
Palmer Luckey Leaves Facebook - petergatsby
https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/30/palmer-luckey-facebook/
======
danso
The TechCrunch write-up almost exclusively focuses on the "Nimble America"
thing. I'm sure that didn't help his standing at Facebook, but he's been doing
other things besides that failed Reddit campaign. Some more context in the Ars
Technica writeup (I hadn't remembered how much he was on the hook for the
Zenimax charges):

[https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/03/oculus-co-founder-
pal...](https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/03/oculus-co-founder-palmer-
luckey-leaves-facebook/)

> _Luckey did appear briefly at a January trial in which id Software owner
> Zenimax Media accused Oculus of misappropriating trade secrets. While Oculus
> was cleared of the worst of those charges, the company was found liable for
> $300 million for various related charges. Luckey himself was personally
> found liable for $50 million in damages._

~~~
leereeves
What was Nimble America anyway, and why the outrage?

The Daily Beast article isn't much help, talking about Pepe the Frog and
"shitposting", with the banner picture, presumably the most egregious example
they could publish, being Hillary's face with the caption "Too Big to Jail".
Partisan, sure, but well within the realm of normal politics these days.

~~~
makomk
Some political campaigning group that intended to take online memes and run
them as actual political billboards. The outrage was because it was pro-Trump.

~~~
justin66
> The outrage was because it was pro-Trump.

Or because someone managed to find a way to make American political dialogue
_even dumber._

------
marricks
I got big into VR partly because of him, enamored by an interview of him my
girl friend pointed me to in 2013. He was young, enthusiastic, idealistic,
relatable to me.

Well, as the years wear on he, and oculus itself, has established more of
itself from the hacker/open source vision. They’ve made enemies along the way,
and many of the reasons people hate him/Oculus I disagree with.

It’s an infant field, they need to fund games to even having reasonable games.
Making games have become increasingly expensive. Sure there’s a place for
indie devs, but those games don’t draw the mainstreamers VR needs to take off
like I, and many others need.

That being said, the things I’ve heard and seen from him make me think he does
emobdy the gamergate “tech bro” (and I do use that as a pejorative) make my
stomach churn. That I can’t really forgive, and don’t want to support.

The privacy aspects of a Facebook (or google for that matter) owning VR, and
getting access to what we __physically look at __for advertising, is such a
gold mine. Totally terrifying. That’s one reason my next system will likely be
something like the Vive, inspite of me finding Oculus far more polished and
fun to have.

EDIT: Interestingly enough I asked him specifically on an AMA if he planned on
staying at Oculus, his answer was an emphatic yes:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/40ea0x/i_am_p...](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/40ea0x/i_am_palmer_luckey_founder_of_oculus_and_designer/cytnax2/?context=3)

~~~
pillowkusis
>He was young (still is) enthusiastic, idealistic, relatable to me.

I would not describe him as idealistic or relatable. He's a self-identified
Trump supporter/donator[0] and definitely has some alt-right leanings.
Regardless of your politics, I think it's fair to say that someone with his
political leanings is not considered "relatable" by a decent portion of
Americans.

[0]: [http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/23/13025422/palmer-luckey-
ocu...](http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/23/13025422/palmer-luckey-oculus-
founder-funding-donald-trump-trolls)

~~~
drawnwren
It's very odd in 2017 that so many people are being socially disqualified
because their political ideology doesn't align with San Francisco's.

~~~
pcwalton
Fortunately, that's not what's happening.

------
exogeny
I'm actually doubtful it has much to do with politics, if at all.

Dude is a world-class weirdo and an extremely bad communicator. So was Zuck,
but he took media training and got..decent at it. Palmer didn't and hasn't,
and there you go.

~~~
Mahn
> extremely bad communicator

I don't know, some mistakes were made, but he was also pretty throughout in
his Reddit AMAs. I think he does deserve some credit for that.

~~~
exogeny
Reddit is not real life. If you could gain the communication, leadership, and
political skills necessary for an executive position at a company like
Facebook by posting on Reddit, then their meeting rooms would smell a whole
lot worse.

------
drawkbox
In general, if you run a product or company it is a bad idea to get political.
You instantly create 50% detractors when you need to always win about 60%
support. Hold off politics activism until you have fuck you money.

In most cases politics is a waste of time, change the world via the market and
products and focus on your own success. Don't degrade your work by getting
into politics, it is merely a divisive system today. Politics suck and they
are past the point of grass roots influencing anything, only money works
[1][2].

