7 ms·

Great article, with some glorious lines: “It’s capitalism shrouded in the fake hippie rhetoric of ‘We’re making the world a better place,’ because it’s uncool

Great article, with some glorious lines: “It’s capitalism shrouded in the fake hippie rhetoric of ‘We’re making the world a better place,’ because it’s uncool to just say ‘Hey, we’re crushing it and making money.’” “Some of us actually, as naïve as it sounds, came here to make the world a better place. And we did not succeed. We made some things better, we made some things worse, and in the meantime the libertarians took over, and they do not give a damn about right or wrong. They are here to make money.” “In the real Silicon Valley, as on the show, there is a cohort of people who have a real sense of purpose and actually think they’re going to change the world, and then there’s a cohort of people who say farcical things about their apps that they clearly don’t believe themselves.”

tinalumfoil 10y ago
In addition to the TV Show a lot of the companies in SV have their own website, which absolutely nails the essence of what they're mocking (Warning: spoilers if you aren't caught up): http://www.piedpiper.com/ http://www.piedpiper.com/ (complete with a blog) http://www.hooli.com/ http://www.hooli.com/ http://www.bachmanity.com/ http://www.bachmanity.com/ http://www.coderag.com/ http://www.coderag.com/ http://raviga.com/ http://raviga.com/ http://www.endframesystems.com/ http://www.endframesystems.com/ http://drinkhomicide.com/ http://drinkhomicide.com/ https://github.com/Stitchpunk https://github.com/Stitchpunk
- YZF 10y ago
  "Smaller files take up less space on your computer. Less space = more stuff. More stuff = better life!" For some reason I just couldn't suppress my laughter reading this...
- Steko 10y ago
  Raviga's website is gold, here's hoping Fixxie Tech makes an appearance on the show.
- namuol 10y ago
  Reviga's website has a bonus Bioshock reference: https://i.imgur.com/Eks4tuu.png https://i.imgur.com/Eks4tuu.png
  - walrus01 10y ago
    Except the "beneath" part, I think that's more of a reference to Peter Thiel and Blueseed/Seasteading.
    - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
      Who said Bioshock isn't a reference to Peter Thiel?
    - mercer 10y ago
      I think the 'beneath' part (and then calling it out in parentheses) is precisely what makes it more than just a Thiel reference. Very clever!
dnautics 10y ago
Hm. I'm a libertarian in silicon valley - and while I'm not opposed to making money, I don't care that much about it (I've made a net of 9k this year, I run a nonprofit that seeks to develop open-source anticancer drugs). And my experience is that libertarians very much care about right and wrong, it's just they take a slightly more absolutist perspective about what makes something right or wrong, resulting in misunderstandings when what others percieve to be a method to "right a wrong" abuts against libertarian principle "primitives" and those others can't concieve of any other way to achieve that desired end. To be fair, there are libertarians (notoriously PT, although i think he's been lightening up a bit) who do sometimes act as if they see making money as the only right.
- mindcrime 10y ago
  I'm starting to think that Thiel is mislabeled as libertarian. I mean, he's a delegate for Trump, no? What libertarian could possibly support Trump? I'm starting to think Thiel is one of those people who falls into a category that doesn't really have a good name, but has a vague resemblance to "libertarian" and so people call him a libertarian. At the very least, I am doubtful that he's a principled libertarian who subscribes to the NAP.
  - Apocryphon 10y ago
    I think it's just how colloquial definitions have taken over: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11873396 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11873396
  - mikeyouse 10y ago
    He's fairly closely aligned with the neoreactionary / dark enlightenment movement which does have some elements of libertarianism but is more focused on the rejection of democracy, taxes, and anything approaching egalitarianism. He wrote an essay for Cato a few years ago that spells out his views fairly specifically: http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education... There are some stark quotes, "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible" or "Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron. In that sense, his support for Trump makes more sense.
golergka 10y ago
I think that while these lines are insightful, they kind of miss the point of an important belief that is often shared by libertarians: that in the end, following self-interest is the most effective way to help the common good.
- jrkatz 10y ago
  > "Am I being selfish?" > I pulled my blankie tighter around my shoulders, making a mental note the owner would require more bitcoin this month as I'd gone over my allotted 36 hours of blankie time. > "No, it's for the greater good." Jokes aside, you've lit on the fundamental part of this disagreement: In theory libertarians believe that; in practice it's hard to know what someone really believes and easy to see what they're doing. Speaking broadly, some people disagree that the actions of libertarian people are helping anybody else unless by accident. Take for example a straw libertarian who buys water rights in drought-stricken regions and sells the water back to the people living in those regions. This person claims publicly (and may or may not truly believe) they are helping people conserve their water. After all, the free market will quickly establish its true cost. To people who think this is fundamentally wrong, it doesn't even matter what the straw libertarian believes -- if it walks like vampire sucking you dry, it might be.
