Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs • Hacker News Board

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#51

Post by Kranar » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:20 AM UTC

samhw wrote: post #50

Kranar wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the person bringing up the hypothetical were remotely as talented as the people on this list and then made a claim that they'd refuse a free $100,000 in order to advance their interests, that would be a worthwhile discussion. Then we can expand on their point of view, what tradeoffs they make, what actual resources or funding they made use of as well as the kind of diligence they performed when accepting money...…

I don't see what that has to do with anything. They are equally qualified to discuss the moral aspects of the question, which is what they are discussing. This feels like a lame attempt to shame the other commenter out of a point you couldn't answer - and on the basis of a standard you wouldn't pass yourself either.

No they are not equally qualified to discuss the moral aspect of it because they have nothing at risk. It's very easy to make cheap moral claims when there is nothing at stake. What's interesting is the kind of moral decisions and tradeoffs an individual makes when there is something at stake.

The fact that this person is not in a position to stake anything makes their claim entirely vacuous and superficial. First go off and start a company working on nuclear energy or electric airplanes, get to a point in your life where someone cares to offer you $100k for nothing in return, then feel free to talk about the tradeoffs and difficult balancing act that leads you to refuse it. That can be an interesting discussion...

Some nobody just chiming in with nothing other than a claim that they'd refuse to take money that they're in no position to even be offered is cheap posturing.

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#52

Post by samhw » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:23 AM UTC

Kranar wrote: post #51

samhw wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see what that has to do with anything. They are equally qualified to discuss the moral aspects of the question, which is what they are discussing. This feels like a lame attempt to shame the other commenter out of a point you couldn't answer - and on the basis of a standard you wouldn't pass yourself either.

No they are not equally qualified to discuss the moral aspect of it because they have nothing at risk. It's very easy to make cheap moral claims when there is nothing at stake. What's interesting is the kind of moral decisions and tradeoffs an individual makes when there is something at stake. The fact that this person is not in a position to stake anything makes their claim entirely vacuous and superficial. First go…

OK, this is now closer to approaching a cogent counter-argument. So why exactly is it that having something at stake would lead someone to answer that question differently?

And why do you think human beings can't think hypothetically about the condition of having something at stake, the same way we can think hypothetically about most everything else?

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#53

Post by halpert » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:23 AM UTC

SavantIdiot wrote: post #27

halpert wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t that true of any public company though? And likely most private ones as well.

A) On what basis do you claim that all public companies are not ethical? (You said "any", but by definition that means "all".) B) By that logic, isn't all money tainted? And everyone of us? And every thing? This is the starting point of every person's decisions regarding being ethical. How far back do you need to "follow the money" before you consider it "ethical"? That is up to every person. Theil has actively engag…

I’m not claiming that all public companies are unethical. I’m claiming that all public companies have some unethical investors. That is, the operations of the company directly benefit some unethical actors. This has nothing to do with “money being tainted” in general.

Just to be clear, this is what you said that I was responding to:

> I think the concern is that they are taking money from someone with highly debatable/questionable ethics.

Some investors in almost all public companies have highly debatable ethics.

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#54

Post by vanusa » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:28 AM UTC

version_five wrote: post #32

vanusa wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're young (and some live in foreign countries) and in any case probably have no idea what Thiel is really about. I say give them a chance to repent and rehabilitate. I'd definitely not want to work for a company that takes Thiel's money or has any of his acolytes or close associates on board, though.

> They're young (and some live in foreign countries) I don't think it's fair to assume that startup founders who have applied to a Thiel Fellowship did so because of ignorance (or because they are young or "foreign"). This is an amazing opportunity for many people and highly competitive. I even see an upside to companies automatically being able to filter their hiring for people that don't get hung up on this. If som…

I don't think it's fair to assume that startup founders who have applied to a Thiel Fellowship did so because of ignorance (or because they are young or "foreign").

My assumption is they obviously know he's a "titan of industry" and that's obviously why they applied for the fellowship. They may not know or care about his politics, and (yes, partially due to the fact that the bulk of these events transpired when they were much younger) may not be aware of some of his more loathsome antics.

I'm not condemning these people, or saying they're stupid. If anything I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, here.

If someone won't work for a company because a particular VC funded it, I can imagine there a much higher probability of that person causing trouble wherever they end up.

It's called ethical backbone. It is perfectly acceptable to not want to work for companies that are engaged in any manner of unethical practices. Or for people who are basically unethical and/or toxic. Or for companies they fund.

