6 ms·

There's nothing admirable about "going against the grain" in itself. Probably most people in the upper echelons of tech wealth don't think it's a great idea to

by kenko 10y ago

There's nothing admirable about "going against the grain" in itself. Probably most people in the upper echelons of tech wealth don't think it's a great idea to deport Muslims, and don't support Trump. I see no reason to admire someone for having a different opinion on that matter just because it's different. There are lots of ways to "go against the grain" in the way you point out. You could be an unthinking dogmatist. Nothing would change the way you feel, not even the censure of your peers. (Is Thiel being censured? Sure, by Pinboard on twitter. By his peers? Not that I can see. His richy-rich pals all still love him, AFAICT.) Is there something admirable about having your head in the ground? Not really---and I don't think that, on the broader social level, we tend to applaud people who still think gay sex is shameful and should be illegal, even though, you know, they really go against the grain. You could be, say, a modern Cato. But Cato is admirable not just because he fell on his sword but because he fell on his sword out of devotion to an admirable ideal. I see no reason, incidentally, to believe your claim that "Thiel stands alone in his strength to go against the grain". If other people aren't going against the grain, it might be that they think the grain is largely going in the right direction already, and not that they lack the strength to go against it. And, on the other hand, you have to pay a little attention to threads about diversity of race or gender to find a lot of people with the strength to go against the grain. Guess what: the grain they go against, Thiel goes with.

kenko 10y ago
incidentally this is a good paper: https://www.princeton.edu/~tkelly/ftawil.pdf https://www.princeton.edu/~tkelly/ftawil.pdf
goodcitizen147 10y ago
You think doing an "as-a-minority" blog post or talk in SV takes strength? Why? The most echoed responses are all praise, especially praises for 'bravery'. Really man, do some higher order thinking here.
exstudent2 10y ago
> There's nothing admirable about "going against the grain" in itself. There is if you think the grain is a corrupt and unfair system that needs dismantling. The enemy of my enemy is my friend thing. I would consider myself to have overlapping social thoughts with most liberals but it's really terrifying to me to have an absolute aggregation of media and executive power (in our industry) along one line of thinking (even if I agree with most of it!). Power needs to be distributed, not consolidated.
- kenko 10y ago
  > There is if you think the grain is a corrupt and unfair system that needs dismantling. The enemy of my enemy is my friend thing. No, there still isn't, because you seem to have missed the "in itself" part. Even in the case you identify, what is admirable is going against a corrupt grain (and presumably, we'd want to actually make it "going against a corrupt grain in a way likely to improve matters"; corruption is multiple and going against corruption in one respect isn't necessarily to go in a less-corrupt-overall direction), not "going against the grain" in itself.
  - exstudent2 10y ago
    I mention it in another comment but the consolidation of power is a problem. It doesn't matter if I agree with those consolidating or not. I don't think Trump has a lot of support from the upper classes in the US. If he were to be elected he would be a weaker form of power than say Clinton being elected. That is a desirable outcome even if his policies are bad since he wouldn't be effective in rolling them out whereas Clinton would be more effective rolling out her possibly slightly less objectionable policies. There would be a greater loss to society in the latter situation.
    - metheus 10y ago
      Under what rubric is the more effective rollout of less objectionable policies a greater loss to society than the less effective rollout of more objectionable policies? This dogma holds consolidation of power to be bad /in and of itself/, rather than because of a consequence, such as "consolidated power leads to suffering." If that's your opinion, fine, but it's no different than any other religion.
      - exstudent2 10y ago
        > Under what rubric is the more effective rollout of less objectionable policies a greater loss to society than the less effective rollout of more objectionable policies? A small slice of a giant pie is bigger than a large slice of a tiny pie?
SixSigma 10y ago
> The eccentric investor is not like anyone else in tech. By Kara Swisher @karaswisher > ... And many of those who like him personally and call him a "dear friend" are even perplexed, going as far as not talking to him of late because of his Trump support. "I’ve tried," sighed one such friend, who described a number of colleagues trying to pull him off the Trump train, including PayPal Mafia family member Reid Hoffman. http://www.recode.net/2016/7/21/12241648/peter-thiel-trump-speech-preview http://www.recode.net/2016/7/21/12241648/peter-thiel-trump-s...
pm90 10y ago
Beautifully explained. There certainly is a lot of Groupthink in Silicon Valley, but that doesn't extend to everything. In Thiel's case, it unfortunately seems like he's turned into one of those rich people who is so far away from how most people live that he does not understand the consequences of some of his ideas. A common problem with the elite: although self-made elites usually have their past to reflect on and make better informed decisions (unlike e.g. the Koch brothers)
- falsestprophet 10y ago
  Why do you think he doesn't understand the consequences of his ideas?
  - pm90 10y ago
    Because a pursuit to the extreme of any ideology is a symptom of mind obsessed with perfection and fanatic belief. In the case of Thiel, its his libertarian beliefs. Now, I don't want to hijack this thread into what is wrong with extreme libertarian thinking (or extreme adherence to any philosophy). You're question was why I thought he doesn't understand the consequences of his ideas: this is why I think that.
vixen99 10y ago
Link for Trump statement saying he wants to deport Muslims?
- vixen99 10y ago
  None forthcoming!!
nolepointer 10y ago
Wanting to halt immigration from countries with radical Islamic ties != deporting Muslims
- gallonofmilk 10y ago
  ssh logic not welcome here... move along
  - diyorgasms 10y ago
    I would assume ssh and its underlying logic are welcome here. What I assume is unwelcome is advocating religious tests in a secular state.
    - gallonofmilk 10y ago
      what if instead of saying "Muslims coming from location X", it were "people coming from location X"? the issue is the same, we don't know how to properly vet these people, nor do we know if they want to assimilate (big problem if they don't)... personally I think given the world we live in, that is logical. I also don't think it should be permanent and we should encourage those that want to join America and all it has to offer so long as we can do our best to ensure their sincerity...
- EC1 10y ago
  Halt. You are going against the leftist narrative. Please put your hands behind your back.

