The Sean Parker Wedding Is the Perfect Parable for Silicon Valley Excess

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 5:37 AM UTC

calinet6 wrote: post #22

scarmig wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Big Sur is hardly some little known park. It's well above Muir Woods in annual visitors (I'm seeing 3M vs 700k) and not too far behind Yosemite (3M vs 4M). I'm pretty surprised that there hasn't been an uproar over it yet. This is the first I've heard of it. Good on Madrigal.

Well, the problem is jurisdiction and ownership. Big Sur isn't a National Park, it's really just a region, including a State Park scattered around an area with privately owned land as well. In contrast, Muir Woods is just a very small national monument (AFAIK, hence its small visitation) and Yosemite has the protection of the NPS and federal government. Looks like the hotel was on private land, so really the issue is…

Post by dchest » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 9:16 AM UTC

rurounijones wrote: post #14

whyenot wrote: post #5

I'm not sure a $2.5 million fine means very much when you have an estimated net worth of $2.1 billion.

One reason I like a system where fines are x% of income like in some nordic countries that can result in 6 figure ($) speeding tickets[1]. [1] http://www.trafficticketsecrets.com/speeding-ticket-news-fin...

Post by shin_lao » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 9:30 AM UTC

Bjorkbat wrote: post #25

Kinda reminds me of back when I used to grow organic vegetables for a living. Well, tried to. The farmer I worked with specialized more in meats and the like, and together me and him would drive down to Houston and The Woodlands to make deliveries, because that's how we operated, people placed their orders and we delivered at designated spots. I learned a lot of things during that period, but the weird thing is, the…

Post by valleyer » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 10:23 AM UTC

photorized wrote: post #15

calinet6 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a slippery slope argument in some ways; sure he can afford it, but if that's the case, should people with means be able to do anything they can afford? Or is there some limit where we can reasonably call it "excess" by nature of it being more than is reasonable for a person to need or desire; even if the excess in question is just disrespect for the conventions. It is an opinionated judgement, but it's not misle…

I am not defending Parker. I saw 'excess' in the headline, I was expecting to see some form of immoderate indulgence. What I saw, was in line with my expectations, unfortunately. The guy's sense of perspective is probably long gone. Disregard for the conventions (and laws) is a different matter though. I hope this goes beyond simple fines.

Post by cafard » Wed, Jun 05, 2013, 12:13 PM UTC