3 ms·

Appreciate your view, as yours was one I was thinking of canvassing. That said, the "how to deal with Nazis in the bar" story comes strongly to mind: <https:/

Appreciate your view, as yours was one I was thinking of canvassing. That said, the "how to deal with Nazis in the bar" story comes strongly to mind: <https://old.reddit.com/r/bartenders/comments/j7y3cu/how_to_deal_with_nazis_in_the_bar/ https://old.reddit.com/r/bartenders/comments/j7y3cu/how_to_d...> I remember when YC had some group with PT on it. What I remember is that rather than kick PT out, the group itself was dissolved ... and then reformulated, with the prior members sans PT. That seemed to me at the time an elegant solution. Reading what pg had written, and is writing now, makes me strongly doubt my previous rationalisation. I've written on this ... sometime, somewhere, though apparently not on HN at least by Algolia's search. The story itself is mentioned by BuzzFeeed News <https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/y-combinator-cuts-ties-with-peter-thiel-ends-part-time https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/y-combinator-cu...> and Business Insider <https://www.businessinsider.com/y-combinator-billionaire-venture-capitalist-and-trump-supporter-peter-thiel-2017-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/y-combinator-billionaire-ven...>, both on 17 November 2017. As for PT: he's told us enough times who he is. I'm taking the well-founded advice to believe him.

tptacek 2y ago
My opinion of Thiel hasn't changed, but YC's management has, as has my take on collective action in our industry --- I can be supportive of a pressure campaign to divest from a bad actor if it's part of a widespread and general mobilization across the industry, but I find it a lot harder to get wound up when a single, small target doesn't cave to a loud fringe, which is what we ended up being.
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  I'd be interested in what your take on effective collective action is. As for pg's recent comments: whether or not he's on YC's board (I can't find confirmation either way, though he's listed as a founder: <https://www.ycombinator.com/people https://www.ycombinator.com/people>, snapshot: <https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223830/https://www.ycombinator.com/people https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223830/https://www.ycomb...>), his essays are featured on YC's homepage (<https://www.ycombinator.com/ https://www.ycombinator.com/>, snapshot <https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223921/https://www.ycombinator.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223921/https://www.ycomb...>), and he's making comments clearly indicated as guidance for both YC and other firms. My own goal isn't persuading pg so much as YC's present leadership, and that of other firms (incubators, VC, or commercial enterprises). Opposition to populists has generally been "fringe", until it wasn't, or until all possible hope of opposition is lost. There are other examples of notable organisations distancing themselves from founders. EFF and John Gilmore come to mind: <https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/10/john-gilmore-leaves-eff-board-becomes-board-member-emeritus https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/10/john-gilmore-leaves-ef...>
  - tptacek 2y ago
    I'm trying not to overthink or noodle on this too hard. I'm definitely not looking to pick a bone with Paul Graham. My thing here is simple: I think if you want to make a case that a particular billionaire is an advocate and activist for literal fascism, that makes sense if there's something productive you can do with the impulse. But to do anything productive, you need to mobilize the industry, to confirm to everybody that the push you're making is broadly reflective of the industry as a whole and not just a loud, concentrated special interest. That didn't happen: the politics of the rank and file of the tech industry are well understood, but they're simply not going to organize and act in a meaningful way. It's too big a lift. Fair enough. If it's not going to happen, I don't have a problem with people recognizing that it's not going to happen, like Graham did, and I don't see why we'd keep chasing performative measures.
    - dredmorbius 2y ago
      Thanks. I disagree, though how and why specifically is hard to articulate. Regardless, I'd asked for a clarification and not an argument. I got that first.

tptacek 2y ago

My opinion of Thiel hasn't changed, but YC's management has, as has my take on collective action in our industry --- I can be supportive of a pressure campaign to divest from a bad actor if it's part of a widespread and general mobilization across the industry, but I find it a lot harder to get wound up when a single, small target doesn't cave to a loud fringe, which is what we ended up being.

dredmorbius 2y ago
I'd be interested in what your take on effective collective action is. As for pg's recent comments: whether or not he's on YC's board (I can't find confirmation either way, though he's listed as a founder: <https://www.ycombinator.com/people https://www.ycombinator.com/people>, snapshot: <https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223830/https://www.ycombinator.com/people https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223830/https://www.ycomb...>), his essays are featured on YC's homepage (<https://www.ycombinator.com/ https://www.ycombinator.com/>, snapshot <https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223921/https://www.ycombinator.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223921/https://www.ycomb...>), and he's making comments clearly indicated as guidance for both YC and other firms. My own goal isn't persuading pg so much as YC's present leadership, and that of other firms (incubators, VC, or commercial enterprises). Opposition to populists has generally been "fringe", until it wasn't, or until all possible hope of opposition is lost. There are other examples of notable organisations distancing themselves from founders. EFF and John Gilmore come to mind: <https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/10/john-gilmore-leaves-eff-board-becomes-board-member-emeritus https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/10/john-gilmore-leaves-ef...>
- tptacek 2y ago
  I'm trying not to overthink or noodle on this too hard. I'm definitely not looking to pick a bone with Paul Graham. My thing here is simple: I think if you want to make a case that a particular billionaire is an advocate and activist for literal fascism, that makes sense if there's something productive you can do with the impulse. But to do anything productive, you need to mobilize the industry, to confirm to everybody that the push you're making is broadly reflective of the industry as a whole and not just a loud, concentrated special interest. That didn't happen: the politics of the rank and file of the tech industry are well understood, but they're simply not going to organize and act in a meaningful way. It's too big a lift. Fair enough. If it's not going to happen, I don't have a problem with people recognizing that it's not going to happen, like Graham did, and I don't see why we'd keep chasing performative measures.
  - dredmorbius 2y ago
    Thanks. I disagree, though how and why specifically is hard to articulate. Regardless, I'd asked for a clarification and not an argument. I got that first.