3 ms·

As a counter point, I'm not gay nor female, but an entrepreneur. Hopefully that doesn't lessen my voice. I lost nearly all respect for Thiel based on his opini

by tensor 10y ago

As a counter point, I'm not gay nor female, but an entrepreneur. Hopefully that doesn't lessen my voice. I lost nearly all respect for Thiel based on his opinions about science vs industry. For reference, his thinking that startups are in any way similar to academia in regards to scientific discovery is completely out there and ignores the obvious reality that startups don't produce scientific knowledge. His backing of Trump simply reinforces my already poor opinion of him. He's never bothered thinking things through and has always had an arrogant streak where he thinks business beats everything. If you believe he's totally wrong you'd be a fool to work with him.

darawk 10y ago
There are plenty of people who foolishly became very wealthy, then.
- tensor 10y ago
  http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 Being rich does not imply merit in science and knowledge, and certainly not in ethics.
  - darawk 10y ago
    But if you set out to become rich and then do so, it seems a bit inaccurate to label that 'foolish'. The comment I was responding to was casting aspersions on Thiel's judgment in all categories on the basis of his judgment in politics. But that is, of course, nonsensical given his success and the success of those who've thrown in their lots with him.
    - cmurf 10y ago
      No, he just does stuff. And he does stuff that just so happens to have made him money. Calling that success, defining success only in terms of building things or making money, is an opinion. How does Thiel feel about his choice, who has questioned the legitimacy of the American electoral process and outcome, in advance of the election - ipso facto if Trump does not win, the election must be illegitimate and a Clinton presidency also illegitimate? Perhaps Thiel feels OK with his choice. Perhaps he can dismiss that every paper of record on the planet has just gone ape shit over this issue in the last couple of hours. Maybe the tax cut Thiel thinks he's going to get from Trump is still worth it - that sort of selfishness would at least be rational. But rational alone does not inoculate someone from having their judgment of character questioned. And in fact a questioning of their political ideology - in light of what Trump has said, it's an open question if Thiel prefers autocracy over having a Republic. It's not crazy to have this question for any of Trump's supporters in light of what Trump has said. Tonight's and tomorrow's headlines are historic, shocking, alarming, but they're not really surprising because this sort of delegitimizing is a hallmark of Trump's modus operandi, having spent 7.5 years trying to delegitimize the current president with the blatant lie he was not a natural born citizen; now turning it into a pre-delegitimization of a would-be Clinton presidency by impugning the electoral process itself. This is a person who lays waste to everything he touches, and Peter Thiel is yet another person to get sucked into the Trump con vortex. So at the very least, he's a sucker. It's just as likely that what you call success, was dumb blind luck by another name. He got lucky, despite being wholly deficient in evaluating Trump's character. And I do not agree with the idea that it is antithetical to "diversity" to ask such questions, or challenge people who have more resources, and in effect more speech, on these issues.
      - darawk 10y ago
        > No, he just does stuff. And he does stuff that just so happens to have made him money. Calling that success, defining success only in terms of building things or making money, is an opinion. No, he doesn't just do stuff. He has built many objectively successful companies and made a great deal of objective money. That is not an opinion. The rest of your post is a non-sequitur.
        cmurf 10y ago
        "defining success only in terms of" is an opinion based metric. I did not question facts. If you want to play a game of vaguery, you're on your own, Otherwise you're welcome to specifically point out which of my conclusions is unsupported by the available facts. There is a difference between a non-sequitur and editorialization.
        darawk 10y ago
        The OP I responded to said that startup founders going to Thiel for advice/investment were 'foolish', because his inability to make good decisions in politics must mean that his startup advice is bad too. Whether or not you agree with his moral/political positions is irrelevant to understanding why that statement is so wrong.
anondon 10y ago
Like you, I don't agree with Pieter Thiel on a lot of issues including his support for Trump. But when you work with him as an entrepreneur, how do his political beliefs, his position on science vs industry matter? If his positions on certain topics go against yours and affects your startup negatively, then it makes sense to not work with him. But deciding not to work with him only because of his opinions does not make sense to me, though it is still your choice. And asking other people not to associate or work with Pieter because you don't agree with him is unreasonable. It's everyone's individual choice.
- thesimpsons1022 10y ago
  it affects you morally. one could say the same about a pedophile or rapist or racist. let's say someone was all 3 of those but you knew it wouldn't affect the business you do with them. would you do it? this isn't to equate them but it is to see if you argument holds up in an edge case. I don't want to associate with, or have someone benefit from my labor, or even profit from their insights if I have such moral disagreements. but some people don't care about morals at all and only care about profit so to them it may not matter.
  - anondon 10y ago
    > one could say the same about a pedophile or rapist or racist. People who indulge in such activities are clearly breaking the law and should be reported. Pieter supporting Trump is legal! > I don't want to associate with, or have someone benefit from my labor, or even profit from their insights if I have such moral disagreements. So you don't want to associate with half the country? It's your choice, but do you see the importance of letting people have different opinions (as long as they are legally acceptable) and agree to disagree?
    - thesimpsons1022 10y ago
      half the country? first it's only expected voters which is like 40 pct of america. then only around 30 pct of those support trump. so yes i'm fine not associating with 12 pct of people.

