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

Shame on Y Combinator

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 1001 posts

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#551

Post by arohner »

edanm wrote: post #491
arohner wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on reading your comments for several years, I presume you are very much in favor of protecting employees from various kinds of discrimination(as you should!). Advocating firing Thiel seems to be counter to that. - If YC severed ties w/ Thiel, as people are recommending, should YC also divest itself of companies with founders who support Trump? - Should YC-invested companies fire employees who support Trump? - I…

"Based on reading your comments for several years, I presume you are very much in favor of protecting employees from various kinds of discrimination(as you should!)." I think it's pretty relevant that Thiel isn't an employee of YC. Saying that they would "fire" Thiel is a complete misnomer - he's a partner that does business with them. I think that's a very different kind of relationship.

I'm aware of that legally the distinction is relevant, but in the realm of public discourse, it isn't. YC could also e.g. cut ties with Thiel because he's gay, but of course HN would crucify them.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#552

Post by puppetmaster3 »

None of you on the 'left coast' got balls to say: I support Trump. And I do support Trump.

What the left media is telling is simply not true. For example Racism, 4 points:

1. Picture w/ Rosa Parks: http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cq-YIOzXEAEyEN7.jpg:medium

2. Picture w/ KKK 'leader' (not sure what they call self): http://img.youtube.com/vi/xDhpqFkUeeE/0.jpg

3. Bring them to heal(vid): http://tinyurl.com/jbeqqk7

4. Calling out a racist(not runnig yet - old vid): http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4xymmq

More - a tie breaker: http://youtube.com/watch?v=b329eUPKQVg

And the tradition of racisam: http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/d...

But today, we have disent, fighting against it (assuming YOU the reader belive they can think for self) - http://tinyurl.com/j89tf56

When we on the right (to the right relative to authoritarian left) say broadcast media is lying - this is an example. Left should be shamed when we can.

I am engineer by training - give me data points.

(ooh. Moderator downvotes. And w/o a comment)

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#553

Post by jshevek »

binaryapparatus wrote: post #145

Non American here. Inability to even comprehend why calls to punish one person because it supports option that I don't like (that's allegedly full of ism-s) equates to me being as narrow minded as the side I am attacking... is very dangerous. Marco is not doing any favor to his favorite this way. Narrow mindedness, no matter how well packaged, stays narrow mindedness. Dragging YC in this is again just a reflection of…

You make excellent points. Marco is not alone in this. There is a subculture in the US that is so full of their own self righteousness, they are unable to take a fair look at themselves. No matter where we sit on the political spectrum, we as a larger culture need to take this more seriously. Thank you for offering your perspective as an outsider.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#554

Post by mc32 »

ashark wrote: post #540
mc32 wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may not be, but looking back many people view the blacklisting of American communists as antithetical to democracy even though their philosophy would have it to overturn our system and forge into a communist one. Blacklisting people because we think they are a threat to our society is what enabled employers of the past to make it hard for people of an opposing view to get jobs because their politics were "anti-Ame…

I do think things have shifted more than a bit with unbridled campaign donations as "speech". This isn't someone handing out fliers or manning a call bank—if you're helping someone deeply opposed to your politics make money, and they're spending giant piles of that money to aid candidates you don't like, severing business relationships and trying to harm their ability to make money any way you can seems like fair gam…

What if workers' unions were to fire members who don't support candidate X, or fire those who do support candidate Y, after all portion of their salaries could be used to underwrite the uncandidate... Is this kind of political retribution what we're aiming for?

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#555

Post by criddell »

exstudent2 wrote: post #384
criddell wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For all the crazy things Trump says, for all is egoism he has some very important points which needs to be addressed and discussed and he represents a group of people who haven't been represented for the last 40 years. Is there a line that Trump could cross where you would start to say he's dangerous and doesn't deserve his spot at the table?

> doesn't deserve his spot at the table? No one gets to decide who gets a spot at the table. It doesn't really matter if you think Trump is "dangerous", the idea that if you think the "right" way you're entitled to shape the dialogue by censorship if needed is exactly what people who are anti-anti-Trump are trying to fight.

> No one gets to decide who gets a spot at the table.

