Untitled topic • Hacker News Board

Re: undefined

#611

Post by 3princip » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:11 PM UTC

idlewords wrote: post #429

Peter Thiel is a YCombinator partner, yet YC has steadfastly refused to disavow him. In a Twitter exchange with David Heinemeier Hansson, Paul Graham suggested that to do so would somehow be the equivalent of firing an employee for having a distateful political opinion. YC's silence on a partner's outspoken support of Trump is disgraceful, and sends the most shameful message about our industry.

It's disgraceful that you would suggest someone be punished for a political opinion.

What's worse is that Clinton is a pathological liar supporting neocon policies which will likely lead to more conflict.

This whole anti-Trump atmosphere is very 1984.

Re: undefined

#612

Post by Jimmy » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:14 PM UTC

kefka wrote: post #499

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because of Clinton's track record. While Sec. of State, she persuaded Obama to intervene in Libya, and in recent speeches she has suggested that the U.S. should take a more aggressive stance against Russian expansionism. She's more of a hawk than is either Obama or her husband. I would put her in roughly the same category of interventionism as Bush.

I know. When I've heard that recently in the last debate, it somewhat made me throw up in my mouth. Last thing I want is yet another war we can't win. I also started thinking about John Titor again, regarding how things happened in his story/anecdote. Obviously different, but a good deal of things seem pretty similar... How many rights will we lose before it's too many?

Don't worry, Hououin Kyouma will show up to save the day. ;)

Re: undefined

#613

Post by rconti » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:18 PM UTC

2AF3 wrote: post #395

rconti wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but offhandedly dismissing "these dishonest polls", when, frankly, 1. They're the best data we have 2. We have no reason to believe they're incorrect 3. There is REALLY no reason to believe they're dishonest Is 100% intellectually dishonest. This is exactly what happened 4 years ago, and apparently some people have not learned from their tremendous mistake. If you want to know why "turnout at a campaign ev…

I'm in fantasy land? If you think the polls aren't manipulated for political advantage you are in fantasy land. You're appeal to 'real scientific data' is childish, since the data can be easy manipulated.

All of my comments stand.

Campaigns also conduct their own internal polling which may or may not have biases, but they're not released; they're used for the campaign. So it only benefits them to know what's actually going on. Trump's is one of the few campaigns that seems only interested in good news, and in not learning from what their internal polling tells them.

That said, of course all campaigns will selectively brag about the polls that make them look good, and quietly ignore those that don't.

Again, the polls are extremely reliable in this country. If you can't see that, you're unlikely to be swayed by yet another data point when this election is complete.

Re: undefined

#614

Post by cloakandswagger » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:26 PM UTC

S4M wrote: post #319

jondubois wrote: post #285

I agree with Thiel about Trump. On the surface, individually, I think that Trump probably looks like a worse person than Hillary, but if you look at each candidate as the sum of their social connections - I think Hillary turns out to be much, much worse. Hillary Clinton is heavily influenced by big finance. That's where the bulk of her friends and her connections come from. Even her son in law is an investment banker…

As a European following the election, I think Trump is a very scary man, yet you provide a good reason to support him, so I am grateful for that as it illuminates my perspective of the US election. Yet, Trump didn't mention those connections between HRC and the finance industry (which were already well known) in the presidential debates.

At the last debate he repeatedly mentioned her finance friends, her paid speeches and Soros during a question about taxes.

Re: undefined

#615

Post by dmode » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #428

dmode wrote: post #404

I hope the tech world shuns Thiel. This is what he is supporting http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-... Specifically, look for his insults aimed at reporters and journalists. This man is unhinged and unqualified. He is currently riling up his followers by claiming that the election will be rigged. I am concerned the consequences of that message https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/1…

The real tragedy is how easily peoples attention are all about form not substance. For all the crazy things Trump is saying he actually have some points that are far more important to discuss than whatever he said about women or journalists. With Hillary you get a seasoned politician who is going to do what they have always been doing. Absolutely nothing. That's besides of course making a huge mess internationally. A…

Well, you have to move past childish rhetoric before we talk substance. And even if we did, Donald doesn't have any substance. If he did, he would have focused on those. His policy ideas are broad brush strokes which don't hold up under further scrutiny. Hillary is a centrist and pragmatic politician. I for one is pretty happy with where the US is and do not want radical change. Minor tweaks around healthcare, military spending, and safety net should be good enough.

Re: undefined

#616

Post by DominikR » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

AsyncAwait wrote: post #505

DominikR wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it then that Socialist governments which are supposedly subordinated to the individual all seem to end up in having re education camps, Gulags, forced labour or concentration camps to crack down on dissenters. Why can't they let individual dissenting opinions exist beside their own hive mind ideology. Why do Socialist governments always try to get control over education to indoctrinate the next generation inst…

> Why is it then that Socialist governments which are supposedly subordinated to the individual all seem to end up in having re education camps, Gulags, forced labour or concentration camps to crack down on dissenters. The don't actually, since Socialism does not discuss anything of that sort - it's an economic theory, not a political one. What you're describing is authoritarianism, which is a mechanism for quickly a…

So in the first part you argue that they acted this way only because other powers tried to subvert them.

