Live data from Hacker News

Shame on Y Combinator

marco.org

361–370 of 1001 posts

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#361

Marcos understanding of this situation is extremely telling for a fundamental problem with many americans relationship with politics. Most only get involved around election. After that their political interest is non existing. It's easy to get lured into the idea that politics is a simple choice between the moral good and the moral bad, that the choice is simple and that there is a one to one relationship between wha…

That is in fact not a fundamental principle of democracy. There is no work of political philosophy anywhere that suggests we should be able to say whatever we'd like "without fear of repercussions". What is a principle of liberal philosophy, though, is that we should be tolerant of the beliefs of others (in the sense of not intervening to suppress them), including intolerant beliefs, until those intolerant beliefs th…

> Nobody denies Sam Altman's right to support Peter Thiel

Of course; what upsets people (you included, probably?) is the hypocrisy and rationalization. For his friend, Altman is willing to throw all principles and grand declarations about "no asshole policy" through the window. In a way it's charming; in another way, it's hard to fathom.

If anyone on HN said 1 thousandth of what Trump says everyday, they would get banned. But giving $1M to his campaign so that he can continue saying those same things, that's totally fine.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#362
post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is next? Perhaps YC should ask applicants for political affiliation? I think you're wrong and I think the reason YC will not drop Theil is very practical: Theil is valuable for the underlying goal of the program (money) and dropping Theil would also alienate a huge (yes, yuuuge) swath of investors.

People --- more of them on my side of this debate than yours --- say this a lot. But I think more highly of Sam Altman than to believe he's standing by Peter Thiel, despite Thiel's work to elect someone both Altman and I believe to be an American Mussolini, simply out of financial expedience. It's that basic respect for Altman that motivates me to keep pressing this argument: the effort seems hopeful.

You'd support an affiliation filter?

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#363
post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They compare Donald Trump with a fascist dictator. A bit childish, considering the slot the candidate is running for is not in a dictatorship. If you think Trump could convert the US to a dictatorship, I would like to see the evidence supporting this.

This is the situation: Identity politics makes gross hyperbole socially acceptable with ~50% of the population and "fightin words" with the other half.

Again, this is an argument you might first take up with Paul Graham and Sam Altman, because they disagree with you.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What repercussions? The situation strikes me as asymmetric: no matter what action Altman or Graham take they will be heavily criticized; for Ptacek, the worst would seem to be disagreement with his well-reasoned dialogue. It seems unfair to force this to become a very public conversation.

Sam Altman has so much money that he divides his time between multiple McLarens. His "reserve fund" in case of emergencies is ten million dollars. Altman need never work again in his life. That's not me, especially after my two teenage kids go to college. I'm a startup founder. Not only that, but I'm a startup founder that just last year considered attending YC during the summer session after Altman invited me (and,…

Reading what you've written, it sounds like you are saying that Altman and people associated with YC are sufficiently petty that they would refuse to work with you in the future because of a political disagreement. Am I interpreting this correctly? That would seem to be at odds with Altman's actions and public persona so far.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#365
post #118

You Americans (at least I think the majority of you are Americans) are getting quite ridiculous arguing over this. Supporting a political candidate is a personal choice, one that is given to every eligible individual in a democratic state. Calling for someone to be fired or sever ties with them over political choice is retarded and counter-productive.

Americans love to moralize and punish each other. Instead of saying that they think somebody is wrong they like to make the other person into some evil person who can't even be argued with because they are so evil. That's why there is no real political discourse but just people screaming at each other.

>Americans love to moralize and punish each other. Instead of saying that they think somebody is wrong they like to make the other person into some evil person who can't even be argued with because they are so evil.

That used to be mostly confined to the conservative side of the political spectrum. Now it's spread to the liberal side as well.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#366

If Thiel donated $1.25M to the NRA, would this lead to the same calls for YC to distance themselves from Thiel? Where does this end?

I heard the NRA is a a racist, sexist bigot with rapidly mounting allegations of multiple sexual assaults! I don't know who this ceterun_censeo guy is, however, I reckon he obviously is supporting people who support Trump. Light the pitchforks! Shame him on twitbook!*

* I feel like I have to explicitly mark this post as sarcasm for fear of peoples stupidity. I listed some other things (like find out where he works) and it just made me sick, I couldn't do it, even in sarcasm and jest. I hope after the dust settles people remember how to be decent again.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#367

Marcos understanding of this situation is extremely telling for a fundamental problem with many americans relationship with politics. Most only get involved around election. After that their political interest is non existing. It's easy to get lured into the idea that politics is a simple choice between the moral good and the moral bad, that the choice is simple and that there is a one to one relationship between wha…

I see you wrote words here but they're not really saying anything.. what is your point then? What really is at stake here? If racism and sexism aren't* just that, what are they? Who is this excluded group you're talking about?

> he has some very important points which needs to be addressed and discussed

What are those points then? Please, let's discuss them

*Edit

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#368
post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is in fact not a fundamental principle of democracy. There is no work of political philosophy anywhere that suggests we should be able to say whatever we'd like "without fear of repercussions". What is a principle of liberal philosophy, though, is that we should be tolerant of the beliefs of others (in the sense of not intervening to suppress them), including intolerant beliefs, until those intolerant beliefs th…

> Nobody denies Sam Altman's right to support Peter Thiel Of course; what upsets people (you included, probably?) is the hypocrisy and rationalization. For his friend, Altman is willing to throw all principles and grand declarations about "no asshole policy" through the window. In a way it's charming; in another way, it's hard to fathom. If anyone on HN said 1 thousandth of what Trump says everyday, they would get ba…

According to Sam Altman, if Peter Thiel said some of what Trump said, they'd stop endorsing him. I could not be more baffled by this stance: someone who speaks like Donald Trump is too toxic to affiliate with YC, but someone who diligently works to make Donald Trump President of the United States is not.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So stuff against Trump is proven 100% for reals and stuff against Clinton is mere allegations? Hmmmm. I'm not a Trump supporter by any stretch of the imagination, but I do find it fascinating how easily people manage to rationalize things. I'm sure there are TONS of folks who would decry a person for being a climate denier who would then perform the exact same mental process to 'overlook' whatever problems exist with…

> So stuff against Trump is proven 100% for reals and stuff against Clinton is mere allegations? Hmmmm. Well there's obviously a spectrum but I think it's absolutely inarguable that Trump's foundation is a tax dodge and that Trump is transparently corrupt; and I think at worst you can say that Clinton made some bad choices, but yes absolutely the allegations against her are without proof. > I'm sure there are TONS of…

> think at worst you can say that Clinton made some bad choices

The Director of the FBI said exactly that, but that there was no malicious intent and thus no crime. Why an investigative body is making a recommendation about charges notwithstanding, when it comes to national secrets, nobody else gets the benefit of the doubt re: mens rea, it's generally interpreted as strict liability. Why did former Secretary Clinton get a seemingly free pass on this one, while members of the rank-and-file military do not? I suspect it's because they're in the rank-and-file.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/292064-troops-using-clinto...

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#370
post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the situation: Identity politics makes gross hyperbole socially acceptable with ~50% of the population and "fightin words" with the other half.

Again, this is an argument you might first take up with Paul Graham and Sam Altman, because they disagree with you.

If you won't defend it, don't parrot it.
Post reply on HN