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

Untitled topic

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 766 posts

Re: undefined

#111

Post by api »

internaut wrote: post #72
nostrademons wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much all of Thiel's investing thesis is to invest in things that are statistically on track to fail, but whose payoff if they succeed is greater than most people imagine. PayPal, Facebook - both of these were terrible ideas when they came out (along with a number of other ones that did, in fact, fail). His idea is that people consistently mis-price risk, and so investing in a portfolio where everyone else thin…

That is one plausible interpretation but there are several layers to this. It is not a coincidence that RenTech and Thiel are supporting Trump. I hesitate to be explicit about what I think is actually going on but if you've read my posts on the Stagnation Hypothesis or watched Peter Thiel's videos on Youtube (low view counts, so I know you're not watching them!) you'll know there is a rather disturbing big picture wh…

Are you referring to his thesis that globalization without significant technological advance will lead to a Malthusian catastrophe?

I have considered this in wondering why he would support Trump.

Re: undefined

#112

Post by threeseed »

Tsugumo wrote: post #93
fixxer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not betting on a Trump presidency, but I'm fascinated at what the electorate is going to look like in the general. We've been basing so much of the polling on projections over 2012/2008 turnout. I would not be surprised if the final margin is within 2 points.

Super Tuesday voter turnout in 2008: 8,228,763 for Democrats, 5,025,685 for Republicans. 2016: 5,557,243 Democrats, 8,307,884 Republicans If I was a betting man, I'd put my money on Trump. I think it will be close. That said, I also believe electoral fraud could decide the election.

That doesn't make much sense. Super Tuesday primaries included all likely Republican voters. But Trump only has the support of about 40% of them and nothing he has done to date indicates that number is changing.

And there is no evidence that electoral fraud is likely to decide the election. In fact it's looking like efforts to prevent it e.g. in Indiana are far more likely to influence the election.

Re: undefined

#113

Post by morgante »

internaut wrote: post #106
morgante wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about typical developers. Lots of top technology leaders have come out vehemently against Trump, [0] including Sam Altman, who I would definitely include in "the people who really run Silicon Valley." [1] To be clear, I'm not disputing Thiel's politics. I think he's right about a lot of things. They have near-zero overlap with Trump's policies. Trump is easily the least libertarian Republican presiden…

I believe you're missing a puzzle piece. Take the time out to watch a few of his Youtube videos. They are long and have very low view counts but they're important.

Sorry, but the priors on a random Internet commentator insisting that the only way to understand his farfetched, radical theory is to watch hours of videos are not very positive.

It would be helpful if you could provide a rational and concise summary here. I'd genuinely like to learn more.

Re: undefined

#115

Post by stephenboyd »

bobsgame wrote: post #38

I'm not very political and I haven't decided who to vote for yet, but I don't understand why the tech industry is so anti-Trump. He seems like a relatively sincere and smart guy to me, and some of his policies seem to be better for business. Is it because of tougher immigration laws? Are there other reasons based on his policies, or is it mostly just emotional?

It's a false dichotomy to suggest that opposition to Trump is either based on disagreements with his public policy statements or 'just emotional'.

Sometimes people are just not qualified for a position, even if they can occasionally say some of the right answers at the interview.

If a tech company is considering hiring a CEO or CTO who has ruined several companies, refused to do business with black people until specifically ordered by a court, sexually harassed dozens of subordinates, publicly and verifiable lied about important topics on a regular basis, or bragged about being exploiting his fame to get away with groping women, it doesn't really matter which tech stack they've been praising. Trump has actually done all of those things, if you don't already know.

He actually bought a teenage beauty pageant and then frequently ogled and sexually assaulted (nonconsensually groped and kissed) the contestants backstage. That should tell you everything you need to know about his attitude towards abuses of power and how he'd exploit the Presidency. Please don't dismiss this stuff as 'just emotional'.

And you can hardly tell what his policies are anyway because he contradicts his own statements on most topics.

On the policies that have been clear, the tech industry is opposed to Trump for the same reasons they're opposed to other Republicans. If you're wondering why he's more unpopular in the industry than a generic replacement-level Republican, it's for the same reasons that he's exceptionally unpopular among Republicans themselves.

Re: undefined

#116

Post by solipsism »

rorykoehler wrote: post #99
solipsism wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have my problems with Libertarianism, but I don't understand what you don't understand. Libertarians think everyone should have freedom to do whatever one wants, but that says nothing of having power to do whatever one wants.

Freedom is not freedom without power to exercise said freedom.

Freedom in the Libertarianism context (and in most contexts) means lack of coercion or constraint imposed by government or other institutions. It doesn't refer to freedom from natural or physical constraints. That wouldn't make any sense to advocate for.

Does this clear it up for you?

Re: undefined

#117

Post by davesque »

My breaking point with Trump (when I decided he is a menace to American society) was reached a long time ago with his proposed ban on Muslim immigration. It was demagoguery not unlike the kind used by Hitler -- attempting to place blame on a very clearly defined minority group to make his followers more motivated. Doing this was simply not right in the most fundamental way and painted a target mostly on innocent people. If that's the man Thiel wants to stand with so be it. But I won't forget.

Re: undefined

#118

Post by morgante »

rorykoehler wrote: post #99
solipsism wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have my problems with Libertarianism, but I don't understand what you don't understand. Libertarians think everyone should have freedom to do whatever one wants, but that says nothing of having power to do whatever one wants.

Freedom is not freedom without power to exercise said freedom.

There is no law preventing me from doing 100 pushups right now. Yet I also find myself powerless to do it.

Does that mean I'm not free to do pushups?

Re: undefined

#119

Post by HillRat »

morgante wrote: post #83
blhack wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their response: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-daybreak-poll-ques... Where they eliminated that one 19 year old, and saw very little effect on the poll.

> Where they eliminated that one 19 year old, and saw very little effect on the poll. How is that a compelling answer? It's like if a news investigation found that a company had poor quality control and features a photo of a defective product in their writeup and the company's response was "we issued a refund for the product the news team purchased." All I can say is that you sound an awful lot like the 2012 talking…

I haven't seen the crosstabs on the USC polls, but my gut feeling is that you're right; the kind of very fine demographic reweighting they're doing isn't common, because (A) it's a pain in the ass and of dubious real-world value; and (B) it's vulnerable to magnifying sample-size and selection problems, of which the skewed Trump support amongst young African-Americans is one example. So while I'll be interested to do a retrospective on the poll's accuracy and precision after the election, I'm personally not putting much faith in it for now.

Re: undefined

#120

Post by rorykoehler »

solipsism wrote: post #116
rorykoehler wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom is not freedom without power to exercise said freedom.

Freedom in the Libertarianism context (and in most contexts) means lack of coercion or constraint imposed by government or other institutions. It doesn't refer to freedom from natural or physical constraints. That wouldn't make any sense to advocate for. Does this clear it up for you?

Precisely. The inability of a person to choose their desired path because they need money to feed their family is textbook economic coercion. We've long passed the point where lack of resources (especially food) is a physical/natural constraint.
Post reply on HN