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

Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 86 posts

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#41

Post by reaperducer »

colmvp wrote: post #19

Within minutes of his death breaking the news, someone in the comment posted on HN about this enablement. I had skepticism but it also felt way too specific and out of nowhere for me to think they were lying. It was heartbreaking to eventually realize it was indeed the truth.

It's what I call the Michael Jackson Effect.

Someone surrounds themselves with people who are financially dependent on them, so they only tell them that they're great, and whatever they do is the best thing that has ever happened. The unchecked praise-money feedback loop eventually leads to the host's destruction.

See also: Silicon Valley.

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#42

Post by [deleted] »

prionassembly wrote: post #10

I didn't know about this. I can't open the link, but I read https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/technology/tony-hsieh-dea... and the whole thing seems classic untreated bipolar disorder. I wonder how much of SV shenanigans can be attributed to manic breakdowns. There was already a "hypomanic advantage" meme going around a while ago; and, of course, thinking you can slightly toe the line towards a controled flirt with…

[deleted]

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#43

Post by redisman »

rchaud wrote: post #14
prionassembly wrote: post #10

I didn't know about this. I can't open the link, but I read https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/technology/tony-hsieh-dea... and the whole thing seems classic untreated bipolar disorder. I wonder how much of SV shenanigans can be attributed to manic breakdowns. There was already a "hypomanic advantage" meme going around a while ago; and, of course, thinking you can slightly toe the line towards a controled flirt with…

I wonder if this will be the new frontier of bio-hacking: attempting to replicate the symptoms of mania to get a "performance advantage".

Is mania a desired state though? It's very chaotic and we already have adderall. I would guess it was more of a facsimile of happiness than a productivity hack. I'm partying all day, my mood is chemically elevated so surely this is what happiness is right?

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#44

Post by omginternets »

rchaud wrote: post #15
Leary wrote: post #11

"Among the many friends the entrepreneur made over his life, some said the cause of his death had spanned many months, in plain sight to those who surrounded him. Last summer, his Park City companions hired an on-call doctor. Unless Mr. Hsieh moderated his drug and alcohol use, the doctor said, he would die within six months." It's one thing to overly indulge a billionaire friend, it's another to endanger his physica…

You cannot forcibly make someone go to rehab. People are quick to blame his 'friends', but it appears that they hired a personal doctor, who gave doctorly advice. What more could they do?

I've often wondered about this, in the abstract.

What if the reason someone isn't motivated to get better is precisely because of the acute drug dependency? In other words, what if getting someone through the initial withdrawal of, say, heroin stabilized them enough to feel motivated to improve their lives?

After all, we use this reasoning to prescribe medication for e.g. anxiety and depression. The reasoning is that drugs are sometimes very good at providing people with just enough stability to allow for long-term solutions like therapy.

If this is indeed the case, might there not be some situations in which forcibly taking someone to rehab would be helpful?

The "you cannot forcibly make someone go to rehab" seems like policy more than actual truth. It may even be a good policy, for all I know. But assuming I'm right, maybe we shouldn't confuse the two.

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#45

Post by omgwtfbbq »

sneak wrote: post #30
Leary wrote: post #11

"Among the many friends the entrepreneur made over his life, some said the cause of his death had spanned many months, in plain sight to those who surrounded him. Last summer, his Park City companions hired an on-call doctor. Unless Mr. Hsieh moderated his drug and alcohol use, the doctor said, he would die within six months." It's one thing to overly indulge a billionaire friend, it's another to endanger his physica…

Our lives and bodies are our own, to use, build, and destroy as we see fit. It's one thing to help a friend avoid an accidental death, but this speaks to a months long pattern of behavior that was clearly a deliberate personal decision. What's the point of wealth if not obtaining the basic freedom to live (and die) how we choose?

>a months long pattern of behavior that was clearly a deliberate personal decision

Drug/Alcohol addiction is hardly a personal decision... This is a dangerous point of view to take.

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#48

Post by goat_whisperer »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #2

US-centric views of love have evolved more towards ‘if it feels right, do it’ It feels odd to tell anyone ‘no’ because people think you are judging them, so most just stay quiet. In a different culture, Tony may have survived if people felt comfortable questioning dangerous behavior.

I don't know if you read the article. But there were people trying to intervene, namely his family, and people calling the police to check in on him. However, the people who were on his payroll made an effort to prevent this stuff, and Tony himself saw any kind of intervention as a kind of betrayal.

So generalizing this example and applying it to US culture is off base.

Post reply on HN