7 ms·

The fact that it is a quote (which I didn't know) moves it out of the extremely disturbing category and into the extremely cringe & very disappointing category.

by bhawks 3y ago

The fact that it is a quote (which I didn't know) moves it out of the extremely disturbing category and into the extremely cringe & very disappointing category. SF politics is a clown show on all sides - Garry has lost serious credibility that he could play some part in cleaning it up. I think he knows that.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
To me, it's extremely disturbing that someone would consider this whole thing as extremely disturbing in the first place. Whether people in the US are extremely oversenstive to tweets and words, or that the tweets and words have the power to suddenly make regular people hateful and violent - neither of those states are normal. Either that, or the country really is a few Twitter sparks away from civil war, which again would... not be a normal state of things.
- Arainach 3y ago
  Posting that you want a group of city councilors to die is not normal behavior. It's not normal when sober, it's not normal on alcohol, it's not normal for any functioning member of society. Anyone saying these things is disturbing. The fact that someone who a number of people believe is intelligent and worth listening to would say such things is extremely disturbing.
  - echelon 3y ago
    If one's own side of the horeshoe [1] had made the gaffe, it's sticks and stones. We're a bunch of evolved apes. Sometimes we say things we don't mean. They'll get over it. If the other side said it, oh dear. We'd best remove them from their job, their payroll, shun them forever, and make sure they never have power again. I think the correct approach is to have a conversation, to seek an apology, and to hold the party to being better. Strike one; it's water under the bridge. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory
    - handoflixue 3y ago
      > If one's own side of the horeshoe [1] had made the gaffe, it's sticks and stones. Some of us have enough principles to complain even when "our" side does horrible stuff. When a friend does it, I might be more inclined to talk to them in private rather than blast them in public, but that's a mix of "I am more likely to change their mind if I don't antagonize them by making this public" and "I have absolutely no social media presence, so me calling someone out doesn't really make a difference."
    - sofixa 3y ago
      > If one's own side of the horeshoe [1] had made the gaffe, it's sticks and stones. We're a bunch of evolved apes. Sometimes we say things we don't mean. They'll get over it. > If the other side said it, oh dear. We'd best remove them from their job, their payroll, shun them forever, and make sure they never have power again. Care to share some examples?
  - anonymoushn 3y ago
    When a group of people routinely cause harm to other people that is in aggregate much greater than the harm involved in them dying, I think it's understandable for the thought to come to mind.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - kyleamazza 3y ago
      The thought, yes, but a public post as the public head of a very publicly visible company?... Go ahead and post it yourself, it seems reasonable, yes?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - roenxi 3y ago
    > ... not normal behavior ... Are we sure about that? There are politicians who have coordinated/enabled things with consequences that would justify capital punishment if someone believes in that as an option. For example, from a raw moral perspective a reasonable person could support executing the entire congressional Aye vote for the US sending the army into Afghanistan. That would be a terrible mistake, because the incentives don't check out, politics would become a bloodbath when people make honest mistakes, bloody vengeance helps no-one and there is a plausible question around whether the person voting is making a personal decision or just trying to channel their voters. But since it is a superficially reasonable position I assume people would say that sort of thing regularly. To argue it out and learn why it is a bad idea, if nothing else.
    - kyleamazza 3y ago
      In the situation you posit, that sort of action would come from a vote, not a single person's vigilante call for action. That is the difference. While I'd argue for a normal person that posting something like that would just fly under the radar and disappear into the aether of the internet, the same does not apply to someone who heads a large publicly visible company, and who posts publicly on an account associated (implicitly) with that company.