by tensor 10y ago

darawk 10y ago

There are plenty of people who foolishly became very wealthy, then.

tensor 10y ago
http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 Being rich does not imply merit in science and knowledge, and certainly not in ethics.
- darawk 10y ago
  But if you set out to become rich and then do so, it seems a bit inaccurate to label that 'foolish'. The comment I was responding to was casting aspersions on Thiel's judgment in all categories on the basis of his judgment in politics. But that is, of course, nonsensical given his success and the success of those who've thrown in their lots with him.
  - cmurf 10y ago
    No, he just does stuff. And he does stuff that just so happens to have made him money. Calling that success, defining success only in terms of building things or making money, is an opinion. How does Thiel feel about his choice, who has questioned the legitimacy of the American electoral process and outcome, in advance of the election - ipso facto if Trump does not win, the election must be illegitimate and a Clinton presidency also illegitimate? Perhaps Thiel feels OK with his choice. Perhaps he can dismiss that every paper of record on the planet has just gone ape shit over this issue in the last couple of hours. Maybe the tax cut Thiel thinks he's going to get from Trump is still worth it - that sort of selfishness would at least be rational. But rational alone does not inoculate someone from having their judgment of character questioned. And in fact a questioning of their political ideology - in light of what Trump has said, it's an open question if Thiel prefers autocracy over having a Republic. It's not crazy to have this question for any of Trump's supporters in light of what Trump has said. Tonight's and tomorrow's headlines are historic, shocking, alarming, but they're not really surprising because this sort of delegitimizing is a hallmark of Trump's modus operandi, having spent 7.5 years trying to delegitimize the current president with the blatant lie he was not a natural born citizen; now turning it into a pre-delegitimization of a would-be Clinton presidency by impugning the electoral process itself. This is a person who lays waste to everything he touches, and Peter Thiel is yet another person to get sucked into the Trump con vortex. So at the very least, he's a sucker. It's just as likely that what you call success, was dumb blind luck by another name. He got lucky, despite being wholly deficient in evaluating Trump's character. And I do not agree with the idea that it is antithetical to "diversity" to ask such questions, or challenge people who have more resources, and in effect more speech, on these issues.
    - darawk 10y ago
      > No, he just does stuff. And he does stuff that just so happens to have made him money. Calling that success, defining success only in terms of building things or making money, is an opinion. No, he doesn't just do stuff. He has built many objectively successful companies and made a great deal of objective money. That is not an opinion. The rest of your post is a non-sequitur.
      - cmurf 10y ago
        "defining success only in terms of" is an opinion based metric. I did not question facts. If you want to play a game of vaguery, you're on your own, Otherwise you're welcome to specifically point out which of my conclusions is unsupported by the available facts. There is a difference between a non-sequitur and editorialization.
        darawk 10y ago
        The OP I responded to said that startup founders going to Thiel for advice/investment were 'foolish', because his inability to make good decisions in politics must mean that his startup advice is bad too. Whether or not you agree with his moral/political positions is irrelevant to understanding why that statement is so wrong.

anondon 10y ago

Like you, I don't agree with Pieter Thiel on a lot of issues including his support for Trump. But when you work with him as an entrepreneur, how do his political beliefs, his position on science vs industry matter? If his positions on certain topics go against yours and affects your startup negatively, then it makes sense to not work with him. But deciding not to work with him only because of his opinions does not make sense to me, though it is still your choice. And asking other people not to associate or work with Pieter because you don't agree with him is unreasonable. It's everyone's individual choice.

thesimpsons1022 10y ago
it affects you morally. one could say the same about a pedophile or rapist or racist. let's say someone was all 3 of those but you knew it wouldn't affect the business you do with them. would you do it? this isn't to equate them but it is to see if you argument holds up in an edge case. I don't want to associate with, or have someone benefit from my labor, or even profit from their insights if I have such moral disagreements. but some people don't care about morals at all and only care about profit so to them it may not matter.
- anondon 10y ago
  > one could say the same about a pedophile or rapist or racist. People who indulge in such activities are clearly breaking the law and should be reported. Pieter supporting Trump is legal! > I don't want to associate with, or have someone benefit from my labor, or even profit from their insights if I have such moral disagreements. So you don't want to associate with half the country? It's your choice, but do you see the importance of letting people have different opinions (as long as they are legally acceptable) and agree to disagree?
  - thesimpsons1022 10y ago
    half the country? first it's only expected voters which is like 40 pct of america. then only around 30 pct of those support trump. so yes i'm fine not associating with 12 pct of people.