If this kind of stance falls under the rubric of "causing trouble" then well, that's the world you chose to live in.

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#55

Post by johnny_b_g » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:28 AM UTC

Kranar wrote: post #49

samhw wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it's called a hypothetical. They're pretty common. They can even be used as thought experiments to bring out interesting aspects of moral questions.

If the person bringing up the hypothetical were remotely as talented as the people on this list and then made a claim that they'd refuse a free $100,000 in order to advance their interests, that would be a worthwhile discussion. Then we can expand on their point of view, what tradeoffs they make, what actual resources or funding they made use of as well as the kind of diligence they performed when accepting money...…

No post body was provided.

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#56

Post by mwattsun » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:30 AM UTC

ksec wrote: post #26

Considering Peter Thiel is on the list [1] of most hated person on HN and Silicon Valley, I am kinda surprised this reached front page. Does Peter Thiel still does VC? I thought he left YC and Silicon Valley. [1] Mark Zukerberg, Larry Ellison and Peter Thiel.

I don't hate Peter Thiel but I feel compelled as an American to say I believe that we should find ways to improve our democratic system, not get rid of it. Thiel seems to believe democracy doesn't work and presumably technocrats such as himself would be better running things. Perish the thought.

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#57

Post by samhw » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:30 AM UTC

johnny_b_g wrote: post #55

Kranar wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the person bringing up the hypothetical were remotely as talented as the people on this list and then made a claim that they'd refuse a free $100,000 in order to advance their interests, that would be a worthwhile discussion. Then we can expand on their point of view, what tradeoffs they make, what actual resources or funding they made use of as well as the kind of diligence they performed when accepting money...…

Quoted post unavailable.

Yeah, I don't think I've seen such an incoherent attempt to ban someone from having an opinion. It's on a level with saying you can't disapprove of Harold Shipman until you've got a medical degree.

Presumably we all have to spend the rest of our lives running around getting various professional qualifications and careers, just so that we can have opinions on utterly generic moral questions which happen to be faced by someone with that degree.

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#58

Post by johnny_b_g » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:39 AM UTC

samhw wrote: post #57

johnny_b_g wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Yeah, I don't think I've seen such an incoherent attempt to ban someone from having an opinion. It's on a level with saying you can't disapprove of Harold Shipman until you've got a medical degree. Presumably we all have to spend the rest of our lives running around getting various professional qualifications and careers, just so that we can have opinions on utterly generic moral questions which happen to be faced by…

Indeed - apparently my Trump bashing was "unqualified", so I now have to go and run for President, get elected, be President for 4 years, and then I can start bashing him.

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#59

Post by samhw » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:46 AM UTC

johnny_b_g wrote: post #58

samhw wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don't think I've seen such an incoherent attempt to ban someone from having an opinion. It's on a level with saying you can't disapprove of Harold Shipman until you've got a medical degree. Presumably we all have to spend the rest of our lives running around getting various professional qualifications and careers, just so that we can have opinions on utterly generic moral questions which happen to be faced by…

Indeed - apparently my Trump bashing was "unqualified", so I now have to go and run for President, get elected, be President for 4 years, and then I can start bashing him.

There are some other things on that todo list ('rape first wife', 'cheat on pregnant third wife with pornstar', 'publicly blame your failed business on a dead man before his funeral had even taken place', 'send deranged tweets to Kim Jong Un while on cough medicine and alprazolam') but you'll get to them ;)

But nah, seriously, I don't know how some people can say such absolutely witless stuff, and still see fit to click 'send'. I think they are just nonplussed that not everyone else has the same Ubermensch ethic as they do, where anyone sufficiently rich or accomplished is exempted from the moral requirements incumbent on normal human beings.

They worship them, to put it simply - the rich and powerful - and they don't understand & can't process that not everyone else does.

Re: Thiel Foundation announces next Thiel Fellow class: 23 entrepreneurs

#60

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 2:00 AM UTC

laingc wrote: post #42

samhw wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your 20 friends are all "massive fans" of a given person, I agree, that's a pretty solid indicator of significant bias. Well, maybe not if that person were the Dalai Lama or something like that, but Thiel is not the Dalai Lama. (Even a regular llama would be strong competition.) I should add that the same would very much apply if all your 20 friends felt the opposite way - that would be closer to the norm, but sti…

> If your 20 friends are all "massive fans" of a given person, I agree, that's a pretty solid indicator of significant bias. I'm glad you agree. Would you say that the tone of your comment reinforces, diminishes, or is neutral with respect to my comment about starting flame wars?

[deleted]