      - roenxi 3y ago
        Well, 1. Votes come at the end of a process starting with someone calling for action. Has to be a first person to bring the idea up; and Twitter is as good a place for public debate as we have. (If only people could master the longform paragraph, or even essay-length debate and move to somewhere a bit more nuanced.) 2. Reflecting on the "Die slow motherfuckers" for a little while - Tan didn't actually make a call for action. Exactly what that means is ambiguous, and it is without a doubt poor form. > someone who heads a large publicly visible company If the board wants to sack him I could certainly see that happening. Although as a practical matter, I don't think this is a sustainable standard. A good CEO is worth their weight in gold, sacking them over being a Twitter troll from time to time seems like a bad call. Musk is an example; both a troll and also a pretty amazing CEO. The right thing to do might be to tolerate the situation unless the pressure gets overwhelming. On that point we've been tolerating outward displays of political speech from corporations for a while. I'm against it both on principle and because it is typically left-wing-aligned but since it happens I don't see why this sort of political diatribe is needs to be stepped on. Dude has political opinions. We all do.
  - HeWhoLurksLate 3y ago
    Is it just me, or does nobody here remember the random baloney they did or said when they were in high school or college? People being frustrated and saying things that aren't quite acceptable is fairly common, seemingly especially when alcohol is involved. Can we all just like I dunno chill out a bit? Who cares, and how does this affect me?
    - alpaca128 3y ago
      Did you also share that random baloney on a public account with your company logo on it? Probably not. And alcohol is not an excuse just because it happens to be legal compared to other drugs.
  - rayiner 3y ago
    What are you talking about? Political effigies are a whole thing, and not just in America: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/giant-trump-effigy-burned-uk-bonfire-n678481 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/giant-trump-e...
    - r00fus 3y ago
      This is the UK - do you have a US example? Because I know that doing this with current POTUS will get you a visit from Secret Service.
      - TeMPOraL 3y ago
        > Because I know that doing this with current POTUS will get you a visit from Secret Service. Funny. That makes it sound like USA is the USSR from the childhood jokes about the difference between USA and the USSR.
      - tpmoney 3y ago
        https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/los-angeles-protestors-burn-donald-trumps-head-effigy-946062/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/los-ange... https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/trump-pinata-school/ https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/trump-pinata-school/ https://am870theanswer.com/all/la-antifa-group-hangs-trump-in-effigy https://am870theanswer.com/all/la-antifa-group-hangs-trump-i... https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/donald-trump-effigy-hangs-from-tree-with-noose-around-its-neck https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/donald-trump-effigy-hangs... https://www.coloradoan.com/picture-gallery/news/2021/01/01/fort-collins-movie-theater-burns-president-donald-trump-effigy-new-years-eve-bonfire-goodbye-2020/4106556001/ https://www.coloradoan.com/picture-gallery/news/2021/01/01/f... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3500960/I-hate-Trump-Shocking-moment-Salt-Lake-City-protester-BEHEADS-effigy-Donald-Trump-steps-city-hall.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3500960/I-hate-Trum... https://www.flickr.com/photos/fibonacciblue/31620818443 https://www.flickr.com/photos/fibonacciblue/31620818443 https://www.newsweek.com/protest-trump-doll-guillotine-outside-white-house-rnc-1528381 https://www.newsweek.com/protest-trump-doll-guillotine-outsi... And that's just the last president. If you search, you'll find plenty of similar examples for Obama and Bush too. Going further back than that will probably be harder to find records for, but yeah we have a long tradition of wishing death on our politicians and expressing that quite loudly. And almost all the time, it's certainly legal, whether or not the local community is keen on it varies.
- explaininjs 3y ago
  While on one hand I agree that getting this worked up over speech is weird, Gary is a (not so) unique case in that when he is able to incite the Twitter activist mob mentality on his side, against other people’s speech, he will happily do so with no hesitation whatsoever. A while back somebody put up some stickers with his face on an octopus and the tentacles holding his various assets. The Twitter mafia went all out saying this was clearly racist and totally unacceptable in civil society, because of some prior art where an asian individual was offensively caricaturized atop an octopus. I tired to point out that the octopus has been used as a symbol of a many faceted organization since forever, and the racist aspect of the prior art wasn’t the octopus but rather the ridiculous caricaturization. The picture of Gary used in his octopus was a totally normal photo, so the racist prior art was of no consequence. Gary somehow saw my comment and decided to launch a tweet thread telling his hundreds of thousands of followers what a terrible racist horrible idiotic person I am, which resulted in a huge hacking campaign being launched against various little personal projects I had posted on my Twitter. Ugh. I don’t use Twitter anymore.
