Peter Thiel Is a Flawed Messenger with a Crucial Message for Tech(wired.com)
wired.com
Peter Thiel Is a Flawed Messenger with a Crucial Message for Tech
https://www.wired.com/story/peter-thiel-is-a-flawed-messenger-with-a-crucial-message-for-tech
59 comments
This is somewhat pedantic to the overall point of the article, but Peter Thiel is moving to LA because the Valley is a stifling cultural environment, but then goes on to name multiple tech companies that they consider part of the Valley, but physically removed.
Why would Thiel moving to LA somehow affect this equation? They start the article using it for its importance and end it with saying it isn't, and it feels so contrived for the writer to use it as a way to editorialize on other matters.
I do happen to agree with a lot of the article, but the editing here feels sloppy, and while I love a lot of Wired's content, it seems like this continues to be a problem with their articles.
Why would Thiel moving to LA somehow affect this equation? They start the article using it for its importance and end it with saying it isn't, and it feels so contrived for the writer to use it as a way to editorialize on other matters.
I do happen to agree with a lot of the article, but the editing here feels sloppy, and while I love a lot of Wired's content, it seems like this continues to be a problem with their articles.
> "Where Peter Thiel lives is of at best marginal import to anyone but him."
This is not first rate journalism. Does Zachary Karabell not realize that people go to Mr. Thiel seeking investment? It's not simply a matter of Facebook. SpaceX and Stripe each had times when they couldn't raise investment from anyone but Thiel.
This is not first rate journalism. Does Zachary Karabell not realize that people go to Mr. Thiel seeking investment? It's not simply a matter of Facebook. SpaceX and Stripe each had times when they couldn't raise investment from anyone but Thiel.
It is worth questioning why they even wrote this article in the first place if that statement were true.
I don't understand the medias obsession with Thiel since Trumps election.
He's a republican. K
He's gay. K
He's critical of the Silicon Valley echo chamber. K
He's a great businessman. K
There's not really a great boogieman story to make from. this.
He's a republican. K
He's gay. K
He's critical of the Silicon Valley echo chamber. K
He's a great businessman. K
There's not really a great boogieman story to make from. this.
Him and Hulk Hogan got in a tag team fight versus the online version of a supermarket checkout aisle tabloid. And won! That's pretty cool I guess...
I agree the obsession with the guy is weird, but then the entire cult of celebrity thing never really made a lot of sense, imho.
I agree the obsession with the guy is weird, but then the entire cult of celebrity thing never really made a lot of sense, imho.
Think it is his refusal to toe the valley's ideological line that's causing the obsession. He's pretty much the same guy he has always been but the landscape around him has changed. He refuses to change with it. That makes him confusing to those who have successfully bullied everyone else into groupthink compliance. Why won't he just submit to the hive?
I think being at the head of Palantir maybe gave him a deep understanding of what's really going on inside the federal government and he's a believer that there is indeed a swamp.
This seems to be one of the big issues that separates the Trump supporters from everyone else. Everyone else seems to think the government was run perfectly under Obama's presidency and Hillary's state department and Trump threw the whole world into chaos.
This seems to be one of the big issues that separates the Trump supporters from everyone else. Everyone else seems to think the government was run perfectly under Obama's presidency and Hillary's state department and Trump threw the whole world into chaos.
People are bad at thinking in absolutes. Humans always think in relative terms. Our perception of how well the government operates is in relation to how we perceive the change to previous governments. Obama, Bush, Clinton, Old Bush, Reagan all seemed kind of like a natural progression with some ups and downs. Trump is a breaking change . People are noticing it.
I see leftists posting articles about how normal Bush was. Do you remember Bush being Hitler just 15 years ago? I remember. It's all about comparison.
Obama was a scandal free presidency! Do you remember Obama getting a Nobel Peace Prize and then proceed to bomb 7 countries? Whatever happened to closing Guantanamo? Enabling the greatest surveillance state ever conceived? That's scandalous.
It's all normal now.
I see leftists posting articles about how normal Bush was. Do you remember Bush being Hitler just 15 years ago? I remember. It's all about comparison.
Obama was a scandal free presidency! Do you remember Obama getting a Nobel Peace Prize and then proceed to bomb 7 countries? Whatever happened to closing Guantanamo? Enabling the greatest surveillance state ever conceived? That's scandalous.
It's all normal now.
Believe me when I tell you that no one misremembers the Cheney Administration. We just didn't think it could get any worse.
"Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line."
If you're concerned with draining the swamp, Trump is the last individual you should be endorsing.
The choice was between him and Clinton. She sure as hell would not be a better choice.
