
Peter Thiel To Join Trump Transition Team - codybrown
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/peter-thiel-join-trump-transition-team-dan-primack
======
meritt
This was obvious from the RNC speech and further reinforced when Thiel donated
$1M to Trump. A contrarian bet, sure, but $1M is a pretty small price to pay
to have a 50/50 shot at CTO of the USA. I'm sure he'll see a very significant
ROI on his $1M once the government starts awarding contracts very conveniently
to companies of which he owns a portion.

I had very negative feelings about Thiel, and those were magnified 10x after
his endorsement of Trump, but I'll at least concede he's a very shrewd
individual.

~~~
RealGeek
> I'm sure he'll see a very significant ROI on his $1M once the government
> starts awarding contracts very conveniently to companies of which he owns a
> portion.

Wasn't Trump rallying against such crony corruption aka 'pay for play'?

~~~
Rapzid
If we believe all the recently headlines about who he's bringing in it appears
pure "pay to play". Lots of individuals who Trump "owes" through either money
or support they provided to him; pure cronyism.

I'm not sure Trump realizes what worked best in business, or what he felt
worked best for him in what business he has done, is not necessarily best for
operating policy. I'm not sure he cares. I suspect he might though. Dude
looked humble-struck in the video today with Obama; almost worried about what
he got himself into.

~~~
edblarney
"Lots of individuals who Trump "owes" through either money or support they
provided to him; pure cronyism."

Trump is the most 'free' President in modern history.

He 'owes' the least, to the fewest people.

This is one thing even the center-left press were talking about.

As for Thiel - $1M might seem like a lot - but Trump doesn't really 'owe'
Thiel anything, because Thiel doesn't have direct future influence etc., and
Trump doesn't need him in the future.

For example: Bill Maher gave $1M to Obama. For that you get some friendly
things, but Obama didn't need Maher after that.

Hillary is not directly uber wealthy - and she accepted $57M from private
individuals and businesses while she was Sec of State - for which she provided
mostly small favours (introductions).

Trump had the smallest team in Presidential history, the banks were mostly
betting on Hillary etc..

I don't really like Trump, but he's largely unburdened by having to hand out
appointments.

He'll give them to those that 'stuck by him' i.e. Guliani etc. and scorn on
the old Bush guard.

~~~
tptacek
Why exactly am I meant to be comforted by the fact that the craven
opportunists --- the lowest of the low of the Republican party, discredited
outsiders like Newt Gingrich and John Bolton --- are getting the most
important positions in the United States government for kowtowing to Trump?

There are important thinkers in the Republican Party. People with ideas and a
moral core, people who have given years of service to the country (and, for
that matter, the party). They're nowhere in the discussion --- most of them
opposed Trump, who campaigned in large part in repudiation of conservative
foreign policy and conservative fiscal policy. There's Robert Gates. And then
there's Newt Gingrich, who has demonstrated nothing but an ability to
personally profit off the chaos he's sown in the party for decades. Gingrich
is a Trump winner; Gates, a loser.

You just described the literal definition of cronyism as if it was a good
thing.

~~~
dlss
> Why exactly am I meant to be comforted by the fact that the craven
> opportunists --- the lowest of the low of the Republican party [...] are
> getting the most important positions in the United States government for
> kowtowing to Trump?

Twenty-three days ago you and Marco sought to get Peter Thiel removed from YC
for his support of Trump[1]. This is to say you were explicitly working to
ensure that respectable people would distance themselves from Trump for fear
of being ostracized.

Although Peter is still with YC, the broader campaign of social pressure you
participated in worked. The respectable Republicans distanced themselves from
Trump. As might be expected, Trump is now giving governmental positions to
those who didn't distance themselves from him during the election. I don't
find that surprising, nor do I find it surprising that those who stuck with
Trump were the discredited outsiders (they were already ostracized).

Quite frankly the surprising part of this story is finding you, just twenty-
three days after your witch hunt, lamenting that no one respectable is in
Trump's inner circle. Isn't this the sort of outcome you were explicitly
fighting for less than a month ago?

[1] See all 82 of your comments on
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12733024](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12733024)

~~~
blahi
>Twenty-three days ago you and Marco sought to get Peter Thiel removed from YC
for his support of Trump

WOW. This is insane! Things like this and Mozilla's CEO situation are exactly
why Trump won the destitute and the rich alike.

