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

Shame on Y Combinator

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 1001 posts

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#321

Post by dpcx »

ceterum_censeo wrote: post #275
maxerickson wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because he is willing to face the repercussions of doing so.

What repercussions? The situation strikes me as asymmetric: no matter what action Altman or Graham take they will be heavily criticized; for Ptacek, the worst would seem to be disagreement with his well-reasoned dialogue. It seems unfair to force this to become a very public conversation.

Altman made it a very public conversation when he posted it on the YC blog. Others are just continuing to discuss in a similarly public venue.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#322

Post by fixxer »

Who stands to lose more if Theil were to no longer be affiliated with YC? Is YC a social endeavor with a political agenda, or a program for entrepreneurs?

If the former, might want to tell the investors. Start with John Meriwether. ;)

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#323

Post by tptacek »

ceterum_censeo wrote: post #275
maxerickson wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because he is willing to face the repercussions of doing so.

What repercussions? The situation strikes me as asymmetric: no matter what action Altman or Graham take they will be heavily criticized; for Ptacek, the worst would seem to be disagreement with his well-reasoned dialogue. It seems unfair to force this to become a very public conversation.

Sam Altman has so much money that he divides his time between multiple McLarens. His "reserve fund" in case of emergencies is ten million dollars. Altman need never work again in his life. That's not me, especially after my two teenage kids go to college.

I'm a startup founder. Not only that, but I'm a startup founder that just last year considered attending YC during the summer session after Altman invited me (and, more likely, my then-cofounder Patrick McKenzie). I have friendships with people inside of YC, and with YC founders. Moreover, the company I'm building now works exclusively with startups, most of them at the YC stage of development, no doubt many of whom will actually be YC companies. How likely am I to get that invite again?

Furthermore, Peter Thiel is famously the most vindictive investor in Silicon Valley. He bragged about it, I believe, to the New York Times. I've had the pleasure of being blackballed by a group of different VC firms in the past.

If you think I have nothing to lose by antagonizing Sam Altman and, I guess, Peter Thiel (I think I have some safety from being too insignificant for Thiel to care about), I'd ask you to reevaluate.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#324

Post by byuu »

gondo wrote: post #216
byuu wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an inevitable result of winner-take-all, first-past-the-post voting. This video explains the situation very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo Short of revolution, we aren't ever going to see a representative democracy here, because the two parties in power have us perfectly divided 50/50, and the status quo benefits them both greatly.

this seems to be a problem of presidential democracy (voting for 1 man). parliamentary democracy, where people are voting for a party and even specifically for multiple people nominated by the party, is solving this problem.

Right, but how do we get the US to move to a system of proportional voting and power? We're never going to get a president+congress that is controlled by one party to vote and pass new laws / ratify new amendments that change the system such that they'll no longer be in control. And we can't get the current two parties to agree on whether the sun is hot or not, let alone on radically changing the way our democracy works.

The cynic in me suspects that, despite all the fiery rhetoric, both parties are in fact very happy with the status quo and the partisan divide that exists in this country. Aside from a few battleground states/areas, most seats are perfectly safe. Mississippi isn't going blue, and California isn't going red.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#326

Post by jazzyk »

Any form of ostracism based on someone's political views scares the hell out of me.

It constitutes an attempt to suppress political discourse and ultimately, freedom of speech.

Disappointing to see many in the tech industry not understanding this.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#327

Post by surfmike »

I think the core of this dispute is the question: How do we deal with those we deeply disagree with? Ostracism, shunning, and preaching? Or vocally opposing their beliefs, as civilly and constructively as you can?

America is increasingly settling into two tribes who seem to believe in the first option.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#328

Post by ElComradio »

tptacek wrote: post #230
_hao wrote: post #118

You Americans (at least I think the majority of you are Americans) are getting quite ridiculous arguing over this. Supporting a political candidate is a personal choice, one that is given to every eligible individual in a democratic state. Calling for someone to be fired or sever ties with them over political choice is retarded and counter-productive.

Adult life is full of personal choices that adults are required to be accountable for.

Almost nobody will agree with the idea that in an ideal world built upon the "marketplace of ideas" that someone should be constrained from expressing political opinions for fear of losing their employment.

In fact this being so is a primary driver of Trump's anti-PC appeal.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#329

Post by splawn »

ThomPete wrote: post #293
jaegerpicker wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That Trump's and by extension Theil's actions have a very real set of consequences has NOTHING to do with democracy. The government is not taking action against them, we the people are. The very idea of democracy is that it's the expressed will of the people, filtered through mechanics to make it possible to administrate. In this case the will of a great number of people, including Marco according to the post, is rem…

And just by that you became what you claim to be against. I am not for Trump or for Hillary, i am for the right to have a discussion about bigger issues without being painted as a supporter of biggotry which only serves to detract from the issues this country has. But i guess that makes me the naive part here.

>And just by that you became what you claim to be against.

Are you claiming that pointing out bigotry is in it's self an act of bigotry? Im asking because that is how I read that, and I don't want to accidentally create straw-man argument because of a misunderstanding.

Having said that here is my potential straw-man.... Wouldn't it follow that pointing that out is also an act of bigotry? Where is the cutoff point?

Post reply on HN