19 ms·
The Sean Parker Wedding Is the Perfect Parable for Silicon Valley Excess
- dclaysmith 13y agoPrevious discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5820590 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5820590
- tanepiper 13y agoDick
- bribriinlondon2 13y agoDick
- uvdiv 13y agoHold on, he paid $2.5 million in fines over what those photos depict? I think CCC is missing a 'Р'. (edit): Here's a interesting profile of the guy leading this bureaucracy: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/us/09sfcoastal.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/us/09sfcoastal.html?pagewa...
- raverbashing 13y agoWell, the bill for the whole thing was 10Mi (Which is probably change for Sean "do you know what's cooler than a million dollars" Parker) Yes, it's probably excessive, but maybe not all the pictures are there
- michaelt 13y agoA $2.5 million fine is nothing to a guy with an estimated $2.1 billion fortune [1]. If we don't want the rich to flaunt the law with impunity, the find should be a hundred times larger - that way it might actually act as a deterrent. Of course, you could argue that we don't care if the rich can commit certain offences with impunity. Perhaps we've signalled that by legislating a fine rather than imprisonment for this offence. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Parker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Parker
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- venomsnake 13y agoI am not sure whether it was in France or England before the industrial revolution when a nobility could get away with running over a peasant with a carriage only with a fine. It did not end well. The only way the rich can live with the others in stable society if there are a lot of things money can't buy.
- johnchristopher 13y agoFirstly, quantifying actual damage to the environment is actually really hard. All the money in the world can't revive an extinct specie for instance. Secondly, I don't like the stance you defend : fines aren't a price to pay to do whatever we want, there are to dissuade people to act in a way society don't want you to act. People are fined when they violently rob or physically attack others, this doesn't mean money buys you the right to randomly punch people in the teeth. (and to follow through: that's why I believe fines should be proportional, which could be the case here) edit: I just looked at your profile and saw you certainly must know a thing or two about laws and justice so I am pretty sure you have a more subtle point of view than what is reflected in your post and my counter-argument in my second point. Looking forward to it.
- calinet6 13y agoYes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
- grimtrigger 13y agoIn theory, you could take the fine and use it for park restoration or expansion of the park. If thats true, than why not just take the fine and be happy? That would leave the environment in better shape and give someone a temporary job fixing it. I don't know enough about ecology to know if its possible
- king_jester 13y ago> I think CCC is missing a 'Р'. Ah yes, because having requirements for a permit before modifying certain locations that are a shared public resource totally makes California the Soviet Union.
- create028 13y agoWith a wedding this 'epic', any smart divorce lawyers should start introducing themselves now.
- aaron695 13y agoIf there's any story here it's impossible to tell with such a badly written and misleading article. >Nothing says, "I love the Earth!" quite like bringing bulldozers into an old-growth forest to create a fake ruined castle. So he brought multiple bulldozers in hey? Somehow I doubt that, do people actually buy into this sort of stuff? At best from pictures it looks like they used small earth moving vehicles as you'd expect. http://ncwtv.com/nn/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/0e64parkers-wedding-company-brought-in-bulldozers.jpg.png http://ncwtv.com/nn/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/0e64parkers-w...
- PavlovsCat 13y agoA small bulldozer is still a bulldozer. ( I searched for "small bulldozer" and this was among the first: http://www.featurepics.com/FI/Thumb300/20060713/SmallBulldozer50608.jpg http://www.featurepics.com/FI/Thumb300/20060713/SmallBulldoz... ) Also, what do you mean by "this sort of stuff"? "This page left blank for your own rationalizations and fantasies", hmm?
- Pxtl 13y agoafaik, technically that picture depicts a small front-loader.
- PavlovsCat 13y ago"unlike most bulldozers" seems to heavily imply it's still a bulldozer: "Unlike most bulldozers, most loaders are wheeled and not tracked, although track loaders are common. They are successful where sharp edged materials in construction debris would damage rubber wheels, or where the ground is soft and muddy. Wheels provide better mobility and speed and do not damage paved roads as much as tracks, but provide less traction." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loader_(equipment) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loader_(equipment)
- DanBC 13y ago> So he brought multiple bulldozers in hey? [...] >At best from pictures it looks like they used small earth moving vehicles as you'd expect. That seems like an odd thing to quibble about. Are you saying he didn't illegally destroy environmentally sensitive wildlife by moving a bunch of earth and installing a fake fucking castle, but that it's all okay because he used "small earth moving vehicles"?