Liberals shoving down their half-baked morals into everybody's throats. How
condescending. So much for Egalitarianism. We are equal, just not with Trump
voters. What a hypocrisy.

~~~
mfukar
> Liberals shoving down their half-baked morals into everybody's throats. How
> condescending. So much for Egalitarianism. We are equal, just not with Trump
> voters. What a hypocrisy.

Mind you, never in the history of history have people fought against
discrimination, corruption, and oppression by saying "but they might have a
point too".

~~~
brlewis
Quick fact check on that:

Uncle Tom's Cabin, the most effective anti-slavery propaganda of the 19th
century, opened up with a scene of slaves living in favorable conditions and
getting along well with their masters.

 _A Modest Enquiry Into the Nature of Witchcraft_ by John Hale is a book
credited with ending the Salem Witch trials. In it he acknowledges testimony
in the trials that could certainly lead one to believe witchcraft actually
happened.

Stowe and Hale acknowledged truth in the opposing side in situations much more
oppressive and discriminatory than Trump's border wall or immigration
restrictions. People who want to effect change today should take note.

~~~
mfukar
Yes, fact check.

There are no "favorable conditions" to slavery. Slavery sought to find moral
ground on the hypothesis that the master knew what was best for their slaves.
Stowe repeatedly makes the point that even kind masters were prevented from
freeing their slaves.

Hale supported the work of the courts until his second wife was accused of
practicing witchcraft. Hah.

This is, in fact, why it's so difficult to fight these things. Interpretation
has trumped over documentation, context "fades", lies are so much easier to
propagate, refuting bullshit could be an actual 24/7 job. How could anybody
keep up. Maybe we're doomed to having morons destroy a few tens of millions of
people every 100 years.

~~~
Chris2048
But you are checking different facts.

The original fact being checked was:

> never in the history of history have people fought against discrimination,
> corruption, and oppression by saying "but they might have a point too"

~~~
mfukar
No, I replied right on point. Let me spell it out:

1\. No "favorable conditions" to slavery means Stowe never recognised
advantages to slavery. Not only he does not, but he laments it despite those
"favorable conditions".

2\. Hale didn't excuse the courts; he actively supported their work. That is,
until he decided he didn't want to. Later commentators on the trials mark this
as the defining moment that helped turn public opinion against the
prosecutions.

To sum up my point, read your history.

~~~
Chris2048
First of all:

> Let me spell it out

> read your history

Seems pretty aggressive to me. If _you_ are refuting these points, why not
include all relevant information?

But in any case, the second point (that Hales work didn't end the witch
trials) you only just make here, and the first you clarify.

~~~
mfukar
Nice try, but it's really the same things in both comments.

~~~
Chris2048
In your head?

~~~
mfukar
If you don't have the necessary context, I can't help.

~~~
Chris2048
You can't help? By providing that context?

~~~
mfukar
Precisely. There are literal stacks of books on these matter, and I can't
condense a single one of them in a HN post more than providing the facts. If
you're interested, you're going to have to read them. It's dreadful, I know.

------
BurningFrog
Relevant column:

 _" I don't see a moral obligation for anyone to serve in a Trump
administration. But people who opposed Donald Trump, on both the left and
right, should commit right now to one thing: We will not tar good people for
joining the Trump administration. Their motives will not be questioned, and if
things do turn out as some of his critics fear, the people in his foreign and
domestic policy apparatus will not suffer guilt by association. It is just too
important that Trump have good advisers.

Trump will be the least policy-savvy president in history. He has built no
ideological framework for future policies, much less a set of detailed
proposals. He has few advisers, in part because so many of the usual
contenders have come out against him."_

[https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-11-09/there-
s-n...](https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-11-09/there-s-no-shame-
in-joining-the-trump-administration)

~~~
thecopy
>He has built no ideological framework for future policies

Sounds like a positive thing

~~~
burkaman
Why?

