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

Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 414 posts

Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

#371

Post by M_Grey »

ominous wrote: post #242
M_Grey wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just nonsensical, and you've defined anything with membership as a "blacklist". What makes a blacklist a blacklist, is the list of "undesirables"; you don't just get to point to any body with membership and define all non-members as "blacklisted".

Why am I blacklisted from using your money? Also, obligatory mention that "blacklist" and "whitelist" are racist terms, and mention of similar spirals of idiocy such as [0] and [1]. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801646 [1] - https://github.com/antirez/redis/issues/3185

Again, as you seem not to have understood my point, you are not blacklisted, you have not been invited. There is a difference you're welcome to ignore, but don't be shocked when people don't take your complaints seriously.

Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

#372

Post by Turing_Machine »

ceejayoz wrote: post #369
Turing_Machine wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, I found that one, but the quote isn't sourced there either, and this appears to be a hit piece biography of Thurmond. Even taking it at face value, the quote is grossly taken out of context, just as I said. "I don't have anything to apologize for. I don't have any regrets. I may have said some things that I could have left off, because I favor everybody receiving equal treatment. Race should not enter into it. It…

> Oh, I found that one... You said: > If this "1998 interview" exists, Google appears to have no knowledge of it. You then dismiss it as a "hit piece", apparently out of nowhere - the author ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Bass ) appears reputable and I can't find anything Googling that indicates it was controversial in any way. > Which also says: "U.S. Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., no longer supports racial segr…

"If this "1998 interview" exists, Google appears to have no knowledge of it."

Your book link does not describe it as a "1998 interview", and in fact doesn't cite the original source at all.

And no, I don't just dismiss it as a "hit piece". I dismiss it because Thurmond claims to have given up segregation in the very next sentence. Thus making paulv's claim that these "quotes" show that Thurmond never repudiated segregation clueless at best, and likely actively dishonest.

"No longer supports" isn't the same thing as "happy to apologize and keep apologizing","

It is if the "apologies" aren't sincere.

Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

#373

Post by FeepingCreature »

aiig wrote: post #322
maratd wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not if they call me a "faggot" on the street. Even then. Be an activist, go out and vote, fight for yourself, but don't attack others because they said something you didn't like.

> Even then. How about you try getting chased out of a subway station after midnight getting called a "faggot" and we'll talk. And people say that the SF tech class is out of touch.

How about you try getting uninvited from a conference getting called a "bigot" for supporting the wrong politician? I hear it feels great. Really makes you consider the other side's arguments dispassionately and clearly.

Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

#374

Post by FeepingCreature »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #125
masklinn wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, to us destroying a person for their political views is disgusting, even if we disagree with them. Get off your high horse, Thiel is not going to be destroyed if YC distances itself from him, bloke's got "fuck you money" a hundred times over, nothing could "destroy" him short of institutional assault, and even then possibly not. And you're advocating for tolerating intolerance whose end-result is the destruction…

> "So you're perfectly fine tolerating intolerance but you can't tolerate the intolerance of intolerance?" I wish there were such a thing as HN gold, that sums things up perfectly.

I can tolerate it, I just don't like it.

I'm not going to fire someone for advocating firing people they don't like. Even though the irony would be damn sweet.

Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

#375

Post by RandomInteger4 »

jimmydddd wrote: post #352
amyjess wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just adding to this, claiming that a democratic election is rigged is one of Umberto Eco's 14 signs of Ur-Fascism [0]: > Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism. [0] http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/

Just curious why everyone loves throwing around the term "fascist" so much. Why not use more precise language to describe what you dislike about a candidate? The term seems ambiguous, and no one seems to have a clear definition of what it is. At most, there seems to be some related factors. For example, my image of Fascists is that they heavily promote war and expanding the empire. But, in contrast, the "fascist" can…

Did you even bother to read the article? You say that you think the term is ambiguous and this article is here exactly for the purpose of elucidating the idea of Fascism as it appears in it's obvious and not so obvious forms.

You say people are quick to throw around the term, yet you're equally quick to disregard those who see some very obvious similarities between Trump's style of campaigning and the rise of various fascist leaders.

These clues are not subtle in Trump's case. It's mind boggling to think that people do not see them. It's like watching Blue's Clues with the audience of children yelling "THE CLUE IS RIGHT THERE!" and Steve is completely oblivious for the whole episode. In the end Blue dies because Steve is ignorant. Blue is our Democracy. You are Steve.

Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

#377

Post by davesque »

archagon wrote: post #26

Based on the awful things Trump has said and (apparently) done, it should be blatantly clear to anyone remotely following the election that isn't your usual political rivalry. Pao is right: "this isn’t a disagreement on tax policy, this is advocating hatred and violence." Quite literally at times! (I might give a pass to the people following the party line or acting on incomplete information, but Thiel knows exactly…

Couldn't agree with you more. I'm dismayed not only at the broader political climate, but at the naivety of my peers in failing to see its roots.

Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

#379

Post by vsl »

amyjess wrote: post #318
sn9 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what about the 'T' in 'LGBT'? Surely you haven't already forgotten the rise in anti-trans discriminatory legislation in recent years? Do you think Trump and his supporters are the type to not support those? Which party is it that's been at the forefront of anti-discriminatory legislation and equal protection in general? It sucks that the first past the post voting system of ours all but guarantees that we must ch…

Adding to this: Clinton was personally responsible for new regulations that allow trans people to easily change the gender markers on their passport and their social security records (and there's also been regulations that rendered the gender marker on social security irrelevant, though I don't remember if that was before or after Clinton left). On top of this, Mike Pence has promised to roll back the Obama administr…

"survival"? Do you honestly believe you'll be shot if Trump wins? If so, wow.

Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions

#380

Post by vsl »

masklinn wrote: post #162
hprotagonist wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except, I guess, if you're Peter Thiel, who stands both to be discriminated against but also to get massive tax breaks in a Trump presidency.

> Peter Thiel, who stands both to be discriminated against A person worth north of 2 billion does not risk being discriminated against.

This entire thread is about attempted discrimination against him due to his wrongthink political views...
Post reply on HN