Untitled topic • Hacker News Board

Re: undefined

#291

Post by selimthegrim » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:11 AM UTC

api wrote: post #122

bobsgame wrote: post #38

I'm not very political and I haven't decided who to vote for yet, but I don't understand why the tech industry is so anti-Trump. He seems like a relatively sincere and smart guy to me, and some of his policies seem to be better for business. Is it because of tougher immigration laws? Are there other reasons based on his policies, or is it mostly just emotional?

Can't speak for others, only myself. To me he's an obvious off the charts narcissist... so much so that his narcissism actually seems extreme against the backdrop of Washington politics and the media. That's kind of amazing. IMHO that disqualifies him from the presidency regardless of his policies. It's analogous to why you can't get a pilot's license with bad eyesight. A narcissist is a person with a dangerous addic…

I too, am from Cleveland, and I can't say I've ever heard Thiel mention Ohio or the heartland/rust belt specifically.

Re: undefined

#292

Post by selimthegrim » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:14 AM UTC

eruditely wrote: post #141

I'm glad to see our Dutch friends have stayed sensible, I'm not-white and I'm voting for Trump because he will not prioritize blacks/mexicans over asian/indian people. There's a huge resentment in the asian communities, and it's super common to say "Fuck white people" "Don't hang out w/ white ppl". Because of built up resentment. if you're a minority learn the differences between white people and what they believe, y…

Has it occurred to you that Indians being good hasn't stopped the police from treating them like the bad kids, to expose one limit of your horrible creaking analogy?

Re: undefined

#293

Post by AvenueIngres » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:18 AM UTC

madaxe_again wrote: post #287

_tpzm wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He is a libertarian I just find this impossible to reconcile with his support for Trump, the most authoritarian presidential candidate in a very long time and possibly ever. I think many of his supporters would actually agree with that description, they like that about him, and they absolutely do not describe themselves as libertarian. They describe themselves as "conservatives" who want a "strong" president to "ta…

Conversely, he could from a family like mine - my Omi is Austrian, along with a slew of cousins. Dinner table conversation still turns to how things would have been better had herr Hitler won. My uncle has to leave the room he so vociferously objects to his mother and his children. So, that collective memory swings both ways. Maybe Thiel lacks education in history and pines for a glorious fictitious past, which is a…

Thiel has bachelor and JD degrees in Philosophy and Law from Stanford. I think it is a little bit preposterous to assume he holds his current views about Trump simply because he is too uneducated to think otherwise.

>Maybe Thiel lacks education in history and pines for a glorious fictitious past, which is a core tenet of the trump campaign. And fascism.

Maybe you are the one confusing narratives built around each candidate by one camp or another with actual ideological separation between those two candidates. Trump is not an authoritarian and Clinton is not a progressive.

This election is about solving the great stagnation problem the world and the US are facing. Thiel understands that should Clinton win, there will be war and an ever increasing flow of immigration that will slowly grow to become impossible to assimilate into what is current mainstream American culture.

> And fascism.

Besides, this is not even the case. You understand concepts have definitions and you can manipulate those to fit whatever pisses you off in a candidate campaigning rhetoric.

Re: undefined

#294

Post by matt4077 » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:19 AM UTC

AvenueIngres wrote: post #200

daveguy wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware either had a proven record of money for favors. Except maybe Trump's donation in Florida.

You are joking? The Clinton Foundation has left an overwhelming trail of evidence that points to their wrong doings, whether it is in Haiti, at the WHO or through the pay-to-play scheme and deals they have with petro-monarchies like Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The latest Wikileaks dump shows that Bill Clinton received a million dollar "birthday gift" through the Clinton Foundation directly from Qatar. At the very moment…

There's simply no proof for any of that. Specifically, there might be a pro but the quid's missing.

Considering US relations with Qatar and Saudi Arabia have always been good (in the 'he's a monster, but he's our monster' sense), there's just no reason to suspect any influence. Saudi Arabia's involvement in 9/11 was known early on by the Bush administration as well.

