5 ms·

> I think it's a very slippery slope to base endorsement on a person's political actions. What exactly else do you propose? Endorsing people based on their act

> I think it's a very slippery slope to base endorsement on a person's political actions. What exactly else do you propose? Endorsing people based on their actions (all actions are political; no actions are apolitical; that's just how it works, you can't quit the game) is the only ethical position which makes any sense at all. This has gone far enough. The only effective response is to judge by actions and refuse to work with any Y Combinator company until Thiel is fired (and Altman resigns).

anondon 10y ago
> What exactly else do you propose? Let people have differing opinions and continue working with them. If Thiel is doing something illegal, and goes against the spirit of the Constitution, call him out for and push for legal action. > The only effective response is to judge by actions and refuse to work with any Y Combinator company until Thiel is fired (and Altman resigns). Fire Thiel for supporting Trump with a donation? Seriously? What is this, a dictatorship? Everyone who disagrees is silenced? You want Altman to resign? Genuine question : Do you hear yourself?
- tptacek 10y ago
  Thiel cannot be fired by Sam Altman because he is not an employee of Sam Altman. His relationship with Altman is that of an endorsee, and all that's being asked of Altman is that he stop endorsing members of Trump's campaign.
  - anondon 10y ago
    > His relationship with Altman is that of an endorsee, Noted. Should have been careful there. > and all that's being asked of Altman is that he stop endorsing members of Trump's campaign. Why? It makes no sense to me. Why can't people have their opinions and agree to disagree on ones they don't agree on. Don't you feel such calls go against free speech?
    - tptacek 10y ago
      They can. What they cannot do is work effectively to prevent bigotry, sexism, and the destruction of the American economy and political fabric while simultaneously endorsing and working with people doing the exact opposite. People keep dancing around the fact that Thiel is not simply a Trump supporter, or even just a Trump donor. He is a Trump campaign surrogate --- a member of the campaign.
      - weberc2 10y ago
        I considered responding to this, but I'm not sure how to have a meaningful conversation with someone who engages in such hyperbole.
        grzm 10y ago
        I understand your frustration. The desire to respond in a constructive way is necessary for us to go forward, especially now. For me, a part of that is to try my best to (a) give the people I'm talking to the benefit of the doubt that they're engaging in good faith; and (b) try not to use language that escalates any tensions. Online text discussion makes this especially fraught, given its low-bandwidth: we only get the text, without the benefit of other channels such as voice inflection and body language. One tool HN provides is the ability to view a user's other comments, which can provide a gauge to measure whether someone is engaging in good faith. And there's always the choice to not respond. If you think someone is just looking for attention, not responding might be the right course of action. Once people get angry or frustrated, it's probably better to just back off and try again some other time. And in general I'm thinking of myself as well to those I'm engaging with. Or if you don't think you have something meaningful to add. Sometimes that's hard to do because you think the conversation is important and want to participate. Please don't interpret anything I've written as criticism of either you or tptacek. For the record, from what I've seen both of you are thoughtful and engaging honestly. I also hope this doesn't come off as preachy. These are just the heuristics I've been using. Some others are Rapoport's rules [0], which I think are really insightful. I'd love to hear how others approach this as well. I've thought about all these things in writing this comment, and I'm still unsure whether I should click the "reply" button. I do think it's important to try to keep these types of conversations going, and I know I need the practice, so in good faith I'm willing to put my neck out another time. [0] https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/03/28/daniel-dennett-rapoport-rules-criticism/ https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/03/28/daniel-dennett-rapo...
