Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by vikramkr 1082 days ago
Sure but we're in a string of silicon valley come to Jesus moments and finally having a case where the founder was so deluded they got even themselves killed is going to get airtime. I don't think there's be nearly as much interest in this story if we weren't in also dealing with Theranos and FTX and the aftereffects of Cambridge analytica etc etc
1 comments
nradov 1082 days ago
OceanGate, FTX, and Cambridge Analytica were not headquartered in Silicon Valley. Out of the companies on your list Silicon Valley can only take the blame for Theranos.
link
vikramkr 1082 days ago
The term silicon valley has long since transcended geographic boundaries to signify the tech and vc/startup sectors as a whole. Facebook and Amazon and Uber and Theranos and FTX are all a part of it. It's about the culture and the people that participate in that culture, move fast break things etc. That's what's been going through trainwreck after public trainwreck. And even if you wanted to tie it to a geographic region, which frankly is irrelevant - the vcs are based out of here
link
panick21_ 1082 days ago
Silicon Valley investors rejected Theranos. Most of them actually consider Tharanos a great victory. Tharanos funding come from lots of large private investors, like family fortunes and so on.
link
vikramkr 1082 days ago
That particular overconfidence in bashing Theranos as an outsider company who would never have been able to fool Real Silicon Valley (tm) is definitely a core part of the narrative that's developing, since nobody believes they'd have disowned her if she had succeeded, and those very same VCs got rugpulled with FTX not that long after making all those confident assertions look very silly in hindsight.
link
panick21_ 1081 days ago
> who would never have been able to fool Real Silicon Valley

I mean its a fact. They were rejected by the traditional VCs.

> since nobody believes they'd have disowned her if she had succeeded

I mean why would they? VCs always talk about companies they could have gotten in early and didn't.

If Theranos was actually successful, then there would be no reason to 'disown' her.

> and those very same VCs got rugpulled with FTX not that long after making all those confident assertions look very silly in hindsight.

What confident assertions?

I don't get what they have to do with each other. Getting FTX wrong (if they did) has nothing to do if they got Tharanos right.

link