Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dgxyz 97 days ago
If he was on a park bench covered in his own piss no one would pay any attention to the same words.
3 comments

Unfortunately, he's not on a park bench covered in his own piss and is instead the puppet master behind the VP of the US and a large chunk of the tech sector.
He's not the master merely another puppet controlling puppets. If you want to get closer to the masters read the epstein files.
And realistically, if we did live in a meritocracy, that's where he would be.
Correct. We call that “credibility”. People can earn credibility in this world through their accomplishments. If your life accomplishment is sitting in your own piss you lack credibility.
In this case it's more of Halo effect which is plaguing the tech world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect
I believe it is a separate set of things.

Thiel has an enormous amount of money. This makes him and his ideas have power, regardless of whether his ideas are crap. It further convinces people that his ideas aren't garbage even when these ideas are in different domains than his business.

All arguments should be considered on merit of the argument not on credibility of the person.
I'm not Christian, but I think that any argument which takes the concept of the Antichrist seriously but removes it from the context of Christianity has no merit.

The Antichrist only makes sense within the framework of Christian eschatology. Invoking the archetype but reframing it as a secular political and cultural force that opposes AI and technological progress seems like meaningless sophistry meant to grant some greater profound scope to what is in essence just basic anti-leftist, pro accelerationist rhetoric, but which only works with a facile understanding of what the Antichrist is supposed to represent, which is opposition to Christ.

And in that sense, Peter Thiel and Donald Trump fit the criteria far more than, say, Greta Thunberg.

Well said. The Antichrist becomes, in Francis Schaeffer's term, a "contentless label". It becomes just something that the speaker thinks is bad. But people (even non-Christians) still have some memory of it meaning something, so it's still an effective term for "something bad".

By the way, "Jesus" also has the same issue. That name is used at times to support positions that are explicitly contrary to what Jesus taught.

Exactly which is why the argument has no merit.

And even if it was in context to Christianity it has no veracity as the entire argument stands on faith which is fallible.

We need filters. I’m not agreeing with Thiel but pointing out to parent why he is listened to but a guy sitting in his own piss is not.