  - golergka 10y ago
    Interesting example. In it, how exactly did this water right transaction take place - was our strawman libertarian the only one trying to buy water rights? If so, why? May be he foresaw drought earlier than his competitors on the market - and in doing so, is rewarded for his climate prediction skills and willingness to investment in infrastructure? If he wasn't the only one, how exactly did he outbid his competitors? I'm asking these questions because this example doesn't seem realistic in libertarian effective free market paradise - on the contrary, this kind of situation arises with some regulated monopoly, not with a freely traded good. And just let me clarify for clarity, paying bribes to get purchase preference (which, let us be realistic, is the most common scenario here) is certainly _not_ a part of libertarian ideology.
    - 10y ago
mindcrime 10y ago
and in the meantime the libertarians took over, and they do not give a damn about right or wrong. They are here to make money. What a load of bullshit. First of all, libertarians have hardly "taken over" anything. If anything, the SV scene (as seen from the outside anyway) seems markedly less libertarian now than it did 15 years ago. Back when Slashdot was full of techno-libertarian types, cyberpunks and crypto-anarchists were spending gobs of time planning how to use technology to enable the stateless society, and rich libertarian leaning folks like John Gilmore were suing the government over the right to travel without showing ID... back then, the SV technologist scene felt very libertarian indeed. Now, if anything, it seems that the progressives have taken over. You still hear a little chatter about Internet freedom and the need for strong crypto, and there is the crypto-currency crowd who have actually gotten somewhere... but by and large, the rhetoric you hear out of SV seems to have skewed in a distinctively statist direction the past decade or two. Heck, just go back through the archives here at HN and compare the talk back at the beginning, to the talk now... you can't help but be struck by the profound shift that's occurred. Now it's commonplace for people to criticize capitalism, denigrate the value of hard work (after all, all success is just "luck"), promote more active government involvement in markets, etc. Heck, I guess you'd almost be hard pressed to find a libertarian on here anymore... or maybe most of us just don't bother saying anything because we know we'll get shouted down (and/or downvoted to oblivion) by the statists. Beyond that, the essence of libertarianism is absolutely to care about "right and wrong", as expressed by the Zero Aggression Principle. And libertarianism itself doesn't say anything about making money... there are plenty of "hippie libertarians" who don't give a shit about making money. IOW, just because somebody is a Capitalist or is concerned with making money, doesn't automatically mean they are a "libertarian."
- Apocryphon 10y ago
  How statist are startup empires built around the idea of flouting regulations? How statist are Uber, AirBnB, and the other members of sharing economy? Granted, perhaps you can label them crony capitalists or some other epithet instead, for using government failings to their advantage instead of trying to do away with government (though some, such as Travis Kalanick, are notoriously big Ayn Rand fans). But when the folk definition for "libertarian" these days usually rests on the side of "-capitalist", and not "anarcho" - more Koch brothers (and Peter Thiel), than Gary Johnson (and Richard Stallman). When people usually talk about civil liberties groups, and Pirate parties, and hacker collectives, they think anarchists. When people talk about "neoliberals", or objectivist billionaires, they think libertarians. Have a problem with that? Take the label back. Work to fix the public perception.
kbenson 10y ago
“It’s capitalism shrouded in the fake hippie rhetoric of ‘We’re making the world a better place,’ because it’s uncool to just say ‘Hey, we’re crushing it and making money.’” One nice thing about the financial industry is that they generally seem to operate without this sort of pretext. Or the pretext is so flimsy that it's easily ignored. Or, if you're a glass-half-empty kind of person, they've lost enough of their humanity to not give a shit anymore. :/
- mercer 10y ago
  I used to think honesty was always better than hypocrisy. Now I feel that it's not so simple. Hypocrisy can be a motivator for a bad actor to not go all-in on the bad actions (lest they be called out for this hypocrisy).
BurningFrog 10y ago
That's a false conflict. Building new profitable companies and industries is actually how the world has been made into a vastly better place the last 250 years.