- genericpseudo 10y ago
  I believe Thiel only responds to economic pressure. I am intending to use my economic leverage, and advocating others do the same, by refusing to work with Thiel and his enablers, which include Y Combinator and companies funded by them. (It's not just the Trump thing, by any means, that's the end of a very very very long list.) Altman has also shown himself to be – at best – unaware of the moral dimensions of his actions, and that's not someone I want to have to deal with. So I won't and I suggest that you don't. Same reason I won't work for an oil supermajor. I don't want to be party to pollution. Everyone else is free to act as they choose, but I hope enough people agree with me that it weights the needle. If companies can't hire talent, they die; so what talent can do is refuse.
cabalamat 10y ago
> The only effective response is to judge by actions and refuse to work with any Y Combinator company until Thiel is fired (and Altman resigns) You want to shun people (YC companies) for not shunning people (YC) for not shunning people (Thiel) for supporting Trump? That's people at three levels removed from Trump. Is that really what you want?
- genericpseudo 10y ago
  Life's too short to work with pollutors. And yes; I want working with Thiel to be a large net economic loss, because I believe that's the language he understands. This is the only effective tool I have to try and do that. It's nowhere near enough, but it's what I've got.
  - SamBam 10y ago
    So... will you actually put your money where your mouth is? Will you not associate with companies or products that were helped by Y-Combinator until they publicly reject YC? Will you not use HackerNews, Docker, DropBox, Reddit, AirBnB, DoorDash, Stripe, Pebble, or any of the rest?
    - genericpseudo 10y ago
      I won't work for any of them.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - foobarchu 10y ago
    You say "thats the language he understands", but that's a really dangerous way to be thinking. Look at it this way: assume you support gay marriage, and the supreme court had gone the other way. Some business partner finds out you support gay marriage, and they vehemently disagree with that, so they refuse to do business with you. They tell all of their other anti-gay acquainances to also stop doing business with you. What would you think of that? Would it make you reconsider, would it make you suddenly be against gay marriage? More likely, it would piss you off and create even more division. That is literally all that cutting business ties with Thiel would do, create division. Cutting a person off because you disagree on something political will never change their mind, it will only make them hate you right back, and suddenly you have two separate groups. Remember after world war 1 when the world went "screw Germany", and ordered massive reparations, and shunned them from everything? Remember how that just caused animosity and hated right back? It triggered another, bigger war. After WW2, on the other hand, the allies integrated. They actually worked at meshing together and creating something better, and it worked. Germany is no longer heavily nazi, or even kind of nazi. For another great example, see the religious history of England. Cutting off Theil and having everyone who doesn't support Trump boycott him just sends him a big middle finger, and makes a big rift that is going to keep causing problems in a big casual loop.

