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

621–630 of 1001 posts

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#621

Post by wang_li »

tptacek wrote: post #204
ThomPete wrote: post #127

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…

>You may not believe Trump is a real thread to society. [...] Trump is an existential threat to our democracy.

If you don't have the rule of law, then you don't have a democracy. Of the two major party candidates, one is a hyperbolic, thin skinned twat who can't control his own mouth. The other is a venal, entitled, secretive, law-breaking, compulsively lying enabler of sexual predators, who will allow people to die, be raped, and have their lives destroyed, if doing her actual job and acting with honor would even possibly threaten her personal financial or political ambitions.

I'll take the twattish buffoon.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#622

Post by surfmike »

tptacek wrote: post #438
undersuit wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't that the exact reason many developers cancelled Oculus Rift support unless Facebook severed ties with Palmer Luckey?

I wasn't aware that there was a boycott of Oculus over Palmer Luckey, but man, that's heartening to hear. I have to admit that I would not have picked "political integrity" over "access to VR toys" in that particular sparring match. Good for those developers! Boycotts are a form of speech. The right to criticize is inalienable.

First, the argument isn't over whether Graham and Altman can drop ties to Thiel, it's whether they should.

Second, if you think that firing an employee for their political beliefs is a straw man, you should be standing up for Palmer Luckey in this case.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#623

Post by cmurf »

ThomPete wrote: post #127

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…

Yes, Trump is extremely valuable. He's exposing America's dirty laundry in a way that couldn't happen otherwise. There is a significant minority who want some autocracy in their government, or they don't care if that's what they get as long as the dear leader calls it like he sees it, even if how he sees the world is demonstrably wrong, and will give the undeniably very wealthy a tax break they may want but don't need.

He has some important points. White people are scared of the brown? They like their white privilege and don't want to give it up? They're attached to their misogyny in ways they can only articulate when off camera? Yes. Important. Just like it's important to look for blood in your stool.

I generally agree, that America since roughly the 1980s, has regressed politically. It puts its dirty diapers into the hamper, out of site out of mind, until the next election. It increasingly likes emotional tug of war, stoking anger and acrimony, rather than persistent converse. And that's how a con man has so impressively conned so much of the country. He couldn't care less about the gripes of those who have a legitimate complaint about how things aren't going all that well for them, but he's all too happy to exploit it. He can't fix any of these problems aside from obsoleting the Congress. I think he'd like that.

Trump TV, the next con. I think the original idea of running in the first place was just to sell his brand, not lead a country. He doesn't act like a leader at all, rather an ordinary stick that just likes stirring the pot. He's done nothing his entire life to make this country better, or the lot of those he now claims advocacy.

What's really at stake is making the leader of the country someone who resorts to name calling as his primary art of diplomacy. He was easily manipulated by Howard Stern, and there will be more gifted manipulators on the Hill, and around the world. Donald is out of his element. There is no bankruptcy lifeline for him at this level.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#624

Post by thisisdallas »

webXL wrote: post #595

Shame on Marco. I can't stand Trump, but I also can't stand this ganging up on Thiel. I guess the fact that he's a billionaire means he can be bullied, but this political bullying has a chilling effect that leads to the lackluster choices we get for president every four years. Thiel sees Hillary as a bigger threat to his interests than Trump. To prefer an outcome does not imply you favor all aspects of that outcome.…

> I guess the fact that he's a billionaire means he can be bullied

No, the fact that he is supporting a republican means he can be bullied. The tolerant left is on some radical moralistic high ground right now and it's far more dangerous than any words Trump has said.

When the campaign of a presidential nominee (Hillary) is recruiting the homeless and mentally ill to cause violence at Trump rallies, simply condemning and attacking someone for having different political views is all but normal.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#625

Post by dlss »

matt4077 wrote: post #572
dlss wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our disagreement isn't on the question of Trump's existential threat status, it's on the question of what should be done about it (incidentally, the same disagreement you seem to have with Sam Altman and Paul Graham). If you have a different solution than tossing out the heathens, I'm all ears. In Sam's blog post the solution he decides on is continuing dialogue. While this may be an imperfect solution, it seems to m…

As long as an ideology is small enough, completely shunning it's adherents is actually the best strategy, because everyone is susceptible to social pressure. But I fear that at 40% of the population, and with the social bubble people have build around them, Trump's neo-fascist movement may be beyond the reach of such tactics. > it's on the question of what should be done about it Everything that is legal. When, in th…

> As long as an ideology is small enough, completely shunning it's adherents is actually the best strategy

Until the thousandth time you use this tactic, and the number of people shunned begins to outnumber the ones doing the shunning.