tinalumfoil 10y ago

In addition to the TV Show a lot of the companies in SV have their own website, which absolutely nails the essence of what they're mocking (Warning: spoilers if you aren't caught up): http://www.piedpiper.com/ http://www.piedpiper.com/ (complete with a blog) http://www.hooli.com/ http://www.hooli.com/ http://www.bachmanity.com/ http://www.bachmanity.com/ http://www.coderag.com/ http://www.coderag.com/ http://raviga.com/ http://raviga.com/ http://www.endframesystems.com/ http://www.endframesystems.com/ http://drinkhomicide.com/ http://drinkhomicide.com/ https://github.com/Stitchpunk https://github.com/Stitchpunk

YZF 10y ago
"Smaller files take up less space on your computer. Less space = more stuff. More stuff = better life!" For some reason I just couldn't suppress my laughter reading this...
Steko 10y ago
Raviga's website is gold, here's hoping Fixxie Tech makes an appearance on the show.
namuol 10y ago
Reviga's website has a bonus Bioshock reference: https://i.imgur.com/Eks4tuu.png https://i.imgur.com/Eks4tuu.png
- walrus01 10y ago
  Except the "beneath" part, I think that's more of a reference to Peter Thiel and Blueseed/Seasteading.
  - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
    Who said Bioshock isn't a reference to Peter Thiel?
  - mercer 10y ago
    I think the 'beneath' part (and then calling it out in parentheses) is precisely what makes it more than just a Thiel reference. Very clever!

dnautics 10y ago

Hm. I'm a libertarian in silicon valley - and while I'm not opposed to making money, I don't care that much about it (I've made a net of 9k this year, I run a nonprofit that seeks to develop open-source anticancer drugs). And my experience is that libertarians very much care about right and wrong, it's just they take a slightly more absolutist perspective about what makes something right or wrong, resulting in misunderstandings when what others percieve to be a method to "right a wrong" abuts against libertarian principle "primitives" and those others can't concieve of any other way to achieve that desired end. To be fair, there are libertarians (notoriously PT, although i think he's been lightening up a bit) who do sometimes act as if they see making money as the only right.

mindcrime 10y ago
I'm starting to think that Thiel is mislabeled as libertarian. I mean, he's a delegate for Trump, no? What libertarian could possibly support Trump? I'm starting to think Thiel is one of those people who falls into a category that doesn't really have a good name, but has a vague resemblance to "libertarian" and so people call him a libertarian. At the very least, I am doubtful that he's a principled libertarian who subscribes to the NAP.
- Apocryphon 10y ago
  I think it's just how colloquial definitions have taken over: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11873396 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11873396
- mikeyouse 10y ago
  He's fairly closely aligned with the neoreactionary / dark enlightenment movement which does have some elements of libertarianism but is more focused on the rejection of democracy, taxes, and anything approaching egalitarianism. He wrote an essay for Cato a few years ago that spells out his views fairly specifically: http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education... There are some stark quotes, "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible" or "Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron. In that sense, his support for Trump makes more sense.

golergka 10y ago

I think that while these lines are insightful, they kind of miss the point of an important belief that is often shared by libertarians: that in the end, following self-interest is the most effective way to help the common good.