anondon 10y ago

> What exactly else do you propose? Let people have differing opinions and continue working with them. If Thiel is doing something illegal, and goes against the spirit of the Constitution, call him out for and push for legal action. > The only effective response is to judge by actions and refuse to work with any Y Combinator company until Thiel is fired (and Altman resigns). Fire Thiel for supporting Trump with a donation? Seriously? What is this, a dictatorship? Everyone who disagrees is silenced? You want Altman to resign? Genuine question : Do you hear yourself?

tptacek 10y ago
Thiel cannot be fired by Sam Altman because he is not an employee of Sam Altman. His relationship with Altman is that of an endorsee, and all that's being asked of Altman is that he stop endorsing members of Trump's campaign.
- anondon 10y ago
  > His relationship with Altman is that of an endorsee, Noted. Should have been careful there. > and all that's being asked of Altman is that he stop endorsing members of Trump's campaign. Why? It makes no sense to me. Why can't people have their opinions and agree to disagree on ones they don't agree on. Don't you feel such calls go against free speech?
  - tptacek 10y ago
    They can. What they cannot do is work effectively to prevent bigotry, sexism, and the destruction of the American economy and political fabric while simultaneously endorsing and working with people doing the exact opposite. People keep dancing around the fact that Thiel is not simply a Trump supporter, or even just a Trump donor. He is a Trump campaign surrogate --- a member of the campaign.
    - weberc2 10y ago
      I considered responding to this, but I'm not sure how to have a meaningful conversation with someone who engages in such hyperbole.
      - grzm 10y ago
        I understand your frustration. The desire to respond in a constructive way is necessary for us to go forward, especially now. For me, a part of that is to try my best to (a) give the people I'm talking to the benefit of the doubt that they're engaging in good faith; and (b) try not to use language that escalates any tensions. Online text discussion makes this especially fraught, given its low-bandwidth: we only get the text, without the benefit of other channels such as voice inflection and body language. One tool HN provides is the ability to view a user's other comments, which can provide a gauge to measure whether someone is engaging in good faith. And there's always the choice to not respond. If you think someone is just looking for attention, not responding might be the right course of action. Once people get angry or frustrated, it's probably better to just back off and try again some other time. And in general I'm thinking of myself as well to those I'm engaging with. Or if you don't think you have something meaningful to add. Sometimes that's hard to do because you think the conversation is important and want to participate. Please don't interpret anything I've written as criticism of either you or tptacek. For the record, from what I've seen both of you are thoughtful and engaging honestly. I also hope this doesn't come off as preachy. These are just the heuristics I've been using. Some others are Rapoport's rules [0], which I think are really insightful. I'd love to hear how others approach this as well. I've thought about all these things in writing this comment, and I'm still unsure whether I should click the "reply" button. I do think it's important to try to keep these types of conversations going, and I know I need the practice, so in good faith I'm willing to put my neck out another time. [0] https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/03/28/daniel-dennett-rapoport-rules-criticism/ https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/03/28/daniel-dennett-rapo...
genericpseudo 10y ago
I believe Thiel only responds to economic pressure. I am intending to use my economic leverage, and advocating others do the same, by refusing to work with Thiel and his enablers, which include Y Combinator and companies funded by them. (It's not just the Trump thing, by any means, that's the end of a very very very long list.) Altman has also shown himself to be – at best – unaware of the moral dimensions of his actions, and that's not someone I want to have to deal with. So I won't and I suggest that you don't. Same reason I won't work for an oil supermajor. I don't want to be party to pollution. Everyone else is free to act as they choose, but I hope enough people agree with me that it weights the needle. If companies can't hire talent, they die; so what talent can do is refuse.

cabalamat 10y ago

> The only effective response is to judge by actions and refuse to work with any Y Combinator company until Thiel is fired (and Altman resigns) You want to shun people (YC companies) for not shunning people (YC) for not shunning people (Thiel) for supporting Trump? That's people at three levels removed from Trump. Is that really what you want?

genericpseudo 10y ago
Life's too short to work with pollutors. And yes; I want working with Thiel to be a large net economic loss, because I believe that's the language he understands. This is the only effective tool I have to try and do that. It's nowhere near enough, but it's what I've got.
- SamBam 10y ago
  So... will you actually put your money where your mouth is? Will you not associate with companies or products that were helped by Y-Combinator until they publicly reject YC? Will you not use HackerNews, Docker, DropBox, Reddit, AirBnB, DoorDash, Stripe, Pebble, or any of the rest?
  - genericpseudo 10y ago
    I won't work for any of them.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- foobarchu 10y ago
  You say "thats the language he understands", but that's a really dangerous way to be thinking. Look at it this way: assume you support gay marriage, and the supreme court had gone the other way. Some business partner finds out you support gay marriage, and they vehemently disagree with that, so they refuse to do business with you. They tell all of their other anti-gay acquainances to also stop doing business with you. What would you think of that? Would it make you reconsider, would it make you suddenly be against gay marriage? More likely, it would piss you off and create even more division. That is literally all that cutting business ties with Thiel would do, create division. Cutting a person off because you disagree on something political will never change their mind, it will only make them hate you right back, and suddenly you have two separate groups. Remember after world war 1 when the world went "screw Germany", and ordered massive reparations, and shunned them from everything? Remember how that just caused animosity and hated right back? It triggered another, bigger war. After WW2, on the other hand, the allies integrated. They actually worked at meshing together and creating something better, and it worked. Germany is no longer heavily nazi, or even kind of nazi. For another great example, see the religious history of England. Cutting off Theil and having everyone who doesn't support Trump boycott him just sends him a big middle finger, and makes a big rift that is going to keep causing problems in a big casual loop.