Live data from Hacker News

SPAC Wipeout Is Punishing Followers of Chamath Palihapitiya

bloomberg.com

61–63 of 63 posts

Re: SPAC Wipeout Is Punishing Followers of Chamath Palihapitiya

#61
post #4

Chamath is one of the most self-serving-pretending-to-be-altruistic salesmen to ever set foot in SV. If you were still a “follower” after doing even the slightest bit of due diligence into the man, you deserve to lose money.

I’m curious why you believe he’s a self serving salesman. I’ve seen a few of his interviews on YouTube and particularly some of his CNBC interviews. I can’t recall him trying to give me specific investing advice, but his analysis on a lot of recent events has made sense. And a lot of his general life advice is great. I’m a follower of Chamath, but that doesn’t mean I believe he can predict the stock market any better…

> I’ve seen a few of his interviews on YouTube and particularly some of his CNBC interviews.

The on with that women at Standford comes to mind, he flat out comes out and says he 'wants to be wealthy in order to be influential,' and is what is left when you're a billionaire: so, given his presence within the high profile VC World and now his spots on the 'all in' podcast I'd say he is making his move. He kind of teased that we would run for Governor on the run up to Newson's recall, only to back track on that. I also saw he is a default 'who to follow' on Clubhouse when I was invited.

The truth is I'm a fan of Chamath, mainly because he calls entrenched the SV wealthy on their BS; it doesn't mean he is a saint but you can tell he gets fed up about it as much as any reasonable person does about how much self-serving non-sense it's built on.

But I also like him because he is cognizant of how his position in life as a billionaire has more to do with sheer luck and timing than anything else, including working hard, and fully acknowledges how his position is untenable for most millennials and Gen Z despite all the kool-aid drinking in SV filling every founder's head that they can be Elon 2.0 if he just works hard enough.

I'm not that familiar with his SPAC positions, it all sounds too much like the derivatives of 2008, which is enough to keep me the hell away from it.

I like what Social Capital stands for, but I would never invest in it, but I'm glad it exists.

His position in Bitcoin, 2012 was early despite what another poster says: I was there back then and you seriously could only get drugs or socks with it so I'd say a tech person getting involved was rather early.

Incidentally, that was the year we finally got retail merchant's attention and did a lot of merchant adoption for Black Friday so it was a remarkable and notable year for many. What followed with the 2013 ATH is when we had our first Eternal September moment.

Re: SPAC Wipeout Is Punishing Followers of Chamath Palihapitiya

#62
post #31

Everybody hated him at Facebook. Nobody was willing to work on his team because he was so rude. [0] 0 = Steven Levy's Facebook: The inside story

> Nobody was willing to work on his team because he was so rude.

I don't doubt this, but how much of this is the same exact thing we see of his current persona, which tends to have no tolerance for the BS Silicon Valley 'wokeness' and general softness with the Ivy league/Stanford CS types that generally are the rank and file and lower tier devs in most FAANGs?

I ask, because as a Californian that remembers the SV of the late 80s and 90s I felt utter disgusted by what it had become in the min 2010s when I moved there for a Summer wlaunching my startup and realized in the first week that what it had become was a massively distorted perversion of it's former self.

Money served as much as an insulator to keep their norms fixed and provided as a (compromised?) barrier of entry, as much as anything else, but somehow it was effective enough to negate the obscene amount of human misery due to massive homelessness and wealth inequality you see on every corner.

Re: SPAC Wipeout Is Punishing Followers of Chamath Palihapitiya

#63
post #37

I know very little about him but was initially intrigued because he’s often referred to as a “good guy” with altruistic motives who also isn’t afraid to call others out. Then I saw him on CNBC in the midst of the GameStop fiasco, railing against Robinhood on the premise that people should be outraged because Robinhood almost ran out of money and had to restrict trades. Whether or not that’s something to be outraged a…

If Robinhood was up-front with users there would be no issue, but they lied. They never mentioned liquidity issues when blocking trades.

Several brokerages were capitalised well enough to allow GameStop trades, Robinhood wasn't because of incompetence and/or malice. This isn't their first blunder, remember when they tried to create bank accounts with zero insurance because their legal and/or executive team is incompetent?

Post reply on HN