How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House • Hacker News Board

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#51

Post by acdha » Thu, May 07, 2026, 1:06 AM UTC

johndhi wrote: post #33

I guess I'm the lone person who likes Sacks here. I do think it's probably true that his influence flagged after Mythos. But he'd already been moved to the science board when that dropped. It's very over stated and looking to act like he was fired, which he wasn't. An article about a person 'falling out of favor' is silly but I guess that's the vibe of the administration so fair enough.

Think about how you’d have felt if a scientist you respected had joined the RJ Reynolds tobacco research institute. Would their prior achievements overshadow a gross ethical failure?

This administration is worse, both because of the wholesale gutting of the American scientific research establishment and all of the various corruption issues on display. As General Morrison put it, “The standard you walk past, is the standard you accept.” Anyone who signed up knew who they’d be working for and has to accept that will be a major part of their reputation.

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#52

Post by vladgur » Thu, May 07, 2026, 1:11 AM UTC

johndhi wrote: post #33

I guess I'm the lone person who likes Sacks here. I do think it's probably true that his influence flagged after Mythos. But he'd already been moved to the science board when that dropped. It's very over stated and looking to act like he was fired, which he wasn't. An article about a person 'falling out of favor' is silly but I guess that's the vibe of the administration so fair enough.

I dont like David Sacks opinions on anything geopolitical, but respect his opinions on tech and identity politics.

That said, this article is by a political writer and even though its on the Verge, its a political opinion piece(ie the centerpiece of it that he was PUSHED OUT -- could use some evidence)

I dont think that belongs to HN.

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#53

Post by mmooss » Thu, May 07, 2026, 4:56 AM UTC

Supermancho wrote: post #11

mmooss wrote: post #2

The OP speculates on why the Trump administration would change direction. Like so many they omit the reason staring everyone in the face: It's a way to acquire more power and wealth for Trump and allies, and more leverage. AI is the highest growth industry in the world, and the most powerful technological change. Any democratic government would seek to control and harness such a thing to the public interest, and the…

There had to have been a trigger that caused the shift, even if that trigger was a momentum threshold...which had to manifest as signal. What didn't happen was irrational and self-oblivious leadership noticing they had been acting irrationally for years. "the potential" of wealth or power was present long before this shift.

You might overestimate the understanding of people outside the tech bubble. Most don't understand or believe what LLMs can do, and humans have a unavoidable habit of sticking their heads in the sand about disruptive change .

That is especially true in a large, heavily bureaucratic organization with a culture of highly-centralized top-down decision-making by the boss - an 80 year-old, non-technical boss - and which priortizes loyalty to and pleasing the boss over expertise and speaking the truth.

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#54

Post by sagarm » Thu, May 07, 2026, 5:35 AM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #45

malcolmgreaves wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*DoD, don’t use the regime’s illegitimate rebrand.

DoW is much more accurate for how it's being used. Are you one to continue using Twitter instead of calling it X?

In the current zeitgeist, people aren't allowed to rename themselves. Why would entities?

Though personally I prefer X/tter.

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#55

Post by austin-cheney » Thu, May 07, 2026, 5:42 AM UTC

goosejuice wrote: post #46

austin-cheney wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when defense types hear something is DANGEROUS, they want more of it I have been doing defense work for almost 30 years and in my experience that is the opposite of true.

I would imagine that heightened fear/threat results in increased budgets. Is that not the case?

Budgets are driven by congress from input by industry, senior military leaders, and current operations. Perceived risk is a completely unrelated political reality for uninformed voters.

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#56

Post by Quarrelsome » Thu, May 07, 2026, 7:34 AM UTC

randallsquared wrote: post #41

Quarrelsome wrote: post #6

> Anthropic’s enemies in the Pentagon, who had, months prior, convinced Trump that Anthropic was “woke” and should be banned for government use. That people in government speak like this is utterly absurd. The quote from Donald Trump's follow up tweet on t'social is considerably worse. This was all due to Antropic not wanting to take on a military contract, right? Or is it suggested its more to do with Mythos, but wh…

> This was all due to Antropic not wanting to take on a military contract, right? No, they already had a contract (since 2024, revisited/renewed by the Trump admin in mid-2025) which included military usage. That contract, though, had some language about what Claude couldn't be used for, ostensibly because Anthropic was nervous about accuracy in lethal contexts. Hegseth and others were unhappy with the restrictions a…

that is an disgusting way to treat a business partner, but given the people involved; i shouldn't be surprised.

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#57

Post by tim333 » Thu, May 07, 2026, 12:46 PM UTC

johndhi wrote: post #33

I guess I'm the lone person who likes Sacks here. I do think it's probably true that his influence flagged after Mythos. But he'd already been moved to the science board when that dropped. It's very over stated and looking to act like he was fired, which he wasn't. An article about a person 'falling out of favor' is silly but I guess that's the vibe of the administration so fair enough.

I can't say I like him - one of the very few people I've blocked on Twitter for going on about how the pathetic Ukrainians are doomed and should just give up.

Paul Graham also had a bit of a spat over whether he was the most evil person in Silicon Valley. Now mostly deleted https://www.reddit.com/r/TheAllinPodcasts/comments/1ebmh2q/p...

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#58

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, May 07, 2026, 2:16 PM UTC

skissane wrote: post #43

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anthropic, who argue AI is a fundamentally different technology They’re arguing it’s a service. I think Aramark could refuse to contract to provide employees to the U.S. military for a campaign on Chicago.

I think in practice contracts to provide civilian personnel to the Pentagon contain clauses limiting the nature and location of the work - the Pentagon can’t contract for a clerical assistant in DC and then demand they go to Iraq to provide physical security - it violates the nature of the agreed work and the agreed location. But contracts for personnel generally don’t contain restrictions on use beyond that. If the…

> in practice contracts to provide civilian personnel to the Pentagon contain clauses limiting the nature and location of the work

Which is what Anthropic was seeking to do. To be clear, I’m unsympathetic to Anthropic’s automated kill-decision objection. But I’m very sympathetic to their no-domestic-use requirement. And that aligns cleanly with precedent for civilian personnel having limits on “the nature and location” of their work.

> Saying that is a breach of contract-unless

Unless you’re negotiating the contract.

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#59

Post by mark_l_watson » Thu, May 07, 2026, 2:38 PM UTC

I used to be a huge fan of the All In Pod Cast before the four hosts started spending too much time going on and on about their $2000 bottles of booze, and too much bragging in general, and too much politics. Have a good life guys, but tone down the bragging, that is boring. Seriously, previously their business and tech podcast was the best. This article is pretty interesting.

Re: How David Sacks crashed and burned in the White House

#60

Post by Zigurd » Thu, May 07, 2026, 2:40 PM UTC

arjie wrote: post #37

It is fascinating that technologists thought they'd use demagogues as a vehicle for change that they would like to see, but demagogues used technologists as a vehicle for their desired change. In the end, the more government-savvy operators triumphed and the rest sort of flamed out. I'm actually quite surprised Elon Musk got whacked. With his companies's success ultimately relying on varying degrees of how well he us…

This is why people are supposed to outgrow Ayn Rand, Pournelle, and unironic readings of Heinlein.

Once congressional investigations dig into the kind of corruption that appeared on the front page of HN today, with people gaming prediction markets and blatantly insider trading on conventional markets, never mind the stink of fascism, the tech industry is going to have difficulty washing the stink of tinpot dictatorship-grade corruption off.