Palmer, like many other 20-somethings, got caught up in it. Political activism
peaks around 27-30 ish, Usually by 30 you realize it is all bullshit and a
waste of time other than voting and giving money to causes you believe in or
that you think should win, quietly, on your own without sharing with the world
your beliefs because others have differing beliefs.

[1] [https://act.represent.us/sign/the-
problem](https://act.represent.us/sign/the-problem)

[2] [http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-
echochambers-27074746](http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746)

~~~
elastic_church
Hm ... given Oculus' continued hegemony in the market place, and the high
reward of supporting the United States' winning administration in the global
marketplace, couldn't he just as easily not.... done anything?

Like there are still devs on Oculus, Trump won, every one with clout that
supported him is now in power, and I personally had no idea

uhm yah he's probably got a lucrative VR contract signed up w/ DARPA, I think
this is all show

~~~
MagnumOpus
> Oculus' continued hegemony in the market place

I don't know what you're on about? Despite billions of money thrown at it by
Zucks, the Vive outsells the Oculus 2:1, the PSVR outsells it by 3:1, the Gear
VR outsells it by 18:1. [1]. There are still devs on Oculus (dozens of them!),
but everybody sane develops on SteamVR from what I hear...

Palmer is smart to take his cash and run while he can.

[1] [http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/6-3m-vr-headsets-were-
shipped...](http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/6-3m-vr-headsets-were-shipped-
in-2016/0178470)

~~~
elastic_church
Wow! Alright

------
devy
> Facebook, which acquired the VR company almost exactly three years ago
> today.

Perhaps Palmer is able to 100% cash out all his stocks/RSUs today so he's out
to do something else?

~~~
SteveNuts
He should set up a VR company

~~~
r00fus
Fairly sure FB would have made it worth his while to sign a non-compete.

~~~
kareemsabri
Pretty sure non-competes are illegal in California.

~~~
alrs
For employees. There are absolutely noncompetes in California for people who
sell their businesses.

[http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/business-and-professions-
code/bp...](http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/business-and-professions-code/bpc-
sect-16601.html)

~~~
trevyn
Question: If you're a rank and file employee who has exercised options, and
are therefore a (very small) shareholder, does this apply to you?

~~~
khuey
IANAL, but the plain text of the statute says:

"For the purposes of this section, “owner of a business entity” means ... or
any owner of capital stock, in the case of a business entity that is a
corporation.

For the purposes of this section, “ownership interest” means ... or a capital
stockholder, in the case of a business entity that is a corporation."

So it certainly seems possible. Note that you would have to "sell or otherwise
dispos[e] of all of his or her ownership interest in the business entity" in
order for this code to apply. So it sounds like it may be possible for a
company to include a non-compete in an offer to buy back your shares.

Again IANAL and this is not legal advice.

------
nsxwolf
Is he really that "embattled"? Do people really have the energy to keep the
outrage going this long?

~~~
wccrawford
Enthusiasts are _intense_, and the VR community is still all enthusiasts. At
least partially because of the price, but probably also because of the severe
lack of high-budget games.

So yeah, the Reddit echo-chamber keeps the hate going long after it would
normally die in that kind of community.

~~~
QuinnyPig
Add on the "gamer" subculture as well, and you've got a recipe for holding
grudges for decades...

------
dotnetisnotdead
Lesson of the day: Keep out of politics if you're not on the "correct" side.
If he walks away from VR we've all lost something.

~~~
FireBeyond
Or, "if you're a public figure, or plan a public campaign supporting someone
who is controversial, don't expect there to be zero criticism of your position
because it's somehow sacred".

~~~
odessacubbage
it's sort of strange that a mainstream candidate with enough support to win
the whole election is considered controversial, plenty public figures endorsed
hilary and none received the level of backlash that palmer did. max temkin
even funded a similarly cringey billboard campaign:

[http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-09-23-report-
oculus-r...](http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-09-23-report-oculus-rift-
creator-palmer-luckey-secretly-funded-pro-trump-meme-website)

[http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-10-15-anti-trump-
ad-a...](http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-10-15-anti-trump-ad-alleges-
candidate-mains-hanzo-in-overwatch)

unless we are to enforce a standard of public apoliticism for public figures
across the board, uniquely singling out endorsements on one side regardless of
wealth doesn't seem like a good way to generate effective discourse

~~~
FireBeyond
> plenty public figures endorsed hilary and none received the level of
> backlash

No? You don't recall the decrying of "Hollywood elites" by right wing media
and supporters?