> She sure as hell would not be a better choice.
That's not at all clear. His appointments were full of people with horrifying conflicts of interest, to the point that his own party didn't support some of them.
That's not at all clear. His appointments were full of people with horrifying conflicts of interest, to the point that his own party didn't support some of them.
Now we all need to look at the design problem here. We have a choice architecture implying there are only two possibilities. Both of which don't represent the people.
The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can develop empathy for the other 50% of people. They're not so different from you. They don't feel represented properly either. But by virtue of the team 1 vs team 2 dynamic they still identify strongly with their candidate. We as a whole need to stop denigrating the other 50%; The idiots, the people that want to ruin your country. We need to see that they have the same wants and needs, and slightly different preferences, and just want to live a good life. We need to stop dividing. That's the game they want us to play. We shall not play it.
The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can develop empathy for the other 50% of people. They're not so different from you. They don't feel represented properly either. But by virtue of the team 1 vs team 2 dynamic they still identify strongly with their candidate. We as a whole need to stop denigrating the other 50%; The idiots, the people that want to ruin your country. We need to see that they have the same wants and needs, and slightly different preferences, and just want to live a good life. We need to stop dividing. That's the game they want us to play. We shall not play it.
And I guess the medias head exploded when everyone clapped at the RNC when he said "I'm proud to be gay, a republican and an American". Didn't you know republicans hate everything that moves, especially gays, womyn and African Americans?
What does that remind me of ... right: "Hey, I'm not a racist, I have many black friends."
oh yeah, the Gawker thing was pretty awesome actually. Gawker got what he deserved
He's a lightning rod of political opinions where pretty much all others (wisely) stay quiet.
He and Mark Cuban should have their own reality TV show.
He and Mark Cuban should have their own reality TV show.
I think they'll call it the 2024 election cycle coverage.
You forgot:
A website published a story about him being gay and he spent an 8 figure sum to shut down that whole company and ruin everyone involved.
and:
He controls a company which builds mass surveillance technology for the government and selected private companies.
A website published a story about him being gay and he spent an 8 figure sum to shut down that whole company and ruin everyone involved.
and:
He controls a company which builds mass surveillance technology for the government and selected private companies.
For those who wants to find the "Crucial Message" quickly, I think it is hidden in the 4th last paragraph :
"That’s why there is and will be an even greater pushback against the idea that a small group of companies and executives can reap vast rewards, dictate the architecture of the online, cloud, AI, and robotic worlds and maintain an insular, parochial, and narrow worldview marked by groupthink."
Or was it somewhere else?
To be fair, it is not a small group of companies, but rather clusters of companies working decades together to make it all happen, and I was hoping there was at least a tiny bit of appreciation in the article. But I quickly realized that while the author did the name dropping he had to point out Amazon is not technically in the Valley but part of the equation. I was hoping he could find companies like Western Digital is also making most of the hard drives that contribute to whatever agenda he thinks the silicon valley is doing.
"That’s why there is and will be an even greater pushback against the idea that a small group of companies and executives can reap vast rewards, dictate the architecture of the online, cloud, AI, and robotic worlds and maintain an insular, parochial, and narrow worldview marked by groupthink."
Or was it somewhere else?
To be fair, it is not a small group of companies, but rather clusters of companies working decades together to make it all happen, and I was hoping there was at least a tiny bit of appreciation in the article. But I quickly realized that while the author did the name dropping he had to point out Amazon is not technically in the Valley but part of the equation. I was hoping he could find companies like Western Digital is also making most of the hard drives that contribute to whatever agenda he thinks the silicon valley is doing.
This is the 'crucial message' that the author is trying to promote:
> His rationale, according to a piece in the Wall Street Journal, is that the Valley is now a politically intolerant culture, left-leaning in the extreme and to the exclusion of any contrarian viewpoints
And it is bullshit. Who can be found shutting down democracy via gerrymandering? Republicans. Who can be found threatening the media from one of the most powerful pulpits in the land? Trump, who seems to have the unyeilding support of the Republican party. Who runs online harrassment campaigns with the explicity aim of silencing people? Gamergate and the red-pill brigade.
The left has made some mistakes and could do a lot of things better, but they can't hold a candle to the right when it comes to insular, parochial, and narrow worldviews marked by groupthink
> His rationale, according to a piece in the Wall Street Journal, is that the Valley is now a politically intolerant culture, left-leaning in the extreme and to the exclusion of any contrarian viewpoints
And it is bullshit. Who can be found shutting down democracy via gerrymandering? Republicans. Who can be found threatening the media from one of the most powerful pulpits in the land? Trump, who seems to have the unyeilding support of the Republican party. Who runs online harrassment campaigns with the explicity aim of silencing people? Gamergate and the red-pill brigade.