- downandout 13y agoApparently I am not acquainted with the plight of unused campgrounds, because this makes me want to go find some redwood trees and throw up on them. Could someone explain to me in what alternate reality these temporary changes were worth $2.5 million in fines? I like California, or should say I liked California until reading this. But it now appears that the inmates are running the asylum.
- bryanlarsen 13y agoDamage to waterways can easily justify fines that large or larger.
- downandout 13y agoAnd you are claiming that you, or anyone else for that matter, can prove that installing a few temporary platforms and fake ruins caused actual damage to a waterway?
- mseebach 13y agoThe problem seems to be that some platforms were build on the bank of the creek with no erosion control, meaning that a good rain storm or two might cause it to collapse into the creek which presumably would block it. There's certainly, let's call it "journalistic excess" in the story (OMG! Google busses!) but I think real damage was done. Weird that neither Parker or the owner had the sense to think that they should clean up afterwards. The specifically sought out the place because of its ecological beauty.
- MarciaPetros 13y agoCan you, or anyone else for that matter, prove that installing a few temporary platforms and fake ruins WILL NOT cause actual damage to a waterway? If you can't see that these regulations are there specifically to protect precious natural reserves from unanticipated damage, you are a moron. The penalty for such barefaced contempt of the law should be death. As a billionaire with an army of lawyers, Sean Parker has no excuse for flaunting the general will of the public in this way. This isn't an innocent mistake made in a drunken moment of passion. This is calculated, premeditated contempt for the laws of our society. If Sean Parker has so little respect for our laws he should have his wealth stripped and be excommunicated from the state. He should feel lucky to escape this kind of crime with his life. Obviously American society is degenerate and borderline non-existent when this kind of conspicuous contempt for society receives apologies by supposedly well-educated people.
- atirip 13y agoNothing too see here. This is totally acceptable behaviour globally - if you have money, do whatever you want, then pay. The most popular TV show on the globe is Top Gear where 3 middle aged assholes with pockets full of greasy money do exactly that all the time - buy, demolish, destroy, whatever, then pay. And as this is the most popular TV show - we all like such assholic behaviour.
- jiggy2011 13y agoThey don't tend to destroy national parks though, just old cars and maybe the odd building that was condemned anyway.
- downandout 13y agoDon't worry, because this didn't come remotely close to "destroying a national park". I realize that Northern California is the natural habitat of the insane tree hugger, and that many joints have been smoked while pondering Sean Parker's evil deforestation plot. But that report found no evidence of actual, permanent damage to anything. It asserted that activities of this general nature, carried to extremes, carry the possibility of some amount of damage. His temporary, aesthetic changes did nothing and no fine should have been levied - certainly not $2.5 million that will be used to perpetuate this particular brand of insanity.
- soofaloofa 13y agoI understand your point but no fine should be levied? This kind of behaviour should be discouraged and a fine is entirely appropriate to discourage it.
- clicks 13y ago> This kind of behaviour should be discouraged and a fine is entirely appropriate to discourage it. I would actually go so far as to say that the fine should have been much bigger. This is something that annoys me about tickets being a fixed amount: is it really a true deterrent to bad behavior when the fine is so negligibly small that you basically don't give a damn? The purpose of punishment is to reform bad behavior, bad behavior that is dangerous to others. When you're going 80+ kph above speed limit you're not just putting your own life at danger, you're putting other innocent people in the vicinity at danger too. A ticket should not be $400 at that point when you're a billionaire, it should be $4 million. $400 is likely not enough forceful enough as a corrective measure. In this instance I'd have been happier if the fine Parker incurred was above $25 million.
- copx 13y agoJealously and ideological discord. The Zuckerbergs and Parkers are undermining the traditional American narrative of "hard work" and entrepreneurship. It seems wrong based on that world view that a baby-faced geek in a hoodie can look down on all the traditional businessmen from his mountain of money. These new rich they did not get rich through "hard work", they just got the right idea at the right time. They did not prove themselves in a decade(s) long process of "building a business", facing countless challenges along the way, but practically got rich over night - often while having a lot of juvenile fun. And of course nobody can construct a charming "rags to riches" nonsense story here, the one Americans love so much. The current generation of silicon billionaires come from privilege, and can be billionaires shortly after completing their studies at some elite university .. or even before that. None of that is surprising. That's how modern, globalized, digital capitalism works. But it makes people uncomfortable, and yes jealous. These 20-something billionaires are simply way more offensive to the common man than the traditional industrial tycoons. Very, very few people will have the right idea at the right time. It is not something you can plan or work (hard) towards to. Also the software business is elitist by nature. In contrast, it is much easier for most to relate to the traditional American entrepreneur story, which for example begins with his first job making pizza, then his first small restaurant and ends with him being a billionaire chain restaurant tycoon decades later. It is obvious that among the capitalists there are subgroups which are seen as less deserving and sympathetic by the general public. Traditionally bankers and - it seems - for quite a few people Sean Parker-types too. Of course it is unjustified to hate people because they found a legal way to easily and quickly make a hell lot of money. But well.. humans being humans.