  - lawgimenez 3y ago
    As an Asian person, I don't see any racism on your part. If that were rice instead of octopus, then there might be some issues.
  - zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
    Wow. Gary Tan sounds like a fucking idiot
- timmytokyo 3y ago
  Your comment seems to suggest that you're viewing this event from outside the US. If so, perhaps you're unaware of the dangerous and recent rise in violent political rhetoric here. Garry Tan is a prominent and powerful person in the tech industry, and his words carry weight. When he rips violent lyrics out of a hip-hop song and refashions them into a political rant, he's pouring more fuel on a fire that's starting to burn out of control. Garry Tan should know better. As an earlier article mentioned [1], he was previously quoted as saying "this kind of stuff should have zero place in San Francisco politics," referring to an activist's taunt that millionaires and landlords should be guillotined. [1] https://missionlocal.org/2024/01/garry-tan-death-wish-sf-supervisors/ https://missionlocal.org/2024/01/garry-tan-death-wish-sf-sup...
  - hackideiomat 3y ago
    Well if you attack his friends, it's not okay, but if you go which death upon 'the leftists' he wouldn't say a thing, I bet
    - romwell 3y ago
      As the article says, a single leftist saying "millionaires should be guillotined" should be taken very seriously. But him saying <specific, named people> should "die slow" shuold be taken as just a joke, bro. Hmmm.
- publius_0xf3 3y ago
  Where or what do you consider normal? The United States is far from the only place where harsh words provoke outrage, rightly or wrongly. It's actually a cultural and historical norm.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    > The United States is far from the only place where harsh words provoke outrage, rightly or wrongly Elsewhere in the world, only retroactively - in retellings, in legends, in K12 history lessons. The nice, patriotic fiction of good person saying something, galvanizing the population, and then large changes happening. > It's actually a cultural and historical norm. It's not. Broadcast media are barely 100 years old. The ability for any rando to broadcast thoughts outside their direct social circles exist for less than two decades. Randos telling other randos within their social circles that they want bad things to happen to public personas - that is a cultural and historical norm. Nothing ever coming out of it, except maybe said randos landing in shit if the word reaches the public personas - that too is the cultural and historical norm. For such talk to be an actual danger to anyone else, and especially the subject of discussion? That is a very recent historical and geographical aberration (or rather, I suspect believing such talk to be dangerous is the aberration).
- hackideiomat 3y ago
  Dude can move so many millions around I'd shit my pants if he tells me to die slow.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    In such case, my pants would be in laundry too, but I (perhaps mistakenly) assume writing angry comments about politicians - up to and including even worse kind of violent wishes - are kind of normal since forever, and nothing ever comes of it. Maybe I'm misjudging the power/prominence of Garry Tan (of whom I never heard of before today) relative to SV politicians?
- fzeroracer 3y ago
  If I as an employee emailed or tweeted at my CEO telling them to die slowly I would be fired immediately and for good reason. It should absolutely be unacceptable behavior for any CEO to do something like this. If I can get fired for it, they damn well should too.
- romwell 3y ago
  >Either that, or the country really is a few Twitter sparks away from civil war, which again would... not be a normal state of things. We're pretty much there, yup. But stochastic terrosism[1] isn't a new or unique thing. Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated after similar remarks were said by Netanyahu[2], which was arguably a pivoting point towards the war in Gaza we have today. Public figures talking about specific people dying should always be treated seriously. It's not disturbing that we do. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Yitzhak_Rabin#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Yitzhak_Rabin...