jrkatz 10y ago
> "Am I being selfish?" > I pulled my blankie tighter around my shoulders, making a mental note the owner would require more bitcoin this month as I'd gone over my allotted 36 hours of blankie time. > "No, it's for the greater good." Jokes aside, you've lit on the fundamental part of this disagreement: In theory libertarians believe that; in practice it's hard to know what someone really believes and easy to see what they're doing. Speaking broadly, some people disagree that the actions of libertarian people are helping anybody else unless by accident. Take for example a straw libertarian who buys water rights in drought-stricken regions and sells the water back to the people living in those regions. This person claims publicly (and may or may not truly believe) they are helping people conserve their water. After all, the free market will quickly establish its true cost. To people who think this is fundamentally wrong, it doesn't even matter what the straw libertarian believes -- if it walks like vampire sucking you dry, it might be.
- golergka 10y ago
  Interesting example. In it, how exactly did this water right transaction take place - was our strawman libertarian the only one trying to buy water rights? If so, why? May be he foresaw drought earlier than his competitors on the market - and in doing so, is rewarded for his climate prediction skills and willingness to investment in infrastructure? If he wasn't the only one, how exactly did he outbid his competitors? I'm asking these questions because this example doesn't seem realistic in libertarian effective free market paradise - on the contrary, this kind of situation arises with some regulated monopoly, not with a freely traded good. And just let me clarify for clarity, paying bribes to get purchase preference (which, let us be realistic, is the most common scenario here) is certainly _not_ a part of libertarian ideology.
  - 10y ago

mindcrime 10y ago

and in the meantime the libertarians took over, and they do not give a damn about right or wrong. They are here to make money. What a load of bullshit. First of all, libertarians have hardly "taken over" anything. If anything, the SV scene (as seen from the outside anyway) seems markedly less libertarian now than it did 15 years ago. Back when Slashdot was full of techno-libertarian types, cyberpunks and crypto-anarchists were spending gobs of time planning how to use technology to enable the stateless society, and rich libertarian leaning folks like John Gilmore were suing the government over the right to travel without showing ID... back then, the SV technologist scene felt very libertarian indeed. Now, if anything, it seems that the progressives have taken over. You still hear a little chatter about Internet freedom and the need for strong crypto, and there is the crypto-currency crowd who have actually gotten somewhere... but by and large, the rhetoric you hear out of SV seems to have skewed in a distinctively statist direction the past decade or two. Heck, just go back through the archives here at HN and compare the talk back at the beginning, to the talk now... you can't help but be struck by the profound shift that's occurred. Now it's commonplace for people to criticize capitalism, denigrate the value of hard work (after all, all success is just "luck"), promote more active government involvement in markets, etc. Heck, I guess you'd almost be hard pressed to find a libertarian on here anymore... or maybe most of us just don't bother saying anything because we know we'll get shouted down (and/or downvoted to oblivion) by the statists. Beyond that, the essence of libertarianism is absolutely to care about "right and wrong", as expressed by the Zero Aggression Principle. And libertarianism itself doesn't say anything about making money... there are plenty of "hippie libertarians" who don't give a shit about making money. IOW, just because somebody is a Capitalist or is concerned with making money, doesn't automatically mean they are a "libertarian."

Apocryphon 10y ago
How statist are startup empires built around the idea of flouting regulations? How statist are Uber, AirBnB, and the other members of sharing economy? Granted, perhaps you can label them crony capitalists or some other epithet instead, for using government failings to their advantage instead of trying to do away with government (though some, such as Travis Kalanick, are notoriously big Ayn Rand fans). But when the folk definition for "libertarian" these days usually rests on the side of "-capitalist", and not "anarcho" - more Koch brothers (and Peter Thiel), than Gary Johnson (and Richard Stallman). When people usually talk about civil liberties groups, and Pirate parties, and hacker collectives, they think anarchists. When people talk about "neoliberals", or objectivist billionaires, they think libertarians. Have a problem with that? Take the label back. Work to fix the public perception.

kbenson 10y ago

“It’s capitalism shrouded in the fake hippie rhetoric of ‘We’re making the world a better place,’ because it’s uncool to just say ‘Hey, we’re crushing it and making money.’” One nice thing about the financial industry is that they generally seem to operate without this sort of pretext. Or the pretext is so flimsy that it's easily ignored. Or, if you're a glass-half-empty kind of person, they've lost enough of their humanity to not give a shit anymore. :/

mercer 10y ago
I used to think honesty was always better than hypocrisy. Now I feel that it's not so simple. Hypocrisy can be a motivator for a bad actor to not go all-in on the bad actions (lest they be called out for this hypocrisy).

BurningFrog 10y ago

That's a false conflict. Building new profitable companies and industries is actually how the world has been made into a vastly better place the last 250 years.