by kenko 10y ago

kenko 10y ago

incidentally this is a good paper: https://www.princeton.edu/~tkelly/ftawil.pdf https://www.princeton.edu/~tkelly/ftawil.pdf

goodcitizen147 10y ago

You think doing an "as-a-minority" blog post or talk in SV takes strength? Why? The most echoed responses are all praise, especially praises for 'bravery'. Really man, do some higher order thinking here.

exstudent2 10y ago

> There's nothing admirable about "going against the grain" in itself. There is if you think the grain is a corrupt and unfair system that needs dismantling. The enemy of my enemy is my friend thing. I would consider myself to have overlapping social thoughts with most liberals but it's really terrifying to me to have an absolute aggregation of media and executive power (in our industry) along one line of thinking (even if I agree with most of it!). Power needs to be distributed, not consolidated.

kenko 10y ago
> There is if you think the grain is a corrupt and unfair system that needs dismantling. The enemy of my enemy is my friend thing. No, there still isn't, because you seem to have missed the "in itself" part. Even in the case you identify, what is admirable is going against a corrupt grain (and presumably, we'd want to actually make it "going against a corrupt grain in a way likely to improve matters"; corruption is multiple and going against corruption in one respect isn't necessarily to go in a less-corrupt-overall direction), not "going against the grain" in itself.
- exstudent2 10y ago
  I mention it in another comment but the consolidation of power is a problem. It doesn't matter if I agree with those consolidating or not. I don't think Trump has a lot of support from the upper classes in the US. If he were to be elected he would be a weaker form of power than say Clinton being elected. That is a desirable outcome even if his policies are bad since he wouldn't be effective in rolling them out whereas Clinton would be more effective rolling out her possibly slightly less objectionable policies. There would be a greater loss to society in the latter situation.
  - metheus 10y ago
    Under what rubric is the more effective rollout of less objectionable policies a greater loss to society than the less effective rollout of more objectionable policies? This dogma holds consolidation of power to be bad /in and of itself/, rather than because of a consequence, such as "consolidated power leads to suffering." If that's your opinion, fine, but it's no different than any other religion.
    - exstudent2 10y ago
      > Under what rubric is the more effective rollout of less objectionable policies a greater loss to society than the less effective rollout of more objectionable policies? A small slice of a giant pie is bigger than a large slice of a tiny pie?

SixSigma 10y ago

> The eccentric investor is not like anyone else in tech. By Kara Swisher @karaswisher > ... And many of those who like him personally and call him a "dear friend" are even perplexed, going as far as not talking to him of late because of his Trump support. "I’ve tried," sighed one such friend, who described a number of colleagues trying to pull him off the Trump train, including PayPal Mafia family member Reid Hoffman. http://www.recode.net/2016/7/21/12241648/peter-thiel-trump-speech-preview http://www.recode.net/2016/7/21/12241648/peter-thiel-trump-s...

pm90 10y ago

Beautifully explained. There certainly is a lot of Groupthink in Silicon Valley, but that doesn't extend to everything. In Thiel's case, it unfortunately seems like he's turned into one of those rich people who is so far away from how most people live that he does not understand the consequences of some of his ideas. A common problem with the elite: although self-made elites usually have their past to reflect on and make better informed decisions (unlike e.g. the Koch brothers)

falsestprophet 10y ago
Why do you think he doesn't understand the consequences of his ideas?
- pm90 10y ago
  Because a pursuit to the extreme of any ideology is a symptom of mind obsessed with perfection and fanatic belief. In the case of Thiel, its his libertarian beliefs. Now, I don't want to hijack this thread into what is wrong with extreme libertarian thinking (or extreme adherence to any philosophy). You're question was why I thought he doesn't understand the consequences of his ideas: this is why I think that.

vixen99 10y ago

Link for Trump statement saying he wants to deport Muslims?

vixen99 10y ago
None forthcoming!!

nolepointer 10y ago

Wanting to halt immigration from countries with radical Islamic ties != deporting Muslims

gallonofmilk 10y ago
ssh logic not welcome here... move along
- diyorgasms 10y ago
  I would assume ssh and its underlying logic are welcome here. What I assume is unwelcome is advocating religious tests in a secular state.
  - gallonofmilk 10y ago
    what if instead of saying "Muslims coming from location X", it were "people coming from location X"? the issue is the same, we don't know how to properly vet these people, nor do we know if they want to assimilate (big problem if they don't)... personally I think given the world we live in, that is logical. I also don't think it should be permanent and we should encourage those that want to join America and all it has to offer so long as we can do our best to ensure their sincerity...
EC1 10y ago
Halt. You are going against the leftist narrative. Please put your hands behind your back.