- macspoofing 13y ago>It seems wrong based on that world view that a baby-faced geek in a hoodie can look down on all the traditional businessmen from his mountain of money. I don't know what you mean by 'traditional businessmen', but Zuckerberg's flaunting of Wall Street conventions by wearing a hoodie was great. Seriously, fuck those guys. There's good people there, but talk about guys making insane amounts of money for work of dubious (and dubious ethical) value. And yes, Zuckerberg's billions came rather quickly, but he did create a product that is used by a billion people, and his company employs thousands of engineers. He broke no laws, didn't destroy the economy and didn't need a trillion dollars of tax payer money to be bailed out.
- kapowaz 13y agoIt could have been worse; his guests could have all had their throats slit in an act of callous revenge (‘The RIAA sends their regards!’).
- wavefunction 13y agoeh... he's "part of the club now"
- fakeer 13y agoI feel bad, even though I am not from that country. Feels like he had already calculated the fines and the outrage. On a sadist note I couldn't resist wondering how long they are going to hold onto each other. Hope that ends without drama at least, after all this waste and damage. Well, this follows pretty soon these days, isn't it? Especially if it's two celebrities.
- hpagey 13y agoI was surprized that he created a LLC to run his wedding. Is this normal for high budget weddings ? What might be advantages of doing so? Just curious.
- rplst8 13y agoAnything you or your wife buy for you wedding is not tax deductable. Anything a corporation, LLC, or company buys can be treated as an expense as a consumable. I'm not sure what revenue the LLC would have, so it would probably take a loss, which then can be written off on personal taxes as "income/loss from a business." That's my guess.
- uvdiv 13y agoNo such thing. IRS won't let you reclassify personal consumption as business losses just by creating an LLC for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_section_183 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_section_... ("hobby loss rule")
- raleec 13y agoWould the LLC structure also protect him in case they decided to fine him $100 million? It'd probably protect him in case a wild animal bit one of his guests. It's relatively cheap protection when so many things can go wrong.
- rplst8 13y agoYes, it separates financial liability from personal assets. Another good reason that I forgot to mention.
- gohrt 13y agoThe courts can and often do pierce the veil of sham LLCs like this. The LLCs main use (still bad), is that if LLC1 runs up a debt of a billion dollars, LLC2 might be protected from it.
- wavefunction 13y ago
- ekm2 13y agoI guess what is required now is the obligatory donation to the "Save the Earth" Foundation.
- derwiki 13y agoOn causes.com, the online activism site he founded, perhaps?
- tibbon 13y agoFor some reason, a Game of Thrones themed wedding feels ill fated. But maybe he didn't read the books?
- snorkel 13y agoThis is the Redwood Wedding.
- thehme 13y agoTotal business psychopath. I am not all surprised of Parker's lack of consciousness for what really actually matters; that place in which we all live - Earth.
- fianchetto 13y agoOld story: Arrogant punk thinks the world is his, will be shown differently in a few years.
- paganel 13y ago> The event's venue, a luxury hotel in Big Sur, California, will include a custom-made fairyland-like setting with fake ruins, bridges, ponds, and a gated cottage Sad to see that SV billionaires suffer from the same kitsch-mania as do the Russian oil oligarchs.
- sliverstorm 13y agoPeople are people. If it's been done before, it will be done again.
- vijayr 13y agoSo what is the best deterrent for such behavior? Obviously, fines aren't going to work - for someone who is worth billions of dollars, a couple of millions is pocket change. Also, if trees/forests are destroyed, it takes decades to restore them back. It is difficult to quantify the time and effort required, plus the negative effect of losing that ecosystem in the mean time.