  - gadders 3y ago
    "Stochastic Terrorism" sounds like a great way for politicians to prevent criticism.
    - romwell 3y ago
      There's criticism, and there's saying "<specific person> should die". If you can't tell the difference, you don't belong in public spaces or forums.
      - gadders 3y ago
        If that's the dividing line, I'm OK with it. If "XXX of party YYY is a disgusting piece of human garbage" than I don't think that should be called terrorism.
        romwell 3y ago
        Yes, that's the dividing line. Specific example that I linked: >Rallies organized by Likud and other right-wing groups featured depictions of Rabin in the crosshairs of a gun. In July 1995, Netanyahu led a mock funeral procession featuring a coffin and hangman's noose at an anti-Rabin rally where protesters chanted, "Death to Rabin". >Netanyahu denied any intention to incite violence Rabin was subsequently shot dead. The definition in Wikipedia says: >Stochastic terrorism refers to political or media figures publicly demonizing a person or group in such a way that it inspires supporters of the figures to commit a violent act against the target of the speech. Of course, direct "kill this person" language is not a requirement for that. "Won't someone rid me of this meddlesome priest?"[1] is a famous example from the 12th century. >If "XXX of party YYY is a disgusting piece of human garbage" than I don't think that should be called terrorism. By itself, it wouldn't be. However, if XXX of party YYY subsequently starts getting death threats or other harrassment as a result of this statement being made, there is a problem. Which language a public person uses to indicate a target to their followers highly depends on the context and history of the particular public person and the group they are addressing. Hopefully, you understand why doxxing[2] is problematic. There are real-life consequences for the person being doxxed. However, the language is perfectly benign; after all, there is no explicit call to action in an address, a phone number, a name. Stochastic terrorism similarly leverages context and publicity to highlight targets. It's not about how you would interpret the message; it's about how the target audience interprets it. In Tran's case, both the message (die slowly) and the target audience's interpretation (a call to harrasment) indicate that there was no miscommunicaiton. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_turbulent_priest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_tur... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing
- gadders 3y ago
  Words are literally violence. Haven't the last few years taught you anything? /sarcasm
- andy99 3y ago
  I wish I could find the clip, I think it's another Tupac song, where it plays a news clip of a stressed sounding woman saying "he says he wants to see his rivals deceased" (roughly) in response to what I assume is a line in "Can't C me". Anyway, it's funny because that clip was making fun, but sounds a lot like all the "calling for someone to die is never ok" feigned pearl clutching I've seen here. The tweet was dumb, insisting on taking it literally in spite of all evidence, for the purpose of outrage is worse.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    I can quote all kinda of people to make very disturbing, threatening statements. Unless I am writting fiction, quote or not, it is still a threat. At the very least, tweeting bat shit crazy stuff while drunk is nothing a CEO should be excused for, at the very least it is a sign of aerious self-control and judgement issues. Regardless of what politicak side said CEO, or anyone else really, is on.
  - zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
    That's the intro to To Live and Die in LA Also, the name of a great song by Wang Chung. I had never heard it until asking Google to play To Live And Die in LA and it played the Wang Chung song instead of Tupac.
  - TheCoelacanth 3y ago
    Perhaps the CEO of a major VC firm and a rapper should be held to different standards in their communications.
- mcv 3y ago
  It's nothing new that words have power. Death threats have the power to silence or coerce people just as much as blackmail does. There's a good reason these are both forms of illegal, punishable speech. Because they can hurt others, even if you don't actually execute the threat.
- rsanek 3y ago
  I agree; I probably wouldn't go as far as "extremely disturbing." But at minimum it's pretty lame and cringe. I want our leaders to be held to a higher bar, and the head of YC should be above this stuff. The sad thing is that it feels fairly in character with what I've seen from Tan in the past.
hef19898 3y ago
Every quote or in this case paraphrasing, lives in context. And in this context, yeah, it is still pretty disturbing. Reflects poorly on YC as well. Aparently their president didn't read the PG essay on keeping a low profile, especially online. Good thing so, nowadays everybody openly shows you who they are and where they stand. Back the days, people hid their dark sides a lot better.