> uniquely singling out endorsements on one side regardless of wealth doesn't
> seem like a good way to generate effective discourse

I am only obligated to commentate on endorsements that I agree or disagree
with. I have no "fair time doctrine", and nor should I have to.

~~~
cookiecaper
>No? You don't recall the decrying of "Hollywood elites" by right wing media
and supporters?

This is generalized, and it's not an active campaign of literal harassment to
make it difficult for specific individuals to work. For whatever reason, the
Right is much less interested in seeing their political enemies suffer than
the Left. Perhaps it's because the Right sees the Left as naive, whereas the
Left sees the Right as human garbage.

The literal inventor of JavaScript, totally irreplaceable and undeniably the
most qualified person for his role, is forced out from Mozilla over a campaign
contribution to another mainstream political cause (which also won). He had
silently made that contribution 7 years prior, and it was only discovered due
to campaign finance disclosure laws. Major sites like OKCupid ran blackouts
against Firefox users to punish them for running a browser associated with
Brendan Eich. Unlike Luckey, he was not trying to get involved publicly, and
only quietly exercises his rights as a citizen.

Now, the guy who "kickstarted" the multi-billion-dollar modern VR revolution
is harassed and chased out of his position for committing a slightly-more-
public form of heresy against the Silicon Valley dogma.

The "criticisms" are not comparable across the aisle.

------
aphextron
Anyone seeing this as having any connection to the VR industry as a whole is
completely ignorant on the subject. Palmer has repeatedly shown himself to be
a toxic liability to the brand, and this was inevitable to anyone who follows
Oculus.

~~~
meddlepal
"He was just in the right place at the right time with a neat hobby project
that got noticed and picked up by Carmack."

 _eye roll_ Really? He's accomplished more than most of the folks on this
site. I really really hate the "They weren't an engineer therefore they're
just background noise" mentality. A startup is a team. Everyone from
executives to the doc writers are important, often in very intangible ways.

~~~
sorenjan
What did Luckey contribute? The first seed of the idea? A proof of concept
[0]? I haven't followed it very closely, but it seems to me that Carmack is
the one that not only had the technical skills at the early stage and did a
lot of evangelizing for the young technology even before he joined Oculus, his
name was also a major factor in bringing in other talent and investment. I
don't think Oculus would have been close to where they are today without
Carmack, I've yet to read about any crucial contributions by Luckey. Right
place at the right time does sound accurate.

And of course companies need more than engineers, Steve jobs wasn't and
engineer and his importance for Apple can hardly be overstated.

[0] [https://youtu.be/kw-DlWwlXHo?t=169](https://youtu.be/kw-DlWwlXHo?t=169)

~~~
srtjstjsj
Why would John Carmack -- who revolutionized graphics processing and led
development of a frikkin rocket ship, mind you -- waste his time with Luckey
if Luckey didn't bring anything to the table?

------
djhworld
Not sure how much he has in terms of liquid cash, but according to wikipedia
his net worth is $730 million

He'll be fine.

------
dayaz36
Nothing in the entire article answered WHY he left. So it was because of the
Trump thing?... Because that's stupid reason. Mark Zuckerberg who is the
actual CEO of facebook is getting bad press on a daily basis and for much
worse reasons than Palmer Luckey. Nobody outside of the tech community even
knows who Palmer Luckey is but because he funded some trump trolls he gets
ousted from the company he started??...something just doesn't sound right.
Seems like a power play is happening behind the scenes and this is just an
excuse

------
mtgx
I give it 12 months before John Carmack leaves, too.

------
spondyl
While not directly talking about Palmer, I'm not surprised that Oculus is
having these sorts of troubles (co-founder leaving/lawsuit).

Being the first-movers in the VR space, or in the current wave of actually
viable VR products, it'd be surprised if they turn out to be the dominant
force in the space

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-
mover_advantage#Resoluti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-
mover_advantage#Resolution_of_technological_or_market_uncertainty)

------
timdeneau
Curious how this will affect Oculus, if much at all.