Re: undefined

#295

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:19 AM UTC

Shivetya wrote: post #266

HSO wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I generally share your sentiment, I also think it's a stretch to hold up Gawker as an example of the freedom of the press. Outing someone or publishing a "sex tape" of someone against their will clearly breaches boundaries. I doubt that the public interest, by any definition, was served by this. Neither Thiel nor Bollea were running for public office. Trump, on the other hand, is a real danger. I would not lump…

sadly I find his opponent to be more dangerous as the press and Congress will likely never call her out regardless of what she chooses to do. already a proven welfare warfare queen we can expect simply more of the same. At least with Trump we know the press will nip his heels everyday and misstep and Congress will not be friendly. we haven't had an adversarial press in eight years and only one adversarial party in th…

[deleted]

Re: undefined

#296

Post by sjellis » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:20 AM UTC

Senji wrote: post #277

yid wrote: post #255

ROI talk aside, and long risks aside, as an entrepreneur in SV, I'll be damned if I touch a dollar of Thiel funding. You can be as rational and cynical as you like, but if you even indirectly support a candidate as abhorrent morally as Trump, I'm going to assume that you have the same vacuousness in ethics that the top of the Republican ticket has, and I'd rather be an impoverished failure than take a dollar of his c…

>abhorrent morally as Trump >you're on the wrong side of history. Let me guess, reality has a left wing bias? Get out of this industry if you place politics above code.

As lots of people have had to point out recently, there's political issues, which we can disagree on, and there's basic human decency.

Re: undefined

#297

Post by adrianratnapala » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:27 AM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #235

aptwebapps wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he's investing in the hopes that Trump will pull of a long shot. I think he has a different goal in mind. He said in his speech at the RNC that the country is broken and that Trump is the only one who can fix it. I have no doubt that he believes the first part - he's said as much for a long time - but I do doubt that he really thinks Trump is the man to fix anything. Thiel may be nutty according to some…

Considering how divisive Trump is even among the conservative base, and especially in the RNC, seems weird to support this particular candidate if what he wants is to assert himself in the republican base and party.

When (as seems likely) Trump loses this election, a weird new space in the Republican party. The "establishment" (whatever that is) will still be the enemy, but the rejection of any one more serious than Trump will have to go.

This will be opportune world for all kinds of right-wingers whose ideas are too extreme or too kooky to have been taken seriously before, but who are more toughtful than Trump.

In very different ways, Paul Ryan and Peter Thiel are positioning themselves for that world. As are a lot of others.

Re: undefined

#298

Post by tomp » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:28 AM UTC

bcg1 wrote: post #237

It should not be overlooked that Mr. Thiel's funding of hogan's lawsuit against Gawker was clearly a shot across the bow of American freedom of the press by the plutocracy. It should also not be overlooked that Charles Harder (hogan's lawyer paid for by Thiel) is now Melania Trump's lawyer in 2 lawsuits against media outlets, and also is working for Roger Ailes, the disgraced deviant sexual harrassing adviser to Dona…

Gawker deserved it. They were vehemently opposed publishing the Fappening leaks (i.e. nude photos of famous women), but more than happy to publish Hogan's video ("he's a man, he can take it"). Sexist of the finest degree.

Re: undefined

#299

Post by matt4077 » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:29 AM UTC

Radim wrote: post #170

Everything has to be such a spectacle, so black-and-white and binary in the US. The forum discussions, here and elsewhere, give outside observers this impression: |=============================X=| Candidate X: some minor flaws, but overall a great option |=X=============================| Candidate Y: the new Hitler, world falls apart if elected For reference, here is how many people in (not only) Europe view this "gr…

The Clinton-is-dishonest narrative is a completely American fiction, created four of five years ago in some strategy meeting and popularized by repetition.

There's nothing there. Republicans spent thousands of hours in Benghazi and came up empty handed. Worst thing she apparently did was setting up a private mail server, as did her predecessors, Republicans included.

Europeans see Trump as an actual danger to peace and stability. He's assembling an angry mob spewing hate against minorities, women, people who think. He's peddling in conspiracy theories undermining democracy. He's treating the carefully adjusted balance of power in eastern Europe. In short: Europeans know his type quite well. He's no Hitler, no. He's Putin, Erdogan, Orban.

Re: undefined

#300

Post by sjellis » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:30 AM UTC

paulv wrote: post #253

ubernostrum wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So consider Proposition 8. This was a ballot measure whose sole purpose was to enshrine in law the idea that "this group of people over here aren't legally equal to everyone else". Privately believing someone has done something wrong, or belongs to a bad group, is one thing. Trying to enshrine that belief in law and disenfranchise the targeted person or group is quite another thing, and if you honestly are unable to…

Look at the timeline. Eich donated after Prop 22 was overturned (Prop 22 restricted marriage to same-sex couples). He wasn't trying to keep the status quo, he was trying to change the California constitution to outlaw something that the court had previously deemed legal. The end result of that difference is subtle, yes, but I find the spirit of the difference significant. Which is to say...much worse.

Thank you - I think that is the thing that pro-Eich people consistently ignore. The Prop 8 campaign to retroactively strip people of human rights once those rights were re-affirmed by the state Supreme Court was an act of pure malice and spite. I don't know what Eich's personal reasons for donating were, but it speaks very poorly of his character that he did.