is a pretty Libertarian idea IMO. It gives people the choice to spend their money however, unlike food stamps and other benefits. It's gonna be needed eventually as more jobs are automated as well.

I know it is accepted by some where it is definitely seen as at least better than the existing method of providing support. However, a lot of libertarians follow a non aggression principle, which says you can't use force or violence against anyone except to protect their liberty. Basic income isn't compatible with that principle in that you will have to extract that resource by force from other people violating their…

Yeah, very true, I hadn't really thought about it that way. It does violate pure Libertarianism, but it might be necessary in the future.

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#173
post #9

From Peter Thiels perspective its a smart move because he's the only one willing to do something this crazy. This gives him a "monopoly" (as he likes to say) on political access as it relates to the tech world if Trump wins. In short it looks like a bet. Personally I find Trump an archetype of everything I'm trying to get away from in life.... but that is not the point. Also this is just my opinion and maybe their is…

+1 good comment! I read Thiel's Zero to One book twice, and you might have nailed the reason. BTW, off topic, but this campaign is crazy. I don't like either Clinton or Trump, and have mentioned to friends and family that I will leave the presidential part of the ballot in November blank or vote for Jill Stein. It just seems wrong to me to vote for someone I simply don't like. For this honesty, I have several friends…

Your vote actually counts for more, at least in non-swing states. If Stein gets 5% of the popular vote (not electoral collage) the Green party gets funding next election and more recognition as a party. It's the first step to ending the two party system. You're right to vote who you like best, not who you think actually has a chance to win.

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still making generalizations about a large group of people and assuming it's true for a particular person which is what racism is for race.

If that's the case, perhaps we should just use the words that mean the things we want to say, instead of using words that don't mean the things we want to say to say the things we want to say? It isn't a great start when people leveling criticism at someone don't even understand(or care) about the meanings of the words they say.

Yeah I agree, racism is unfortunately used synonymously with discrimination by many people. It's a bit of a pet peeve of mine.

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you said discounts the fact that what he said is racism. The post he is replying to is asking for an example and he gave one. Also, how is 5 related to this event?

OP was giving reasons why what Trump said in that case was not racism. I'm guessing 5 is related because it shows a sitting supreme court justice saying that her "race"(if we are defining heritage/ethnicity as race) plays an important role in her judicial decisions.

> I'm guessing 5 is related because it shows a sitting supreme court justice saying that her "race"(if we are defining heritage/ethnicity as race) plays an important role in her judicial decisions

Specifically on issues of race or gender discrimination, she holds out that her background -- largely through life experiences, though she is expressly less eager to completely discount the possibility of an inherent or cultural contribution than a particular other commentator -- provides an advantage in the quality of her decisions, sure.

Extended quote from the 2001 speech in which the "wise Latina" remark appears (it was later repeated, on the same issue, several times in other speeches by Sotomayor.):

---

In our private conversations, Judge Cedarbaum has pointed out to me that seminal decisions in race and sex discrimination cases have come from Supreme Courts composed exclusively of white males. I agree that this is significant but I also choose to emphasize that the people who argued those cases before the Supreme Court which changed the legal landscape ultimately were largely people of color and women. I recall that Justice Thurgood Marshall, Judge Connie Baker Motley, the first black woman appointed to the federal bench, and others of the NAACP argued Brown v. Board of Education. Similarly, Justice Ginsburg, with other women attorneys, was instrumental in advocating and convincing the Court that equality of work required equality in terms and conditions of employment.

Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

---

Certainly, I don't think its particularly controversial to say that, with otherwise equivalent general "wisdom" (insofar as that can be quantified and compared, something that Sotomayor correctly points out is not necessarily realistic), a person with deeper relevant life experience on the subject being addressed might do better.

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#176

We've already established that you're an idiot. You're just reinforcing the fact if you continue to claim that a "security cordon" is the same thing as a wall.

I don't follow: is the opposition to the wall grounded on a distinction between a cordon and a wall? Is the argument that, "walls are great, but not that high"? If not, then this seems like a distinction without a difference.

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#178
post #176

We've already established that you're an idiot. You're just reinforcing the fact if you continue to claim that a "security cordon" is the same thing as a wall.

I don't follow: is the opposition to the wall grounded on a distinction between a cordon and a wall? Is the argument that, "walls are great, but not that high"? If not, then this seems like a distinction without a difference.

Cordon just means an imaginary area patrolled by guards. Anyone can declare a cordon without building anything or deploying anybody.

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#179
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow: is the opposition to the wall grounded on a distinction between a cordon and a wall? Is the argument that, "walls are great, but not that high"? If not, then this seems like a distinction without a difference.

Cordon just means an imaginary area patrolled by guards. Anyone can declare a cordon without building anything or deploying anybody.

The Guatemala-Mexico security cordon has no structures or deployed patrols?

Re: Peter Thiel’s Embrace of Trump Has Silicon Valley Squirming

#180
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, Trump and Hillary aren't that different. He's a little less of a warhawk, speaks his mind, and is pro-2A. The last one is almost enough on its own for me, given Hillarys stance on that issue.

But he lies so much and makes so many factual errors how can you trust him on anything? His pro-torture position seems to show disregard of the 8th amendment is he really going to protect the others and is the 2A that much more important to you than all the others? I'm no saying that you should like Hillary but congress will probably block gun reform as always and while she spins and dissembles at times it isn't the…

> But he lies so much and makes so many factual errors how can you trust him on anything?

This applies to Hillary too, you know? The most awful thing about this election is that neither candidate is trustworthy. They are both blatant liars.

Post reply on HN