The left has made some mistakes and could do a lot of things better, but they can't hold a candle to the right when it comes to insular, parochial, and narrow worldviews marked by groupthink
No, it's bullshit simply because it's prima facie bullshit.
"The Valley" (something no one here says out loud) has the same liberal bias it's had for decades. It has changed in some ways, much the same way our national politics have changed over time. There are ebbs and flows in what's liberal vs conservative, to what degree, on which issues... etc.
But "the Valley" has not suddenly become some unique bastion of intolerance (beyond the general shift in polarization that's been, again, nationwide) or 'groupthink', the newly beloved piece of mud to sling by right-y cultural agitators. It's just a large target for the current wave of culture clash and change.
Thiel is welcome to go chill wherever he feels happy. But no need to be such a baby about it really.
"The Valley" (something no one here says out loud) has the same liberal bias it's had for decades. It has changed in some ways, much the same way our national politics have changed over time. There are ebbs and flows in what's liberal vs conservative, to what degree, on which issues... etc.
But "the Valley" has not suddenly become some unique bastion of intolerance (beyond the general shift in polarization that's been, again, nationwide) or 'groupthink', the newly beloved piece of mud to sling by right-y cultural agitators. It's just a large target for the current wave of culture clash and change.
Thiel is welcome to go chill wherever he feels happy. But no need to be such a baby about it really.
This is just exactly the kind of attitude that keeps people like myself on the other side. The issue Tiel is obviously talking about is within the context of silicon valley and the online platforms they control.
It's irrelevant that repubs are gerrymandering, that trump talking about suing the media as a private citizen or that you believe that gamergate was a harassment campaign.
Yet you lay them out as if it's some solid evidence to imply right wing views are being discounted justly. That the current situation is just a case of bad opinions being beaten up on fairly.
It's irrelevant that repubs are gerrymandering, that trump talking about suing the media as a private citizen or that you believe that gamergate was a harassment campaign.
Yet you lay them out as if it's some solid evidence to imply right wing views are being discounted justly. That the current situation is just a case of bad opinions being beaten up on fairly.
Your entire ridiculous post is predicated upon an incorrect assumption:
OP says
> left-leaning in the extreme and to the exclusion of any contrarian viewpoints
You respond with an attack on Republicans, but they are not the only group or philosophy which fits the description 'any contrarian viewpoints'.
Even if you didn't make that assumption, you assumed that people with 'contrarian viewpoints' don't vote for your coveted Democratic party as well, and they simply don't believe in the 'left-leaning in the extreme' vision but prefer it for other reasons.
OP says
> left-leaning in the extreme and to the exclusion of any contrarian viewpoints
You respond with an attack on Republicans, but they are not the only group or philosophy which fits the description 'any contrarian viewpoints'.
Even if you didn't make that assumption, you assumed that people with 'contrarian viewpoints' don't vote for your coveted Democratic party as well, and they simply don't believe in the 'left-leaning in the extreme' vision but prefer it for other reasons.
None of your examples are in the valley though.
I do agree online debate is extremely toxic and partisan on both sides, to the detriment of everyone and leading to groupthink. But that is not what's discussed here.
I do agree online debate is extremely toxic and partisan on both sides, to the detriment of everyone and leading to groupthink. But that is not what's discussed here.
Don't forget climate change denial.
bjrobz(2)
As much as I hate to admit, I do agree with Thiel's point (barely mentioned after the first paragraph) that the vast majority of thought is being driven by politically intolerant left-leaning liberals. I am absolutely one of them, but it's amazing that in multiple major tech companies in Seattle, there has been a near-100% shared liberal mentality, that has only exploded post-Trump.
It's very difficult to make products and apps for everyone, when the people making them represents only one viewpoint. And interestingly, unlike companies that localize/culturalize their products by opening local offices, I don't know of any companies opening satellite offices in Alabama/Mississippi or even conservative counties in Washington and California.
I remember when it used to be taboo to talk politics in the office. I find that doesn't even exist anymore, when everyone shares the same left-leaning mindset.
It's very difficult to make products and apps for everyone, when the people making them represents only one viewpoint. And interestingly, unlike companies that localize/culturalize their products by opening local offices, I don't know of any companies opening satellite offices in Alabama/Mississippi or even conservative counties in Washington and California.
I remember when it used to be taboo to talk politics in the office. I find that doesn't even exist anymore, when everyone shares the same left-leaning mindset.
