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

381–390 of 766 posts

Re: undefined

#381

Post by 1337biz »

nostrademons wrote: post #42
vinhboy wrote: post #17

Politics aside. What does it say about his judgement to continue investing in something that is statistically on track to fail. Not only that, but its also a toxic brand to attach yourself to. Or do we just put this in the "expensive new hobby" section and leave it at that. ---- Update: I want to hijack my own comment to ponder something. As someone with no money and no influence, I find it hard to think about how to…

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…

Perfect quote from Paul Graham here:

Others may be reassured to hear Trump has only a 15% chance of winning, but it terrifies me. In Silicon Valley 15% is a good chance.

https://twitter.com/paulg/status/786801011830628352

Re: undefined

#382

Post by whack »

tvural wrote: post #264

Thiel might have ulterior motives, but his support of Trump is not too surprising if you've listened to his other ideas. He feels that the political agenda has been overrun by distractions, like "who can use which bathroom", at the expense of real problems, like the stagnation of median wages over the last forty years. He prefers the days when the national conversation was about how to beat the Soviets, and sees the…

Some of Trump's strongest policy prescriptions include

1) Clamping down on immigration

2) Clamping down on free trade

I don't see how any libertarian can be a fan of either.

Re: undefined

#383

Post by 1337biz »

DasIch wrote: post #321
s_kilk wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think this race is nearly as over as most people seem to believe This feels a lot like the atmosphere over here (in Britain) just before the Brexit vote. Many people thought it was a guaranteed Remain vote, and woke up to a terrible fright on that Friday morning.

The polls showed Brexit winning.

They didn't:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United...

Re: undefined

#384

Post by 1337biz »

rconti wrote: post #70
throwaway101416 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's very difficult to find truly unbiased statistics on this. Every current well-known analyst has been repeatedly egregiously wrong on the matter throughout this election cycle.

On matters of opinion, ABSOLUTELY. On matters of polling, absolutely false. Even Brexit was predicted by the polls, it just didn't happen until a week before the vote. (It's worth noting, of course, the same could happen here. And that's probably what Thiel is counting on).

Where do you see the Brexit predicted by the polls?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United...

Seems to not support that claim.

Re: undefined

#385

Post by colmvp »

1337biz wrote: post #381
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…

Perfect quote from Paul Graham here: Others may be reassured to hear Trump has only a 15% chance of winning, but it terrifies me. In Silicon Valley 15% is a good chance. https://twitter.com/paulg/status/786801011830628352

When it comes to a company 15% isn't too bad as you have a long time to test and figure out whether you make it. It's never just about one exact moment.

With an election it can usually be summed to important event: the vote. So that's why it doesn't terrify me at all. There's enough evidence now and in previous elections to show me he's not going to win the election. If the situation were say closer to Gore/Bush or even Romney/Obama pre-vote polling numbers, then maybe I'd be scared.

Re: undefined

#386

Post by [deleted] »

1337biz wrote: post #381
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…

Perfect quote from Paul Graham here: Others may be reassured to hear Trump has only a 15% chance of winning, but it terrifies me. In Silicon Valley 15% is a good chance. https://twitter.com/paulg/status/786801011830628352

[deleted]

Re: undefined

#387

Post by mrcarrot »

DominikR wrote: post #338
quirkafleeg wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We of all people should know better. Not if Austria's 2016 presidential elections are anything to go by.

I'm in Austria, it was a disgrace. All of media was attacking the right wing guy with no dissenting voices, and you have to be afraid of personal and professional consequences if you endorse him or say anything against the Socialist candidate they are trying to push. It's literally like in the Soviet Union, at least that's what my parents told me as they came from a Communist country.

The media can't be very good at propaganda if they were 'all attacking the right wing guy' and he _still_ managed to poll almost 50% of the vote.

Re: undefined

#388

Post by Amezarak »

mattmanser wrote: post #325
Shivetya wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sadly I find his opponent to be more dangerous as the press and Congress will likely never call her out regardless of what she chooses to do. already a proven welfare warfare queen we can expect simply more of the same. At least with Trump we know the press will nip his heels everyday and misstep and Congress will not be friendly. we haven't had an adversarial press in eight years and only one adversarial party in th…

As a foreigner, I really don't get this attitude. Hillary's a hawk, so let's support the obviously erratic, racist, bigoted, tax-dodging, incompetent, incoherent, sexually assaulting idiot who looks very much like a new Hitler and thinks if you win an election you get to lock up your opponents like a crazy third world state. Boggles my mind that 'Murica' 'Freedom' can bring out such a petty, childish and obviously se…

What you're missing is nuance.

When you say "the obviously erratic, racist, bigoted, tax-dodging, incompetent, incoherent, sexually assaulting idiot", you're taking the opposition beliefs as fact, just like the Republicans who claim Clinton is an "obviously erratic deathly ill man-hating murdering warmongering power-hungry alcoholic liar."

Look at each candidate from their point of view. For example:

> thinks if you win an election you get to lock up your opponents like a crazy third world state.

Trump does not believe he can lock people up arbitrarily. He believes he can appoint a special prosecutor to look into Clinton's alleged wrongdoing surrounding her emails. He believes the only reason no prosecution happened already is because of political pressure.

There's a huge difference there. You may still, reasonably, find that belief concerning, but it's on a whole different level than "Trump believes he can lock up his opponents" just because he wins. Generally when you look into any claim about Trump or Clinton the reality is a lot more reasonable than one side or the other makes it seem. There are billions of dollars and massive, organized campaigns doing everything they can to paint everything the other person does as insane.

In general, the Clinton campaign is better at this, because they don't go around actively antagonizing the media like the Trump campaign does, and they have a lot more experience in the field. That said, you do still see of total nonsense about Clinton treated as fact even in "objective" sources - let alone the kind of insanity that propagates in the conservative media. For example, the latest meme is that the Clintons had Scalia murdered because of a wet-works email (that is actually about something totally different if you do even a little investigation.)

Re: undefined

#389

Post by dickman3000 »

nostrademons wrote: post #315
hacker42 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is an interesting take on this matter: > Famously, the only reason he went to seek fortune in the Silicon Valley was because he was denied a highly prestigious clerk position for a Supreme Court justice. > It seems to me that Thiel originally wished to become a politician, and only stopped pursuing that path to seek his fortune in the Silicon Valley when he hit his first setback when applying to clerk for the Su…

I doubt it. Thiel's personality - in all his public appearances - has been hyper-rational, not exactly the sort who would hold onto a childhood dream for 20 years. And he's talked about how falling off that track was the best thing that ever happened to him - so much so that he now wants to help other talented college kids fall off the established track. Also, he's not U.S. born, which disqualifies him from being pre…

Peter Thiel doesn't seem hyper-rational. He had an 8 year long hissyfit that culminated in the Gawker lawsuit.

Re: undefined

#390

Post by dickman3000 »

easyd wrote: post #144

Everyone seems to think it's about maximizing his ROI or, less cynical, about economics. But here's a quote from Thiel's speech at the republican convention: "Instead of going to Mars, we have invaded the Middle East. We don't need to see Hillary Clinton's deleted emails: her incompetence is in plain sight. She pushed for a war in Libya, and today it's a training ground for ISIS. On this most important issue, Donald…

Hasn't Thiel talked about how it's bad that women have the right to vote? Doesn't seem like he cares much about liberty here.

Thiel strikes me as more of an authoritarian than libertarian, hence probably why he supports Trump. I mean ... why else would he support Trump?

No sense in doing complicated mental gymnastics here.

Post reply on HN