Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons • Hacker News Board

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#121

Post by bko » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:49 PM UTC

adamlett wrote: post #107

bko wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course money matters in justice, as it matters with everything else. I can't imagine a system in which it doesn't matter. Perhaps if the Bar Association cartel was broken, lawyers would be less expensive, but there needs to be a kind of mechanism to allocate the judicial resources of the state.

You really can't imagine? What if for example the losing party in a law suit was automatically forced to pay the legal expenses of the winning party? That is actually how it works many places outside of the US. It's quite effective at discouraging frivolous lawsuits, and it means that a rich person can't bankrupt a someone by waging a legal attrition war.

Yes, that would help. However, there is still an upfront cost of being able to defend the lawsuit. I imagine the wealthy in the countries that do have this system still have advantages in litigious matters

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#122

Post by arprocter » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:50 PM UTC

The media backlash feels more like a disingenuous and thinly veiled attack on Thiel's political views.

Ask yourself - would there be all this hand-wringing if Soros had funded the case?

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#123

Post by saint_fiasco » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:50 PM UTC

adamlett wrote: post #107

bko wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course money matters in justice, as it matters with everything else. I can't imagine a system in which it doesn't matter. Perhaps if the Bar Association cartel was broken, lawyers would be less expensive, but there needs to be a kind of mechanism to allocate the judicial resources of the state.

You really can't imagine? What if for example the losing party in a law suit was automatically forced to pay the legal expenses of the winning party? That is actually how it works many places outside of the US. It's quite effective at discouraging frivolous lawsuits, and it means that a rich person can't bankrupt a someone by waging a legal attrition war.

In that system Gawker would still be fucked. However a rich person who controls a media company can still discourage lawsuits against him by spending a lot of money on lawyers to defend him.

Suppose that rich media-owner slandered you. Even if the lawsuit would not be frivolous, the small possibility that you would lose and have to pay for the rich guy's very expensive lawyers would dissuade you from suing him in the first place.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#124

Post by ryporter » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:51 PM UTC

further_tech wrote: post #93

dimino wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an ad hominem, because the article isn't making an argument, and someone questioning his motives isn't saying he's wrong because of his motives.

The article is making an argument (Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons) and, regardless of the author's motives or background, I analyze his arguments. Claiming "isn't saying he's wrong because of his motives" is just reinforcing what I'm trying to say.

The author defends Gawker by stating, "But at least Gawker did this openly." If he is working for Gawker, that is very relevant to his argument.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#125

Post by drumdance » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:51 PM UTC

GrumpyYoungMan wrote: post #91

further_tech wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if so, I'd rather move beyond the Ad hominem.

Pointing out that a source is likely not impartial because they are a professional PR specialist is hardly an ad hominem. From the author's page: "Keith uses the power of strategic communications along with his experience as a lawyer and company co-founder to secure maximum leverage for his clients. His individual and team recognitions include the PR News Award for Outstanding Media Exposure (Business Development); T…

In fairness, his opinion is probably consistent with the views of the editors at Reuters.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#126

Post by ThomPete » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:52 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #17

> Litigation finance is typically a business venture. It doesn’t become charity because a wealthy person uses it as a template for a personal crusade and then insists he’s doing everyone else a favor. Why? Many cases brought by individuals or groups on moral grounds have led the way to better governance. A lot of good work has been done by groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Why should individuals or g…

There is a difference between winning a lawsuit to right a wrong and then to go further and actually try to take down a paper. Whatever Gawker did to Theil it's not worth doing what he is doing but thats up to him.

The problem though is that as extreme wealth gets put into fewer hands it allow them to basically bleed anything skeptical to this out.

Furthermore and as a sidenote.

I find it ironic that Theil of all people, a libertarian who claims we more or less don't need government end up kind of illustrating exactly why we do. Thats of course on top of his funding of Palantir a company who's based on government work.

I like some of his thinking but I think he is showing some major flaws.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#127

Post by ctulek » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:53 PM UTC

vintermann wrote: post #42

threatofrain wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the problem is the fact that Peter Thiel tossed money in the direction of a lawsuit. The issue is that money matters in justice, and that Peter Thiel coincidentally put his money somewhere did not make this so. People are focusing shame on Peter Thiel today but that's the wrong place. There will always be rich people.

Now, I agree with that. But it's not the argument other people are making. People are saying this is an attack on journalism, and complaining that Thiel could have bankrupted Gawker just by attrition. Yeah, he could. But that was not in fact what he did. Gawker didn't lose by attrition, they lost a particular case they damn well deserved to lose. On the other hand, Thiel says Gawker's former victims have been forced…

If Thiel didn't have a history with Gawker, I would believe to this nobel cause. However, it is obvious that he is using his power for personal revenge.

The short article just tries to show that the new billionaires are not different than old billionaires. They won't hesitate to use their power for personal gain in any area.

Well, you may say, of course, they will use their power for their personal gain. Well, yes, that is the point. Silicon Valley billionaires are not different.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#128

Post by wl » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:54 PM UTC

atonse wrote: post #76

vintermann wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now, I agree with that. But it's not the argument other people are making. People are saying this is an attack on journalism, and complaining that Thiel could have bankrupted Gawker just by attrition. Yeah, he could. But that was not in fact what he did. Gawker didn't lose by attrition, they lost a particular case they damn well deserved to lose. On the other hand, Thiel says Gawker's former victims have been forced…

Yes, Gawker deserved to lose that case. However, the Thiel involvement produced a vindictive and revenge-based strategy to try the case in such a way that Gawker couldn't use their insurance to pay the damages. So I don't think anybody's arguing that Gawker shouldn't have lost that case. But it's clear the motive here wasn't just punishment, it was to put Gawker out of business. And I used to hate Gawker because of a…

Part of the purpose of tort law is to discourage tortfeasors from future misconduct. With a company as big as Gawker, insurance subverts this to some extent.

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#129

Post by arprocter » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:54 PM UTC

danso wrote: post #54

FWIW, David Simon, one of the biggest living romantics about the American press, has been ripping Gawker and defending Thiel for the past week. Probably the most prominent of journalists who I've yet seen defend Thiel: https://twitter.com/aodespair/status/736536875498770432

See Generation Kill and s5 of the Wire to feel more of his press opinions

Thanks - I didn't know he was on twitter

Re: Thiel shows why tech billionaires are the new robber barons

#130

Post by saint_fiasco » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 2:55 PM UTC

further_tech wrote: post #73

supergirl wrote: post #11

I wonder what's the connection, if any, between the author of the article and Gawker. If he's the same guy I found on Linkedin, he seems to be working for some kind of PR company for hire; also confirmed by the article footnote. I hope nobody takes this article only for what it is but also questions why it is.

Even if so, I'd rather move beyond the Ad hominem.

Ad hominem isn't always irrelevant. You would expect a journalist to defend an organization that employs many journalists and it's useful to keep that into account, as it reduces the ratio between the (conditional probability that the journalist will argue for that position given that the position is true) and (conditional probability that the journalist will argue for that position given that the position is false).