Gary Johnson and Jill Stein (and many others) would like to have a word with you.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#556

Post by cabalamat »

cabalamat wrote: post #517

There are two separate questions here: Q1. Is Trump a spectacularly bad candidate, i.e. would he turn the USA intor a dictatorship, start a nuclear war, or do somethnig else equally damaging to society? Q2. If Y Combinator shunned Thiel for supporting Trump, would that make a Trump presidency less likely? If the answer to Q2 is no, as I suspect it is, then it doesn't much matter what the answer to Q1 is. If we end up…

In fact if Q1=yes and YC shunning Thiel would make it more likely that Trump would win, which it might well do as it plays into Trump's anti-establishment narrative, then people opposed to Trump should very much insist on YC not shunning Thiel.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#557

Post by ElComradio »

tptacek wrote: post #495
ElComradio wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough re: employment, but if we shift "employed by" to "do business with" it's still the same discussion. A theme going on here is a binary state regarding how we should treat individuals and consider their positions. This idea of "endorsing" Thiel means you are supporting all of his political views and not just his business views. That if one supports Trump one is all-in on all of his positions. For example, m…

If we shift "employment" to "do business with", we have formulated an argument that boycotts are unethical. So, no, I don't think that gets us anywhere.

Boycotts are designed to force a _business_ to change behavior.

If we extend this into the realm of the individual and political speech, it is a totally different animal with clear dangers for freedom of expression.

I am not myself sure if I would consider it a moral failing to "boycott" an individual as a pressure tactic in these circumstances (or more like misguided social engineering) but it is definitely laudable to take a more nuanced view as Altman and YC have done.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#558

Post by tptacek »

edanm wrote: post #489
tptacek wrote: post #204

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…

"Sam Altman cannot coherently believe this while supporting Peter Thiel [,...]" Why not? This is the only part of your comment I have a problem with. People can coherently have two values that they care about, and have to weigh one against the other. It is totally legitimate to think that Trump is a threat to democracy, to completely oppose Thiel, but to also think that firing someone for their political beliefs is a…

The problem with this logic is that you're multiplying a very low probability against a truly catastrophic outcome. The expected value result of that calculation is still very, very bad.

But I also disagree about Trump's prospects. As I wrote elsewhere on the thread: I think we underestimate the likelihood that Trump will win, and further I think we're going to be in exactly the same struggle in just 3 more years, when Trump begins his next presidential campaign in earnest. When he captures the nomination next time, there will be no opposition research left with the power to halt his campaign: all the news value will have been spent on this campaign.

Donald Trump is a terrifying force in American politics, and the damage he's done will spread far beyond the 2016 election.

I'm out on a limb here for saying this, because I'm a loyal Democrat, but as a believer in the American political tradition warts-and-all, I think Republicans should be even more dismayed, because one way or the other Trump is going to ruin the Republican party. When most Democrats say this, they mean that Trump will prevent Republicans from winning. But I don't mean that. I mean that Trump is killing their party, and he and his acolytes will finish that job by (eventually) winning. Even as a liberal Democrat, I feel sorrow for the loss of a loyal opposition and a voice for limited government.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#559

Post by evgen »

dreta wrote: post #352
jaegerpicker wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a simple comparison really: Trump - (paraphased) Muslims are evil, they should be registered and have special restrictions placed on them. He singled out a single religious group. Made them the target of a group of people that are disposed to hating them. It goes against the very spirit of modern western democracy. To many it represents a clear and unforseen threat to our country. Even Bush who was clearly the m…

There’s a major problem with Muslim refugees in Europe right now. My girlfriend used to love visiting Paris, now it’s basically a no-go zone even in daytime. What he’s saying is based on reality, even if it makes you feel all bad inside when you hear it. Even in the US, where the refugee problem doesn’t exist, you still learn after terrorist attacks that, f.e. the family knew, or that the attacker had bomb equipment…

There’s a major problem with Muslim refugees in Europe right now. My girlfriend used to love visiting Paris, now it’s basically a no-go zone even in daytime.

I think you and your racist girlfriend should probably go visit some other country instead. I am sure you can find some nice white safe space where you can fondle your your personal weaponry without being considered mentally unstable, but Europe is definitely not going to be to your liking.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#560

Post by ashark »

mc32 wrote: post #554
ashark wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do think things have shifted more than a bit with unbridled campaign donations as "speech". This isn't someone handing out fliers or manning a call bank—if you're helping someone deeply opposed to your politics make money, and they're spending giant piles of that money to aid candidates you don't like, severing business relationships and trying to harm their ability to make money any way you can seems like fair gam…

What if workers' unions were to fire members who don't support candidate X, or fire those who do support candidate Y, after all portion of their salaries could be used to underwrite the uncandidate... Is this kind of political retribution what we're aiming for?

Quantity has its own quality. Bob the riveter donating $500 is far removed from 7-figure donations. It's an entirely different kind of relationship with the candidate and the campaign.
Post reply on HN