I'm not going to argue against the fact that others try to subvert them because this is a fact, but the thing is that other Ideologies also face the same issue.

Yet we consistently always see the same thing in Socialism. The last one where this happened is Venezuela, which has enacted a forced labour law recently.

Regarding education: I wouldn't teach my children Creationism but I also fail to see how this can in any way negatively impact a child in 99,99% of all existing professions. If my child wanted to work in Biology it's a problem, if it wants to work in any other profession - not so much. For me in IT it is completely irrelevant what my beliefs about these matters is.

The only problem that can arise is other people treating you bad because you hold other beliefs than them, no matter how irrelevant they are.

To me it is a matter of freedom. I'm not here on this earth to further some agenda that someone in an ivory tower has thought up. I'm here for myself and the people around me and I want to be free to act in a way that I see fit. Socialism negates this, I'd be just a part of a collective and someone else is going to tell me what my role in society is, what ideas are good and which are bad.

Regarding wealth distribution: Why shouldn't you be able to have 1 trillion dollars, provided it wasn't accumulated through use of force or other criminal means. What you have to understand is that a company makes its money by providing goods and services that other citizens are willing to pay for voluntarily. Maybe the guy with the $80 billion did some shady things, but unless proven so you can't argue against him owning that money.

> Also, Hitler was against the Jews, socialism isn't.

Socialism is against successful people. Why? Because they have options to ignore what the government wants them to do (they are not dependant) and because their success often comes with power.

As it happens Jewish culture has shown again and again that it is a highly successful one at raising children that prove to be highly productive and successful in societies. No amount of persecution and discrimination over 2000 years could change that.

It doesn't surprise me in the least when a Socialist make an Anti-Semitic statement, I know they hate them for their success.

You yourself made a statement one sentence before that arguing that the successful person with lots of money is somehow criminal, which means you despise success at some level. It's not a big step to move from that belief to outright Anti-Semitism.

Re: undefined

#617

Post by dmode » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

awqrre wrote: post #573

dmode wrote: post #404

I hope the tech world shuns Thiel. This is what he is supporting http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-... Specifically, look for his insults aimed at reporters and journalists. This man is unhinged and unqualified. He is currently riling up his followers by claiming that the election will be rigged. I am concerned the consequences of that message https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/1…

Have you seen the hidden-cam video of Alan Schulkin, NYC commissioner of board of election claiming that they are in fact rigged? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUDTcxIqqM0

Some commissioner somewhere said election is rigged, so that must be the truth we all accept and go rioting on the street.

Re: undefined

#618

Post by _cbb1 » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:41 PM UTC

untilHellbanned wrote: post #514

tvural wrote: post #264

Thiel might have ulterior motives, but his support of Trump is not too surprising if you've listened to his other ideas. He feels that the political agenda has been overrun by distractions, like "who can use which bathroom", at the expense of real problems, like the stagnation of median wages over the last forty years. He prefers the days when the national conversation was about how to beat the Soviets, and sees the…

I'm all for it but Trump isn't the guy to lead the change. He has no record of success and treats all humans terribly. If Somebody with a similar mindset on the business matters minus the catastrophic interpersonal issues runs in the future I'll happily elect them.

Well, he actually does have a record of success. He wouldn't have a strong following if he treats all humans terribly.

Re: undefined

#619

Post by kybernetyk » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:43 PM UTC

zo1 wrote: post #566

_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…

>" I've lived in America my whole life, but I was born in Austria, and German is my first language. It pains me to see a fellow German-speaking immigrant support a right-wing populist who appeals pretty explicitly to white identity politics. We of all people should know better. " As opposed to black identity politics? Or female identity politics? Would you feel better if the context was a place like South Africa wher…

I'm, too, not an American but a libertarian. And I don't support either candidate.

Tbh. I find it horribly sad how much time and energy people invest in this election where the both possible outcomes are equally bad.

"Voting for the lesser evil" is still voting for evil. So why not take all that time wasted on internet arguments about which evil is the lesser one and do something fun instead?

Re: undefined

#620

Post by _cbb1 » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:46 PM UTC

acdha wrote: post #438

gallonofmilk wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

have you not read wikileaks? the DNC/Hillary rigged it against him from day one, he never stood a chance

Clearly you haven't read those emails: they show nothing of the sort, which is why you couldn't provide any evidence to back that claim. You can find signs that people in the establishment personally favored the establishment candidate – the least surprising revelation in political history – but there's no evidence that lead to any concrete action. That's why the only claims of rigging have been intentional misrepres…

When you have Donna Brazile feeding the Clinton campaign townhall questions so that she can prepare the answers. Threats for super delegates switching to Bernie and Debbie Wasserman Shultz stepping down. It's clear evidence of a rigged election. Who knows what was happening that is not in the emails.