In the long run, I don’t think Oculus is good for the industry. Their room
scale tracking hardware is inadequate, and their exclusive titles are dividing
a fledgling market. I say this as a Vive owner and enthusiast. This along with
the lawsuit… maybe it’s for the best.

~~~
pmoriarty
I haven't tried the Oculus Rift, but I do own the Note 4 Gear VR, and recently
tried the Vive. I felt the Vive was clearly inferior, with a much closer and
much more obvious and shallow feeling of depth to it, what felt like a worse
field of view, and just more primitive VR games.

I was severely disappointed, considering how great the reviews of Steam VR
games were, how much I looked forward to finally trying them out, and how
primitive and demo-like the Gear VR games and apps were. It felt like the Gear
VR games set a relatively low bar that the Vive should easily exceed, but
sadly the games for the Vive were even worse.

If the Rift is actually better than the Gear VR, as I have expectation it is,
then the Vive must be really awful in comparison.

It is nice that the Vive tracks you as you walk around your room, but that
doesn't make up for the poor game quality and other issues I mentioned.

Overall, though, I think VR as a whole has a very, very long way to go. I was
stunned and blown away when I first tried the Gear VR, but that sense of
amazement wore off after a few weeks, and after that all the fun was in
letting other people try it and vicariously enjoy their amazement. That lasted
a few months, and ever since my Gear VR has been gathering dust, as it's just
too much of a hassle to use, especially for long periods of time, when it gets
too uncomfortable.

The main problem, though, is that all the games and apps are way too
primitive, and all feel like bare-bones demos. If any of them were great, all
the hassle and discomfort would be worth it, but they're really not.. at least
not after the novelty has worn off.

------
tannhauser23
I wish him the best - he jump started this entire industry, which was for a
long time in the realm of scifi. Go and read his IAMAs on Reddit: he's clearly
passionate and knowledgeable about VR. I hope he finds a proper outlet for his
talents, now that he has the resources to do whatever he wants.

------
yuhong
Interestingly
[https://www.reddit.com/user/palmerluckey](https://www.reddit.com/user/palmerluckey)
shows no posts for almost a year.

------
nichochar
In my experience, innovators hate big companies. The culture and people there
are all selfish, self involved, trying to "beat the game" by maximizing their
RSUs, piggy backing on other people's work.

------
cr0sh
I'm not sure how I feel about this - ambivalent, I guess - pretty much how I
felt after the FB acquisition.

I was a KS supporter - but I had followed Luckey for a while before on the
MTBS3D forums, when he was just playing around, modding classic HMDs - mixing
up the parts. He was one of only a handful of people that I could see who
still played around with VR in that mid-to-late 1990s way. At the time, I
thought that if there were anybody who could bring back VR, it was him.

I've played with DIY "homebrew" VR off and on since the mid-90s. I have a
collection of old HMDs and other gear from the era. I've modded a powerglove,
and at one time hooked it up to my Amiga and messed around with AMOS3D for fun
with it. Later, Rend386...in short, I was disappointed to see VR die - so when
the Kickstarter was announced, I was - to put it mildly - stoked.

That KS was the first one I backed (and not the last!) - I had high hopes,
especially because Luckey had made a huge deal out of there being Linux
support. With the FB deal, that was dropped, and that's when for me at least,
the gilding rubbed off revealing a more base interior to the whole thing.
Still, I had hoped that it would all lead somewhere.

In a way, I guess it did. More people than ever before got to play around with
VR and such, and experience it all in ways that in the mid-90s I could only
dream about (the tech just didn't exist at a price any normal person could
afford). It was, though, a disappointment to hear that people were still
having the same usage problems with this new tech that were the bane of VR
back then.

Now it seems that once again, interest is waning. The hardware is still way
too expensive for most people to come on board. People are still skeptical
about what it is, whether it really works, or worried about side effects and
other problems. Others simply don't understand the concept of immersion - or
if they do, they can't seem to grasp why that would be such a great thing (I
find it odd that some can't understand the idea of being -inside- a virtual
world - a world of make believe, a world of dreams? One would think that would
be something everyone would be gung-ho about, but I guess not).

Then to find out Palmer's true side, which - at least to me - wasn't apparent
before; conservative, a seeming "I've got mine" attitude (and I don't begrudge
his newfound wealth - in fact, I kinda proud for him on that mark), and bro-
dude, let's support our favorite cheeto-in-chief...

And then the whole Zenimax thing.

For me, his reputation has been horribly tarnished. I'm glad he gave the whole
VR thing another boost, but at the same time, it looks likely that this is the
last great "hoorah" for the technology, and it will likely never get another
chance again - at least not in the "gloves and goggles" classic form we've
come to associate the term "VR" with.

Perhaps that's for the best.

