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

'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

missionlocal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 558 posts

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#371

Post by kyleamazza »

roenxi wrote: post #290
Arainach wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Posting that you want a group of city councilors to die is not normal behavior. It's not normal when sober, it's not normal on alcohol, it's not normal for any functioning member of society. Anyone saying these things is disturbing. The fact that someone who a number of people believe is intelligent and worth listening to would say such things is extremely disturbing.

> ... not normal behavior ... Are we sure about that? There are politicians who have coordinated/enabled things with consequences that would justify capital punishment if someone believes in that as an option. For example, from a raw moral perspective a reasonable person could support executing the entire congressional Aye vote for the US sending the army into Afghanistan. That would be a terrible mistake, because th…

In the situation you posit, that sort of action would come from a vote, not a single person's vigilante call for action. That is the difference.

While I'd argue for a normal person that posting something like that would just fly under the radar and disappear into the aether of the internet, the same does not apply to someone who heads a large publicly visible company, and who posts publicly on an account associated (implicitly) with that company.

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#372

Post by spacebacon »

spacebacon wrote: post #357

Technically we are all dying slow. If we are going to take his statement literally then we should consider how literal the entire statement is. We all “should die slow” as that is inherit to the human condition. Each breath we inhale is slowly oxidizing us from the inside out. If he said they should die fast I would be more concerned. If he said they should all die on x date at y place by z method then that is defini…

I take no side here in this factual statement yet welcome even more down votes from anyone that can’t regulate their emotional response beyond a down vote to a reasonable and objective analysis of his statement. Carry on with the downvoting. You are doing great!

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#373

Post by romwell »

khimaros wrote: post #265
badrequest wrote: post #47

> Tan, for his part, apologized over the weekend, noting that his post was a reference to a Tupac Shakur lyric Ah, so if it's a quote, it doesn't matter, because even though you've decided when to use them, they're not "your words" Thanks, going to publish press releases with Cannibal Corpse lyrics going forward.

can confirm this is taken almost word for word from "Hit 'em up", 2Pac's infamous and apparently (at least partially) sincere response to B.I.G.'s "Who shot ya?" this song played an important part in the public exchange that concluded with both artists dead from fatal gunshot wounds. the seemingly out of place "as a record label" portion of Tan's quote probably should have engendered some pause in the discerning read…

>the seemingly out of place "as a record label" portion of Tan's quote probably should have engendered some pause in the discerning reader.

A discerning reader would discern that the word record was missing from Tran's allusion to Tupac's song.

Here's the full quote, in its entirety:

>Fuck Chan Peskin Preston Walton Melgar Ronen Safai Chan as a label and motherfucking crew

>And if you are down with Peskin Preston Walton Melgar Ronen Safai Chan as a crew fuck you too

>Die slow motherfuckers

Compare and contrast with Tupac's lyrics:

>Fuck Mobb Deep, fuck Biggie

>Fuck Bad Boy as a staff, record label and as a motherfuckin' crew

>And if you want to be down with Bad Bo, then fuck you too*

>Chino XL, fuck you too

>All you motherfuckers, fuck you too (take money, take money)

>All of y'all motherfuckers, fuck you, die slow, motherfucker

The only part that was left intact is "die slow".

Which is hardly a quote. More of a violent, incoherent ramble.

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#374

Post by suslik »

sublinear wrote: post #358

> Tan “should not have done any of that. He should go for a while. He should not represent tech anymore,” I'd argue that anyone who cares this much should "go for a while". For over at least a decade now it's made no sense that we hold people in certain roles to a higher standard than anyone else. These high standards are a form of power transfer that hurts those who believe in them. Can't we just admit we're all hum…

Does he actually "represents tech"? I am really not sure about that.

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#375

Post by ignoramous »

tempestn wrote: post #257

I'm a little bit aghast at all the comments saying this is normal or no big deal. Maybe it is normal (or at least common), but it shouldn't be. If you believe it's no big deal, I can't agree. I can see this kind of behaviour from adolescents, but adults should understand that words are meaningful and have consequences, and that even if you disagree with someone, they're still a human being who deserves some modicum o…

> normal

It isn't normal for anyone else, of course. As for Garry, he is heavily invested in SF politics.

> no big deal

It is a big deal only if Garry was consistently inflammatory. Otherwise, it can be safely relegated to careless jibe by a drunkard.

> words are meaningful and have consequences

True, but one is allowed to retract, excuse, apologize. One incident unto drastic consequences will result in heavy-handedness wielded often, a weaponization against anyone standing upto establishment or established norms (which is quite contrary to what either the left or the right would want, in the context of political discourse).

> adolescents, but adults

Are we being too sensitive, vindictive, projecting remorse? One look at tech Twitter (and deleted tweets) and we'd want to cancel them all. What good is that going to bring, other than create an inescapable and ever shrinking echo chamber?

> some modicum of respect, or at least decency

Politics gets dirty from time to time.