by bhawks 3y ago

TeMPOraL 3y ago

To me, it's extremely disturbing that someone would consider this whole thing as extremely disturbing in the first place. Whether people in the US are extremely oversenstive to tweets and words, or that the tweets and words have the power to suddenly make regular people hateful and violent - neither of those states are normal. Either that, or the country really is a few Twitter sparks away from civil war, which again would... not be a normal state of things.

Arainach 3y ago
Posting that you want a group of city councilors to die is not normal behavior. It's not normal when sober, it's not normal on alcohol, it's not normal for any functioning member of society. Anyone saying these things is disturbing. The fact that someone who a number of people believe is intelligent and worth listening to would say such things is extremely disturbing.
- echelon 3y ago
  If one's own side of the horeshoe [1] had made the gaffe, it's sticks and stones. We're a bunch of evolved apes. Sometimes we say things we don't mean. They'll get over it. If the other side said it, oh dear. We'd best remove them from their job, their payroll, shun them forever, and make sure they never have power again. I think the correct approach is to have a conversation, to seek an apology, and to hold the party to being better. Strike one; it's water under the bridge. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory
  - handoflixue 3y ago
    > If one's own side of the horeshoe [1] had made the gaffe, it's sticks and stones. Some of us have enough principles to complain even when "our" side does horrible stuff. When a friend does it, I might be more inclined to talk to them in private rather than blast them in public, but that's a mix of "I am more likely to change their mind if I don't antagonize them by making this public" and "I have absolutely no social media presence, so me calling someone out doesn't really make a difference."
  - sofixa 3y ago
    > If one's own side of the horeshoe [1] had made the gaffe, it's sticks and stones. We're a bunch of evolved apes. Sometimes we say things we don't mean. They'll get over it. > If the other side said it, oh dear. We'd best remove them from their job, their payroll, shun them forever, and make sure they never have power again. Care to share some examples?
- anonymoushn 3y ago
  When a group of people routinely cause harm to other people that is in aggregate much greater than the harm involved in them dying, I think it's understandable for the thought to come to mind.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - kyleamazza 3y ago
    The thought, yes, but a public post as the public head of a very publicly visible company?... Go ahead and post it yourself, it seems reasonable, yes?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- roenxi 3y ago
  > ... not normal behavior ... Are we sure about that? There are politicians who have coordinated/enabled things with consequences that would justify capital punishment if someone believes in that as an option. For example, from a raw moral perspective a reasonable person could support executing the entire congressional Aye vote for the US sending the army into Afghanistan. That would be a terrible mistake, because the incentives don't check out, politics would become a bloodbath when people make honest mistakes, bloody vengeance helps no-one and there is a plausible question around whether the person voting is making a personal decision or just trying to channel their voters. But since it is a superficially reasonable position I assume people would say that sort of thing regularly. To argue it out and learn why it is a bad idea, if nothing else.
  - kyleamazza 3y ago
    In the situation you posit, that sort of action would come from a vote, not a single person's vigilante call for action. That is the difference. While I'd argue for a normal person that posting something like that would just fly under the radar and disappear into the aether of the internet, the same does not apply to someone who heads a large publicly visible company, and who posts publicly on an account associated (implicitly) with that company.
