3 ms·

If Thiel actually felt that he was acting in a just and above board way to address a wrong, it's hard to understand why he has been skulking about secretly fund

If Thiel actually felt that he was acting in a just and above board way to address a wrong, it's hard to understand why he has been skulking about secretly funding this take down. It is implausible at best to believe that anyone with an actual principled commitment privacy to would have backed Palantir and Facebook.

DasIch 10y ago
If Thiel hadn't kept it a secret, it could have affected the trial. I think that alone is a perfectly good reason for keeping the involvement secret.
- internaut 10y ago
  I'd have taken it to my grave. I would have done it by arranging for an innocuous face (Milo, one of the usual suspects so they wouldn't suspect a thing) to organize a collection drive to help Hogan, and of course Terry would have obtained a marvelous anonymous contribution. If you do get found out then the 'democratic' nature of a fundraiser will defuse some of the blowback. I understand that he wanted to provide a deterrent against further Gawkers but their people have a tendency to play dirty e.g. serious blackmail and more importantly their fellow travelers in the media establishment will back Gawker as a member of their tribe by sabotaging you later. They'll do nothing for a while and then all pile on at once to generate a big fuss. I'd make a plan to have full video/audio recordings of everywhere I go. There's also a risk they will go after people you know or try to damage you by association (my guess would be on this route). Thiel is probably deft enough to avoid being ensnared by them but this kind of thing is distracting when you could be doing something useful intend of fending off social justice crazies all the time.
Artistry121 10y ago
... Facebook doesn't post things people don't want posted on there. There's a whole different level between "mines data people put on the site" and "posts sex tape against someone's will". Facebook makes an explicit agreement with the user. Palantir is a bit different but the real problem would be with the scope of what it's customers are allowed to use it for and that can be solved by laws and courts as well. If you think they are breaking the law and causing a disservice find a lawyer, establish damages and you can make lots of money. It's common for most people to not publicize they are involved in lawsuits - in any role - unless necessary. Nobody posts "going to bankruptcy court today" or "paying for my daughter's DUI lawyer" openly. It's implausible to believe you don't see the difference between Facebook offering a photo upload service and Gawker stealing and uploading a sex tape.
steego 10y ago
> If Thiel actually felt that he was acting in a just and above board way to address a wrong, it's hard to understand why he has been skulking about secretly funding this take down. Are you really that naive? If you want to take down a news organization, the last thing you want to do is announce your plans if you're taking on an organization as ruthless as Gawker. I've watched small town newspapers masterfully destroy good people's careers who literally did nothing wrong. The newspapers simply sacrificed innocent people to sell more papers. There is no fair and open forum when taking on a news organization.

DasIch 10y ago

If Thiel hadn't kept it a secret, it could have affected the trial. I think that alone is a perfectly good reason for keeping the involvement secret.

internaut 10y ago
I'd have taken it to my grave. I would have done it by arranging for an innocuous face (Milo, one of the usual suspects so they wouldn't suspect a thing) to organize a collection drive to help Hogan, and of course Terry would have obtained a marvelous anonymous contribution. If you do get found out then the 'democratic' nature of a fundraiser will defuse some of the blowback. I understand that he wanted to provide a deterrent against further Gawkers but their people have a tendency to play dirty e.g. serious blackmail and more importantly their fellow travelers in the media establishment will back Gawker as a member of their tribe by sabotaging you later. They'll do nothing for a while and then all pile on at once to generate a big fuss. I'd make a plan to have full video/audio recordings of everywhere I go. There's also a risk they will go after people you know or try to damage you by association (my guess would be on this route). Thiel is probably deft enough to avoid being ensnared by them but this kind of thing is distracting when you could be doing something useful intend of fending off social justice crazies all the time.

Artistry121 10y ago

... Facebook doesn't post things people don't want posted on there. There's a whole different level between "mines data people put on the site" and "posts sex tape against someone's will". Facebook makes an explicit agreement with the user. Palantir is a bit different but the real problem would be with the scope of what it's customers are allowed to use it for and that can be solved by laws and courts as well. If you think they are breaking the law and causing a disservice find a lawyer, establish damages and you can make lots of money. It's common for most people to not publicize they are involved in lawsuits - in any role - unless necessary. Nobody posts "going to bankruptcy court today" or "paying for my daughter's DUI lawyer" openly. It's implausible to believe you don't see the difference between Facebook offering a photo upload service and Gawker stealing and uploading a sex tape.

steego 10y ago

> If Thiel actually felt that he was acting in a just and above board way to address a wrong, it's hard to understand why he has been skulking about secretly funding this take down. Are you really that naive? If you want to take down a news organization, the last thing you want to do is announce your plans if you're taking on an organization as ruthless as Gawker. I've watched small town newspapers masterfully destroy good people's careers who literally did nothing wrong. The newspapers simply sacrificed innocent people to sell more papers. There is no fair and open forum when taking on a news organization.