> when my grandchildren ask me in 40 years or so I want to be able to say "I did everything that's legal".

I'm sorry to hear this. I hope in time you can come to focus on the similarities you have to your fellow humans rather than what sounds like a myopic focus on purely ideological differences.

As I said in GGGP to excuse your actions:

> sometimes a person needs to make mistakes / destroy something beautiful in order to find the next level of understanding

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#626

Post by abecedarius »

mafribe wrote: post #390
rfrey wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are Trump and Thiel if not "elites"? So it seems the elites are campaigning against each other.

The socialist tradition has a suitable term: "class traitor". The ruling class is ruling, in substantial parts because they are better at cooperating than other classes (and are good at seeding discord in other classes). One aspect of ruling class cooperation is ruthlessly punishing their own class traitors. I suspect that is part of what the whole saga is about.

That's interesting. What are some other examples of ruling-class traitors getting punished?

P.S. I hate having to add a disclaimer like this, but: I'm genuinely interested.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#627

Post by oldmanjay »

creo wrote: post #93

Tell me one thing YC community: What american politics topics are doing on worldwide tech-focused site?

If anything, this is a silicon valley tech site that is so compelling it has a worldwide audience. Not really the same thing.

Plus if you live somewhere in the world, American politics affects you because we have such immense power.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#628

Post by gist »

tptacek wrote: post #204
ThomPete wrote: post #127

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…

> Even most leaders of the Republican party refused to get on stage at the RNC to support Trump. Thiel did.

The reason for that is very simple. They don't have "fuck you" money or "fuck you" careers. They need to be careful of what they say and what they do. Peter Thiel doesn't and to a lesser extent neither does Sam or Paul. They probably will still have an oversupply of highly qualified people acting in their own self interest who want to take advantage of YC and all it offers. Ditto for investors and so on. A much different situation than a politician.

> But we are all very much entitled to criticize what Altman is doing, and we would be doing Altman no favors by withholding that criticism.

In all honesty Sama goes up many notches in my (non-important to anyone but me) ranking system for what he is doing. Even given my previous thoughts on the actual impact to him business wise or personally (I am sure anyone who needs him will still seek him out and forget about all of this.)

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#629

Post by HelloNurse »

calebm wrote: post #465

"Funding Trump, especially at this scale, represents general support of what Trump has said and done." - That's a pretty big logical leap. Would a person who supports Hillary "generally support" flippant top-secret email handling? Let's be logical: I think we can all agree that a person can support a candidate while not supporting every word they speak or action they take.

Thinking there is a lot of good in "what Trump has said and done", that his horribly racist, sexist and insane opinions and ideas are an acceptable price, and that Clinton would be a worse president is a legitimate opinion, but comparing Clinton's reckless behaviour to Trump's reckless statements is not. Forgiving past errors isn't the same as accepting future policies. Imprudent and illegal use of email is only a mistake, it doesn't represent a political program or opinion or stance, except for the generic disregard for the law that is implied by breaking it.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#630

Post by MaxfordAndSons »

To be charitable, you're full of shit. Does Hillary encourage violence at rallies? Does she stoke resentment at minority outgroups for political gain? Does she threaten to imprison her political opponents? Is she preemptively calling the election fraudulent and encouraging polling place intimidation and violence?

Also you mixed up "kind" and "degree". The difference between them is, in fact, one of kind. Sure, she's a bit of a corporatist shill, but that's par for the course for most presidents since the 1900s. The case against her is built from years of strident exaggerations and lies, amplified by misogyny. She's a completely normal, if less than thrilling, politician. The case against Trump is sufficiently built on things he's said in public in just the last few months alone. He's an American proto-fascist.

Post reply on HN