    - roenxi 3y ago
      Well, 1. Votes come at the end of a process starting with someone calling for action. Has to be a first person to bring the idea up; and Twitter is as good a place for public debate as we have. (If only people could master the longform paragraph, or even essay-length debate and move to somewhere a bit more nuanced.) 2. Reflecting on the "Die slow motherfuckers" for a little while - Tan didn't actually make a call for action. Exactly what that means is ambiguous, and it is without a doubt poor form. > someone who heads a large publicly visible company If the board wants to sack him I could certainly see that happening. Although as a practical matter, I don't think this is a sustainable standard. A good CEO is worth their weight in gold, sacking them over being a Twitter troll from time to time seems like a bad call. Musk is an example; both a troll and also a pretty amazing CEO. The right thing to do might be to tolerate the situation unless the pressure gets overwhelming. On that point we've been tolerating outward displays of political speech from corporations for a while. I'm against it both on principle and because it is typically left-wing-aligned but since it happens I don't see why this sort of political diatribe is needs to be stepped on. Dude has political opinions. We all do.
- HeWhoLurksLate 3y ago
  Is it just me, or does nobody here remember the random baloney they did or said when they were in high school or college? People being frustrated and saying things that aren't quite acceptable is fairly common, seemingly especially when alcohol is involved. Can we all just like I dunno chill out a bit? Who cares, and how does this affect me?
  - alpaca128 3y ago
    Did you also share that random baloney on a public account with your company logo on it? Probably not. And alcohol is not an excuse just because it happens to be legal compared to other drugs.
- rayiner 3y ago
  What are you talking about? Political effigies are a whole thing, and not just in America: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/giant-trump-effigy-burned-uk-bonfire-n678481 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/giant-trump-e...
  - r00fus 3y ago
    This is the UK - do you have a US example? Because I know that doing this with current POTUS will get you a visit from Secret Service.
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      > Because I know that doing this with current POTUS will get you a visit from Secret Service. Funny. That makes it sound like USA is the USSR from the childhood jokes about the difference between USA and the USSR.
    - tpmoney 3y ago
      https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/los-angeles-protestors-burn-donald-trumps-head-effigy-946062/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/los-ange... https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/trump-pinata-school/ https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/trump-pinata-school/ https://am870theanswer.com/all/la-antifa-group-hangs-trump-in-effigy https://am870theanswer.com/all/la-antifa-group-hangs-trump-i... https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/donald-trump-effigy-hangs-from-tree-with-noose-around-its-neck https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/donald-trump-effigy-hangs... https://www.coloradoan.com/picture-gallery/news/2021/01/01/fort-collins-movie-theater-burns-president-donald-trump-effigy-new-years-eve-bonfire-goodbye-2020/4106556001/ https://www.coloradoan.com/picture-gallery/news/2021/01/01/f... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3500960/I-hate-Trump-Shocking-moment-Salt-Lake-City-protester-BEHEADS-effigy-Donald-Trump-steps-city-hall.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3500960/I-hate-Trum... https://www.flickr.com/photos/fibonacciblue/31620818443 https://www.flickr.com/photos/fibonacciblue/31620818443 https://www.newsweek.com/protest-trump-doll-guillotine-outside-white-house-rnc-1528381 https://www.newsweek.com/protest-trump-doll-guillotine-outsi... And that's just the last president. If you search, you'll find plenty of similar examples for Obama and Bush too. Going further back than that will probably be harder to find records for, but yeah we have a long tradition of wishing death on our politicians and expressing that quite loudly. And almost all the time, it's certainly legal, whether or not the local community is keen on it varies.
explaininjs 3y ago
While on one hand I agree that getting this worked up over speech is weird, Gary is a (not so) unique case in that when he is able to incite the Twitter activist mob mentality on his side, against other people’s speech, he will happily do so with no hesitation whatsoever. A while back somebody put up some stickers with his face on an octopus and the tentacles holding his various assets. The Twitter mafia went all out saying this was clearly racist and totally unacceptable in civil society, because of some prior art where an asian individual was offensively caricaturized atop an octopus. I tired to point out that the octopus has been used as a symbol of a many faceted organization since forever, and the racist aspect of the prior art wasn’t the octopus but rather the ridiculous caricaturization. The picture of Gary used in his octopus was a totally normal photo, so the racist prior art was of no consequence. Gary somehow saw my comment and decided to launch a tweet thread telling his hundreds of thousands of followers what a terrible racist horrible idiotic person I am, which resulted in a huge hacking campaign being launched against various little personal projects I had posted on my Twitter. Ugh. I don’t use Twitter anymore.
