4 ms·

> is a symptom of increasing politicization that's really degrading the quality of submissions Yes, how strange it is that when PG posts a particularly inflamm

• Natsu 11y ago
  A proper response might be worth reading, but this is a bunch of insults attacking a poorly-constructed strawman made out of words stuffed into PG's mouth.
  • bmer 11y ago
    I'd like to offer a counterpoint to those who believe that this is simply "nonsense invective". I think the submission is worded like the "everyman" talking, but it makes all the right counter-points. * venture capitalism != democracy * venture capitalism = the few get to decide what is valuable * venture capitalism does not create wealth because existing wealth is used to legitimize "new wealth" * venture capitalism cannot be used as the solution for everything, because in its existing form, it already undervalues things we would all care for (teachers, nurses, etc.) and overvalues things we all understand as entertainment (Candy Crush Saga) * Paul Graham has written some very weird things -- his article then, taken holistically with the background of his other opinions, is scary Pretty well written, I'd say. I am curious to know what words were stuffed into PG's golden mouth.
    • Natsu 11y ago
      The parts claiming that PG hates the "poors" would be one example of stuffing words into his mouth. I have difficulty locating any of the points you mentioned in the article itself. EDIT: Here's the false "distillation" of PG's essay put into quotes (i.e. stuffed into PG's mouth): "I can distill the essence of the entire argument to: “Don’t hate the player, but don’t hate the game either. Hate yourselves, stupid poors, for not getting VC funding to start a company.”" EDIT 2: To reply more fully, point-by-point: * There may be some kind of actual point there in that one needs to have currency in order to 'vote' for startups. I think the point of calling it democratic is that people choose what they want rather than having it chosen for them. * The few are becoming many with things like Kickstarter allowing just anyone to help bring things to reality, though you may have some point in that the amount of money you can bring to bear on the problem is at issue. * "venture capitalism does not create wealth because existing wealth is used to legitimize "new wealth"" - I don't even know what you think "wealth" is, but I'm guessing your idea of it is tied up in currency (dollars, Euros, whatever). If we didn't have, say, a cure for Malaria and a startup brings us that, it's new wealth. This is separate from the amount of currency that may exist in the world or how it may flow as a result of this. If we give everyone $1,000,000 in currency, it doesn't change the amount of actual things we have that could be buyable like, say, cars, though people might be less willing to sell them for particular amounts of currency due to inflation. So this point is completely incoherent as the two sides of it are causally unrelated and it seems not to understand the use of 'wealth' as an economic term. * "venture capitalism cannot be used as the solution for everything" - A strawman, as nothing is given to show that PG has actually claimed that. Instead it gives us this: "The solution to poverty is as transparent as starting Google, you stupid poors. Come on! Figure Google 2 out already, you idiots." * "Paul Graham has written some very weird things -- his article then, taken holistically with the background of his other opinions, is scary" - Fear is the "mind killer" and its effects can be seen in this piece.
• jdminhbg 11y ago
  People can feel free to respond to posts on PG's personal blog however they like, but their incoherent nonsense can stay on Medium where it belongs.