> Wishing a slow death on someone, even rhetorically

There is probably a socio-political climate in which such statements could be considered incitement, but in this case, lunatics using Garry's words to threaten and scare their victims is exactly that... a work of an opportunist lunatic who probably thinks highly of themself. That isn't on Garry.

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#376

Post by roenxi »

kyleamazza wrote: post #371
roenxi wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... not normal behavior ... Are we sure about that? There are politicians who have coordinated/enabled things with consequences that would justify capital punishment if someone believes in that as an option. For example, from a raw moral perspective a reasonable person could support executing the entire congressional Aye vote for the US sending the army into Afghanistan. That would be a terrible mistake, because th…

In the situation you posit, that sort of action would come from a vote, not a single person's vigilante call for action. That is the difference. While I'd argue for a normal person that posting something like that would just fly under the radar and disappear into the aether of the internet, the same does not apply to someone who heads a large publicly visible company, and who posts publicly on an account associated (…

Well,

1. Votes come at the end of a process starting with someone calling for action. Has to be a first person to bring the idea up; and Twitter is as good a place for public debate as we have. (If only people could master the longform paragraph, or even essay-length debate and move to somewhere a bit more nuanced.)

2. Reflecting on the "Die slow motherfuckers" for a little while - Tan didn't actually make a call for action. Exactly what that means is ambiguous, and it is without a doubt poor form.

> someone who heads a large publicly visible company

If the board wants to sack him I could certainly see that happening. Although as a practical matter, I don't think this is a sustainable standard. A good CEO is worth their weight in gold, sacking them over being a Twitter troll from time to time seems like a bad call. Musk is an example; both a troll and also a pretty amazing CEO. The right thing to do might be to tolerate the situation unless the pressure gets overwhelming.

On that point we've been tolerating outward displays of political speech from corporations for a while. I'm against it both on principle and because it is typically left-wing-aligned but since it happens I don't see why this sort of political diatribe is needs to be stepped on. Dude has political opinions. We all do.

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#377

Post by syndacks »

tempestn wrote: post #257

I'm a little bit aghast at all the comments saying this is normal or no big deal. Maybe it is normal (or at least common), but it shouldn't be. If you believe it's no big deal, I can't agree. I can see this kind of behaviour from adolescents, but adults should understand that words are meaningful and have consequences, and that even if you disagree with someone, they're still a human being who deserves some modicum o…

He was only quoting Tupac…

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#378

Post by ZeroGravitas »

tempestn wrote: post #257

I'm a little bit aghast at all the comments saying this is normal or no big deal. Maybe it is normal (or at least common), but it shouldn't be. If you believe it's no big deal, I can't agree. I can see this kind of behaviour from adolescents, but adults should understand that words are meaningful and have consequences, and that even if you disagree with someone, they're still a human being who deserves some modicum o…

I saw a clip from a popular right wing podcaster recently in which he was annoyed that his guests kept wishing death on people.

He was mostly annoyed it seemed because this meant he got demonitized or had to pull some content which cost him money. And that people didn't listen to his specific pre-show instruction to not call for death. And that some of his viewers got angry at him about this (I didn't quite follow why, they weren't angry about the death threats but somehow thought his removal of episodes made him a part of the deep state or something).

edit: link to short version of the clip I saw

https://twitter.com/majorityfm/status/1752833975851049108

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#379

Post by rayiner »

tempestn wrote: post #257

I'm a little bit aghast at all the comments saying this is normal or no big deal. Maybe it is normal (or at least common), but it shouldn't be. If you believe it's no big deal, I can't agree. I can see this kind of behaviour from adolescents, but adults should understand that words are meaningful and have consequences, and that even if you disagree with someone, they're still a human being who deserves some modicum o…

We can debate about whether it should be normal, but clearly it is, right? For example we have the Darwin Award, where we mock people who actually died (not just rhetorically). I’m not the least bit edgy as far as millennials go, and I’ve made the joke that “the best thing Trump could do for the GOP is to get assassinated.” It always gets a laugh.

Re: 'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant

#380

Post by Amezarak »

this_steve_j wrote: post #353
zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

If his rapper persona had tweeted the lyrics to a diss track but clarified the theatrical kayfabe by breaking the fourth wall, that arguably could be less of a threat but still demonstrate questionable judgment, so I agree with you there. But violent rhetoric certainly increases the likelihood that others will escalate violence against the target, and so the risk (threat) of death and harm very much does increase as…

https://missionlocal.org/2024/01/y-combinator-ceo-garry-tans...

> Half a dozen lawyers and judges told Mission Local that, however ill-advised, Tan’s comments do not rise to the legal definition of a death threat.

Your interpretation involves a large change to how free speech has been legally defined in America for a long time.

You may be interested in this case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

Where the Supreme Court clarified that even more disgusting speech tinged with violence-encouraging rhetoric was, in fact, legally free speech. (Please, let's not call rhetoric itself violence.)

Post reply on HN