- lawgimenez 3y ago
  As an Asian person, I don't see any racism on your part. If that were rice instead of octopus, then there might be some issues.
- zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
  Wow. Gary Tan sounds like a fucking idiot
timmytokyo 3y ago
Your comment seems to suggest that you're viewing this event from outside the US. If so, perhaps you're unaware of the dangerous and recent rise in violent political rhetoric here. Garry Tan is a prominent and powerful person in the tech industry, and his words carry weight. When he rips violent lyrics out of a hip-hop song and refashions them into a political rant, he's pouring more fuel on a fire that's starting to burn out of control. Garry Tan should know better. As an earlier article mentioned [1], he was previously quoted as saying "this kind of stuff should have zero place in San Francisco politics," referring to an activist's taunt that millionaires and landlords should be guillotined. [1] https://missionlocal.org/2024/01/garry-tan-death-wish-sf-supervisors/ https://missionlocal.org/2024/01/garry-tan-death-wish-sf-sup...
- hackideiomat 3y ago
  Well if you attack his friends, it's not okay, but if you go which death upon 'the leftists' he wouldn't say a thing, I bet
  - romwell 3y ago
    As the article says, a single leftist saying "millionaires should be guillotined" should be taken very seriously. But him saying <specific, named people> should "die slow" shuold be taken as just a joke, bro. Hmmm.
publius_0xf3 3y ago
Where or what do you consider normal? The United States is far from the only place where harsh words provoke outrage, rightly or wrongly. It's actually a cultural and historical norm.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  > The United States is far from the only place where harsh words provoke outrage, rightly or wrongly Elsewhere in the world, only retroactively - in retellings, in legends, in K12 history lessons. The nice, patriotic fiction of good person saying something, galvanizing the population, and then large changes happening. > It's actually a cultural and historical norm. It's not. Broadcast media are barely 100 years old. The ability for any rando to broadcast thoughts outside their direct social circles exist for less than two decades. Randos telling other randos within their social circles that they want bad things to happen to public personas - that is a cultural and historical norm. Nothing ever coming out of it, except maybe said randos landing in shit if the word reaches the public personas - that too is the cultural and historical norm. For such talk to be an actual danger to anyone else, and especially the subject of discussion? That is a very recent historical and geographical aberration (or rather, I suspect believing such talk to be dangerous is the aberration).
hackideiomat 3y ago
Dude can move so many millions around I'd shit my pants if he tells me to die slow.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  In such case, my pants would be in laundry too, but I (perhaps mistakenly) assume writing angry comments about politicians - up to and including even worse kind of violent wishes - are kind of normal since forever, and nothing ever comes of it. Maybe I'm misjudging the power/prominence of Garry Tan (of whom I never heard of before today) relative to SV politicians?
fzeroracer 3y ago
If I as an employee emailed or tweeted at my CEO telling them to die slowly I would be fired immediately and for good reason. It should absolutely be unacceptable behavior for any CEO to do something like this. If I can get fired for it, they damn well should too.
romwell 3y ago
>Either that, or the country really is a few Twitter sparks away from civil war, which again would... not be a normal state of things. We're pretty much there, yup. But stochastic terrosism[1] isn't a new or unique thing. Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated after similar remarks were said by Netanyahu[2], which was arguably a pivoting point towards the war in Gaza we have today. Public figures talking about specific people dying should always be treated seriously. It's not disturbing that we do. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Yitzhak_Rabin#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Yitzhak_Rabin...
- gadders 3y ago
  "Stochastic Terrorism" sounds like a great way for politicians to prevent criticism.
  - romwell 3y ago
    There's criticism, and there's saying "<specific person> should die". If you can't tell the difference, you don't belong in public spaces or forums.
