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

LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 39 posts

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#21

Post by icelancer »

fake-name wrote: post #20
icelancer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, I don't primarily because you have a similar chance to getting hit and killed by a car. Does that have an impact on innovation? This is... not a very good comparison for a multitude of reasons. Not the least of which being that not everyone has the same chance of being hit and killed by a car, of course... > Really, I've never met anyone who is actively "hustling" Have you considered that maybe some of the very…

> This is... not a very good comparison for a multitude of reasons. Not the least of which being that not everyone has the same chance of being hit and killed by a car, of course... That's also true for the chances of becoming mega-rich. Can you name any actually successful person who got into the business they're in because they wanted to be come rich, rather then because they were doing something that interested th…

Pegging limits to subjective personal thoughts is pretty ludicrous, in my opinion. That's the height of authoritarianism and rule by random dictation. Whether or not that's a good idea, it's absolutely a horrible process, which is a lot more important than enacting good laws via force.

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#22

Post by fake-name »

icelancer wrote: post #21
fake-name wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is... not a very good comparison for a multitude of reasons. Not the least of which being that not everyone has the same chance of being hit and killed by a car, of course... That's also true for the chances of becoming mega-rich. Can you name any actually successful person who got into the business they're in because they wanted to be come rich, rather then because they were doing something that interested th…

Pegging limits to subjective personal thoughts is pretty ludicrous, in my opinion. That's the height of authoritarianism and rule by random dictation. Whether or not that's a good idea, it's absolutely a horrible process, which is a lot more important than enacting good laws via force.

I did say it's just a thought experiment. Though to be fair, I don't see it being dramatically more random then what we have now.

The numbers here are mostly spitballing, and not based on much, but the idea I think is worth considering, if for no reason other then the contrast it provides with the way things currently are.

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#23

Post by austincheney »

> But at least a few Democrats thought their party could not shun such tactics entirely if others were going to continue to use them.

And so the deception arms race has begun. Social media messaging is a toxic influence when centrally managed, inherently anonymous, or publicly accessible.

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#24

Post by sl1ck731 »

abapologist wrote: post #11
fake-name wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically, he’s too rich to know where he’s spending his money. If you have that problem, you have too much money . I've periodically considered a limit on the money people can have. I think if we limited people to a maximum wealth, after which taxes were 90+%, it'd go a fair way to fixing a lot of the issues with the world. Something like 10 million dollars seems reasonable. (Note: this ignores all the ways people…

Don’t you think this would have an impact on innovation? The chance at getting mega rich drives people to take big risks.

I think 10 million dollars is as much incentive as 100 million for anyone trying to make it big. After a certain amount for most people it is just a lot of extra zeros.

The idea that someone who would strive to do something great would lose interest at being limited to 10 million is laughable.

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#25

Post by r00fus »

icelancer wrote: post #10
fake-name wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically, he’s too rich to know where he’s spending his money. If you have that problem, you have too much money . I've periodically considered a limit on the money people can have. I think if we limited people to a maximum wealth, after which taxes were 90+%, it'd go a fair way to fixing a lot of the issues with the world. Something like 10 million dollars seems reasonable. (Note: this ignores all the ways people…

Can corporations have unlimited money? 10 million barely makes payroll for some medium-large businesses. And a thought experiment isn't not subject to discussion... otherwise why post it?

Sure, as long as they aren't using massive tax avoidance schemes to not pay the taxes. Also they aren't persons.

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#26

Post by alphabettsy »

tossaccount123 wrote: post #12

Interesting how so many leftists who hate the koch brothers and their big money spending are fine with billionaire tech elites throwing their money around But I suppose that's not surprising considering the top 10 richest districts and 73 of the top 100 voted democrat https://finance.yahoo.com/news/midterms-one-party-controls-w... Citizens United needs to be overturned ASAP

Huh? Overturning Citizens United is a key goal of “leftists”, so much so that Bernie Sanders talked about it continuously during his campaign.

The entire GOP continues to vilify Soros though and seem perfectly content with Citizens United.

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#27

Post by tw04 »

fake-name wrote: post #7
code4tee wrote: post #2

Basically, he’s too rich to know where he’s spending his money. A good problem to have, but clearly he recognized this was a big screwup and he fessed up. Not more one can ask for.

> Basically, he’s too rich to know where he’s spending his money. If you have that problem, you have too much money . I've periodically considered a limit on the money people can have. I think if we limited people to a maximum wealth, after which taxes were 90+%, it'd go a fair way to fixing a lot of the issues with the world. Something like 10 million dollars seems reasonable. (Note: this ignores all the ways people…

That was literally tax law in the 1950s.

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#28

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

sl1ck731 wrote: post #24
abapologist wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t you think this would have an impact on innovation? The chance at getting mega rich drives people to take big risks.

I think 10 million dollars is as much incentive as 100 million for anyone trying to make it big. After a certain amount for most people it is just a lot of extra zeros. The idea that someone who would strive to do something great would lose interest at being limited to 10 million is laughable.

Most innovators aren't striving to reach some grand self-motivating concept. The world is much better off for having people like the Collison brothers, who see that a moderately sized piece of infrastructure is too complicated and try to earn a lot of money by making it simpler.

Re: LinkedIn Co-Founder Apologizes for Deception in Alabama Senate Race

#30

Post by sl1ck731 »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #28
sl1ck731 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think 10 million dollars is as much incentive as 100 million for anyone trying to make it big. After a certain amount for most people it is just a lot of extra zeros. The idea that someone who would strive to do something great would lose interest at being limited to 10 million is laughable.

Most innovators aren't striving to reach some grand self-motivating concept. The world is much better off for having people like the Collison brothers, who see that a moderately sized piece of infrastructure is too complicated and try to earn a lot of money by making it simpler.

I'm not sure I follow. They were still motivated by money. I doubt there was some altruistic revelation that got them incredibly interested in processing credit cards.
Post reply on HN