- sopooneo 13y agoPenalties that require the offender to restore the area to its previous condition. Screw up a redwood or endangered species? Fix it. Unspeakably expensive? Tough. Get some bids and hire a firm to do it and if it costs half your net worth then oh well. There was a great Planet Money episode about how BP was required to replace pelicans (not pay a per-dead-bird fine) after their gulf coast spill and how market prices eventually emerged for that service. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/07/30/128880374/the-friday-podcast-tallying-up-the-pelican-bill http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/07/30/128880374/the-frid...
- w1ntermute 13y agoIn Finland (or maybe Sweden), fines for crimes scale to match the offender's ability to pay. I recall reading that some rich guy had to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a speeding ticket.
- kryptiskt 13y agoThat's Finland. Sweden have fixed fines for traffic violations. For minor crimes, there is "dagsböter" that is scaled by the income of the perpetrator (notionally by 30-150 days' salary, but in actual use the fine is set much lower).
- whyenot 13y agoFederally listed steelhead use the lower parts of Post Creek to spawn. This is something the wedding planners would have learned if they had sought the necessary permits. Increasing sedimentation in the creek reduces steelhead reproductive success, and is considered a take without a permit under the Endangered Species Act. The ESA has both civil and criminal penalties for taking without a permit, but NOAA's ability to enforce these kinds of violations is pretty limited, they don't have the money or the manpower. Thankfully, the California Coastal Commission has both.
- bsimpson 13y agoAnd instead, they said "it's cool - just make us one of those fancy app things and we'll call it even." [1] [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/sean-parker-was-fined-25-million-for-his-extravagant-big-sur-wedding-2013-6?google_editors_picks=true http://www.businessinsider.com/sean-parker-was-fined-25-mill...
- ryanisinallofus 13y agoHe paid the fee AND promised to make the app, but yeah.
- whyenot 13y agoI would have liked a much more significant fine, but it's better than nothing.
- andyl 13y ago"The Perfect Parable for Silicon Valley Excess" I disagree. To me, this is the story of a single a-hole. I don't see a larger story. I live in Silicon Valley, and with some exceptions, nearly every person I've dealt with over the years, rich or poor, have been super cool. Many journalists present outliers as representative of the normal situation, then put up link-bait titles to generate controversy and clicks. It is a dishonest practice.
- steven2012 13y agoI do not disagree with the article. I've been living in Silicon Valley for 15+ years now. When I first came, my office mate told me "You know you're in Silicon Valley, when you stop asking "How much will it cost" and start asking "How long will it take". I've seen lots of examples of things like this behavior, from people taking the car pools lanes to save time, to Steve Jobs parking in handicap spots. Whether or not it's smarter to beg for forgiveness vs ask for permission is another issue, but I've seen this behavior often around here.
- andyl 13y agoSteve Jobs is the ultimate outlier. Yeah some folks here are obnoxious, anxious, ride in carpool lanes etc. Is it so different from other urban areas - Seattle/Boulder/DC/LA? Not in my experience.
- ryanisinallofus 13y agoExactly. "Nothing says, "I love the Earth!" quite like bringing bulldozers into an old-growth forest to create a fake ruined castle." Fuck you Sean Parker. Couldn't you have just flown everybody out to a real castle somewhere for $20 million?
- ryanisinallofus 13y agoPremature f-bombation. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/sean-parker-responds-to-redwoods-wedding-criticism-and-his-defense-is-actually-pretty-convincing/276553/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/sean-p... Not that you care what I think, or will read this but I'm sorry for pre-judging. Apparently you can't believe everything you read on the internet.
- xradionut 13y agoNot suprising for the nouveau riche. My buddies and I have witness acts like this so often, we nick-named it the "tude", as in attitude. From the asshole that parks his Hummer sideways in 2 handicap spots to stupid brats that trash resturants and laugh at the staff, it's really stupid behavior. The "old money" knows better than this and mostly stays off the radar of the rest of the public.
- bjhoops1 13y agoAn interesting book that jives with this is Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else. One of the interesting things the author finds about the nouveau rich is that they are typically more dismissive of the poor and less charitable than the "old money." Probably in large part because they think "I made it because of my own merits - if you don't have the things I have, it's because you are lazy or incompetent." As for trashing a redwood forest, not sure what makes that seem OK. :)
- ywang0414 13y agoIt's just rich people doing stupid things. It is however unnecessary to associate the entire valley with one idiot.
- epoxyhockey 13y agoThis story is more about bad taste than Silicon Valley excess. Tens of thousands of individuals in this world have the means to pull off what Parker did.
- chrischen 13y agoWith great power comes great responsibility. Power is entrusted, not entitled. I really hope no one makes this coke-snorter his role model.