    - gadders 3y ago
      If that's the dividing line, I'm OK with it. If "XXX of party YYY is a disgusting piece of human garbage" than I don't think that should be called terrorism.
      - romwell 3y ago
        Yes, that's the dividing line. Specific example that I linked: >Rallies organized by Likud and other right-wing groups featured depictions of Rabin in the crosshairs of a gun. In July 1995, Netanyahu led a mock funeral procession featuring a coffin and hangman's noose at an anti-Rabin rally where protesters chanted, "Death to Rabin". >Netanyahu denied any intention to incite violence Rabin was subsequently shot dead. The definition in Wikipedia says: >Stochastic terrorism refers to political or media figures publicly demonizing a person or group in such a way that it inspires supporters of the figures to commit a violent act against the target of the speech. Of course, direct "kill this person" language is not a requirement for that. "Won't someone rid me of this meddlesome priest?"[1] is a famous example from the 12th century. >If "XXX of party YYY is a disgusting piece of human garbage" than I don't think that should be called terrorism. By itself, it wouldn't be. However, if XXX of party YYY subsequently starts getting death threats or other harrassment as a result of this statement being made, there is a problem. Which language a public person uses to indicate a target to their followers highly depends on the context and history of the particular public person and the group they are addressing. Hopefully, you understand why doxxing[2] is problematic. There are real-life consequences for the person being doxxed. However, the language is perfectly benign; after all, there is no explicit call to action in an address, a phone number, a name. Stochastic terrorism similarly leverages context and publicity to highlight targets. It's not about how you would interpret the message; it's about how the target audience interprets it. In Tran's case, both the message (die slowly) and the target audience's interpretation (a call to harrasment) indicate that there was no miscommunicaiton. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_turbulent_priest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_tur... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing
gadders 3y ago
Words are literally violence. Haven't the last few years taught you anything? /sarcasm
andy99 3y ago
I wish I could find the clip, I think it's another Tupac song, where it plays a news clip of a stressed sounding woman saying "he says he wants to see his rivals deceased" (roughly) in response to what I assume is a line in "Can't C me". Anyway, it's funny because that clip was making fun, but sounds a lot like all the "calling for someone to die is never ok" feigned pearl clutching I've seen here. The tweet was dumb, insisting on taking it literally in spite of all evidence, for the purpose of outrage is worse.
- hef19898 3y ago
  I can quote all kinda of people to make very disturbing, threatening statements. Unless I am writting fiction, quote or not, it is still a threat. At the very least, tweeting bat shit crazy stuff while drunk is nothing a CEO should be excused for, at the very least it is a sign of aerious self-control and judgement issues. Regardless of what politicak side said CEO, or anyone else really, is on.
- zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
  That's the intro to To Live and Die in LA Also, the name of a great song by Wang Chung. I had never heard it until asking Google to play To Live And Die in LA and it played the Wang Chung song instead of Tupac.
- TheCoelacanth 3y ago
  Perhaps the CEO of a major VC firm and a rapper should be held to different standards in their communications.
mcv 3y ago
It's nothing new that words have power. Death threats have the power to silence or coerce people just as much as blackmail does. There's a good reason these are both forms of illegal, punishable speech. Because they can hurt others, even if you don't actually execute the threat.
rsanek 3y ago
I agree; I probably wouldn't go as far as "extremely disturbing." But at minimum it's pretty lame and cringe. I want our leaders to be held to a higher bar, and the head of YC should be above this stuff. The sad thing is that it feels fairly in character with what I've seen from Tan in the past.

hef19898 3y ago

Every quote or in this case paraphrasing, lives in context. And in this context, yeah, it is still pretty disturbing. Reflects poorly on YC as well. Aparently their president didn't read the PG essay on keeping a low profile, especially online. Good thing so, nowadays everybody openly shows you who they are and where they stand. Back the days, people hid their dark sides a lot better.