4 ms·
As a matter of good policy they wouldn't publicly denounce anyone that was associated with YC.
by haltist 3y ago
As a matter of good policy they wouldn't publicly denounce anyone that was associated with YC.
- gjvc 3y agosimplest explanation is most likely the one nearest the truth
- skygazer 3y agoironically, that’s too simplistic. Simplicity is only virtuous in an explanation if the explanation itself is not contradicted by reality. Unbound from reality, simplicity is dangerously seductive because it’s easy and wrong.
- bch 3y agoFor every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. - H.L. Mencken
- ghufran_syed 3y agovery glib (though true) - but do you have any evidence in this case as to what reality is? If so, could you please explain how the given statement is "contradicted by reality"?
- skygazer 3y agoI was just addressing the notion that the simplicity of the conspiracy theory was evidence of its veracity - it is not. If you're asking if I have evidence against the nonsensical conspiracy theory that third party praise given about a recently fired CEO can be construed as evidence of a secret ownership stake in the charity that fired him, I'm going to leave that to the judgement of the reader.
- haltist 3y agoDiscovered a while ago by Occam.[1] 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
- notahacker 3y agoBut it's possible to maintain that good policy without publicly endorsing his side of someone else's argument though...
- haltist 3y agoI don't do marketing for YC but Paul Graham does so you'd have to ask him about how they deal with such situations. My comment is just my opinion.