> there has been a near-100% shared liberal mentality, that has only exploded post-Trump
This is mainly because anyone who doesn't share that liberal mentality has learned to keep their mouths shut or risk their career.
This is mainly because anyone who doesn't share that liberal mentality has learned to keep their mouths shut or risk their career.
And this is kind of the problem with politics. Something I've never understood with people is why they have a desire to punish others who disagree or don't share their political beliefs.
Sadly, it is this opposing views between people that causes wars and yet on a local/individual level, it results in things like not promoting someone who doesn't share your views or limiting a salary increase or bonus.
It's really disappointing about ourselves, I guess.
Sadly, it is this opposing views between people that causes wars and yet on a local/individual level, it results in things like not promoting someone who doesn't share your views or limiting a salary increase or bonus.
It's really disappointing about ourselves, I guess.
The same is true on the opposite end of the spectrum. Red state groupthink exists and is not exactly welcoming to outsiders.
specialist(3)
The first portion of the Joe Rogan podcast with Douglus Murray touched this very specific issue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBp4afbDeLk
The core of the issue here is that the left is not uniformly liberal a large part of what is associated with the left is not liberal but ranges from authoritarian to old plain tyrannical just like with the right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBp4afbDeLk
The core of the issue here is that the left is not uniformly liberal a large part of what is associated with the left is not liberal but ranges from authoritarian to old plain tyrannical just like with the right.
"That’s why there is and will be an even greater pushback against the idea that a small group of companies and executives can reap vast rewards, dictate the architecture of the online, cloud, AI, and robotic worlds and maintain an insular, parochial, and narrow worldview marked by groupthink."
Slightly strange from the author of 'Zero to One'..
Slightly strange from the author of 'Zero to One'..
I think that's the author of the article speaking though, rather than Thiel.
One thing I have been wondering about lately is what kind of reputation will people working in the tech industry have 10-20 years from now. Will people working outside the industry think of us as the new banker wankers?
Unfortunately, I would not be surprised giving the social implications of much of the technology that are being introduced through companies such as Amazon, Uber etc.
Unfortunately, I would not be surprised giving the social implications of much of the technology that are being introduced through companies such as Amazon, Uber etc.
So the author says Thiel's message is that there will be more regulation of the tech industry, as if that is unquestionably a bad thing. But we've all seen how the industry, like any large scale human activity, is subject to manipulations that work against the public good, and specifically the good of its own users. At this point it seems like many industry leaders acknowledge the need for regulation, and as is historically the case with other industries, are seeking to work with the government to design regulations that will (ideally) strengthen consumer protections but not create undue burdens. Thiel appears to be staunchly libertarian and so for him regulation per se is a negative development, but there are certainly other ways to view the interaction between public and private sectors. I get the sense that lots of people working in tech can see the case for why a bit more oversight wouldn't hurt.
The author can't have listened much to Thiel. He certainly doesn't speak without a filter, most of what he says he will repeat in interview after interview, for years. Every now and then he adds something new, but that thing is seldom very off-the-cuff. Thiel is unorthodox, not unfiltered.
This thread (50 comments as of now) utterly amazes me.
I mean, I haven't seen americans with different political views talking to each other in a level headed manner for a long time. Heck, on reddit they just use different subreddits, /r/politics and /r/the_donald, otherwise they are on each other throats in no time. Ok, that's reddit, so it should be expected, but HN is not much different recently. And it's not like we are talking about war crimes or human lifes here; it's just an opinion from some wealthy VC dude. Hardly something to be mad about, no matter if you agree with him or not.
PS: I have to make a disclaimer probably. by some coincidence, I'm russian. Weather is damn cold in Moscow, thanks for asking. No, I wasn't paid 50 rubles for this post.
I mean, I haven't seen americans with different political views talking to each other in a level headed manner for a long time. Heck, on reddit they just use different subreddits, /r/politics and /r/the_donald, otherwise they are on each other throats in no time. Ok, that's reddit, so it should be expected, but HN is not much different recently. And it's not like we are talking about war crimes or human lifes here; it's just an opinion from some wealthy VC dude. Hardly something to be mad about, no matter if you agree with him or not.
PS: I have to make a disclaimer probably. by some coincidence, I'm russian. Weather is damn cold in Moscow, thanks for asking. No, I wasn't paid 50 rubles for this post.
Despite years of effort and media both fictional and non-fiction, showing everyone how politics manipulates their emotions and core beliefs, nothing has improved. If anything it's gotten so much worse. Insanity is the only way that a person can really summarize it. It's blind rabid insanity.