~~~
natoliniak
I also remember the short lived VR craze of the mid 1990s. As a kid back then,
I remember trying some kind of 3d tennis game in an arcade, which was like $3
to play. What turned me off from it was a weird realization that I much prefer
playing sports in real life with the bonus of not feeling nauseated and seeing
cross-eyed after wards. Thus, I would love to see this modern incarnation of
VR applied to something more than just games...

------
LeicaLatte
Politics takes up a lot of time and I don't think creatives should get
involved. Atleast not voluntarily.

------
staunch
I completely support and forgive Palmer Luckey. I hope for the world's sake
that he goes on to do more great things.

There are truly bad people in the world. People who deserve to be hated.
Palmer Luckey is very far from being one of them. If you're still piling on
Palmer Luckey, you're a real piece of shit human being.

------
aanm1988
ooof. that sucks.

Kinda makes sense. Between the odd political stuff, the lawsuit where he was
partially blamed, and the general poor PR at times.

------
mmanfrin
I don't find it takes much energy to consider him a horrible person.

e: Downvoting because you disagree is not a proper use for your downvote
button.

~~~
schneems
Unrelated to this thread, I was just thinking to myself a few minutes ago
"2015 me would be very surprised at how mad i've been able to bee for this
long". So I would be more surprised if people weren't still outraged.

~~~
mmanfrin
I think there's a difference between being mad, and having formed an opinion
about a person. I'm not actively raging about Lickey, but I have formed an
impression of him that is unfavorable.

------
Mao_Zedang
Peter Thiel next?

------
mozumder
Probably indicates that VR really is deader than dead. The only people this
appeals to are the tech-bros.

I really don't understand the Silicon Valley tech-bros that think VR has any
hope. How do they not see the obvious user-experience problems, like motion
sickness and limited visibility & resolution, as well as its product liability
issues, like always falling down along with running into walls and breaking
things? If you think VR is a solution, then we know you're a bad product
designer.

The first generation of VR died out because of product-liability issues. Did
those fundamental issues get solved? No.

~~~
criley2
I don't understand people who use the demeaning and sexist term "tech bros"
unironically.

Did you know that there are women who like VR? Who code for VR? Who work to
create it? Who are on the boards making decisions about its future?

Does your "techbro" bigotry leave room for the women of tech?

It makes me think you're a Gawker commenter who accidentally found their way
to a community where you don't belong. I just don't get how this kind of
condescending sexism finds its way here.

~~~
geofft
I think there are two distinct things you can disagree with in the parent
comment. The first is whether the use of the phrase "tech bros" is defensible;
the second is whether all the people who are supporting VR are those who can
be called (rightly or wrongly) "tech bros". I think you're conflating those.

I've always interpreted the term as being gendered, but not gender-
essentialist; there are plenty of women who are "tech bros", because it's
referring to a culture and set of ideals derived from gendered spaces like
fraternities, but not those spaces themselves; plenty of "tech bros" were not
members of a college fraternity, for instance. It is true that the _vast
majority_ of tech bros are men, for many reasons relating to society and
gender. It's certainly possible that the term could get inaccurate, in which
case I at least would favor a different one, but it works for now.

Under that definition, "there exist women who do behavior X which you
attribute to tech bros" does not imply "attributing behavior X to tech bros is
incorrect".

That leaves the question about whether "tech bros", such as they are, are the
only people rooting for VR. I think that's fairly unlikely to be true, and
yes, your points seem do rebut that claim. (That said, it's probably worth
mentioning somewhere here that while women _exist_ in VR, the industry seems
to be biased towards an assumption of men, from various apps placing virtual
objects at heights that are difficult for most biological women to reach, to
the entire concept being based on a model of 3D visual processing that is more
common in biological men: [https://qz.com/192874/is-the-oculus-rift-designed-
to-be-sexi...](https://qz.com/192874/is-the-oculus-rift-designed-to-be-
sexist/) _Pointing out_ the obvious truth that VR seems to be male-dominated
is not excluding women, and your question about bigotry seems to be attacking
the messenger.)

But even if it's misplaced to associate the entire VR industry with "tech
bros", I don't think that invalidates the concept of "tech bros" itself.

Finally, I think it's inappropriate to imply that a good-faith participant
doesn't belong here.

~~~
srtjstjsj
You're bending over backwards to try to rationalize a sexist term, and digging
yourself deeper by then stereotyping fraternities.