~~~
defen
Ideological leaders (on the left and the right) were responsible for hundreds
of millions of deaths in the 20th century, for a start.

More generally, no ideology can actually capture reality. While they all
contain some truth, they are all also fundamentally untrue if you drill down
far enough. I'd rather grade someone on results (human happiness) than
adherence to an ideological framework. I don't mean this in a simple
utilitarian sense, either.

------
masondixon
A huge issue today is the lack of calm, reasoned debate.

As a Trump supporter I have never been able to properly explain the rationale
to a liberal. I believe there is a worthy debate beneath all the political
smear, but it is never reached. I believe the reason for this is the liberal
media and the incredibly effective Democratic party election machine.

The argument stays at the high level of "how could you vote for someone who
said that", "he is a monster", etc. It is "I don't want to listen".

All you have to do to realise what is wrong with this is to ask yourself:
"What happens if the situation is reversed and someone said they don't want to
listen to me?". What if someone else started to restrict what I could say?

Thankfully, freedom of speech is such an integral part of the US, that there
is not one side trying to control what the other can say, and the other doing
the same back.

This is what makes the country work. The fact that both sides are not in the
business of restricting free speech. This doesn't hold true in many other
countries.

~~~
rootlocus
> Thankfully, freedom of speech is such an integral part of the US, that there
> is not one side trying to control what the other can say, and the other
> doing the same back.

Sure, you and Donald Trump can say whatever you please. Nobody's restricting
your freedom of speech. However, what you say betrays who you are. And what
Trump said showed he's a liar, misogynist, tech illiterate, arrogant and
overall a disgusting human being.

> "What happens if the situation is reversed and someone said they don't want
> to listen to me?"

People listen up until the point you prove to them you're not worth listening
to.

~~~
gedrap
Sorry but your comment simply indicates the problem.

It's quite similar to the post-Brexit discussions, how pro-Bexit people are
stupid, etc.

We can talk about what a "liar, misogynist, tech illiterate, arrogant and
overall a disgusting human being" he is all we want. It would probably be
fine, as in it wouldn't really matter, if he was some random radical weirdo
with an audience of a dozen equally weird folks. But he's the President-elect.

So we can continue with this circle jerk rant about what a disgusting human
being is and what his voters are like. Or we can try to actually understand
why so many people voted for him. But in order to do that, we need to stop the
whole rant that never changes.

I am not pro-Trump. In fact, my safety largely depends on NATO and Trump poses
a threat. But there's no point in shouting about what a misogynist he is. It's
so counterproductive.

~~~
rootlocus
> It's quite similar to the post-Brexit discussions, how pro-Bexit people are
> stupid, etc.

Except I didn't call voters stupid, I simply summarized what Trump said.

> We can talk about [...] It would probably be fine [...] But he's the
> President-elect.

Of course we can talk about it. We have freedom of speech (wasn't this the
original point?). You mean to tell me he can say whatever he wants but I can't
call him out because he's the president-elect?

I get it that everyone whats to prevent things from going worse but we
shouldn't close our eyes or accept whatever Trump happens to say or do out of
fear. He shouldn't be allowed to do whatever he wants because "we must be
united". He should be called out and, if necessary held accountable.

~~~
gedrap
Trump those things was definitely not acceptable. But we can't undo the
election or ignore the results of it simply because we don't find it
acceptable. A very large share of American population were happy enough to
vote for him. This, Brexit, raise to popularity of some specific parties in
Europe should be a huge wake up call. And if we keep the attitude of 'racists
voted him! He's a liar!' then it's just the beginning.

~~~
return0
We should be very worried about the prospect of nationalist parties in europe.
Unlike the US, nationalism in europe is deadly, very deadly. We should have a
frank discussion about immigration and define our red lines in order to weaken
this wave.

~~~
masondixon
The thing is, these dangerous elements don't have any voice if there is not an
issue in the first place.

If the borders were controlled and immigration was regulated, then you have no
Nazis gaining support.

This is the side effect of these open borders policies in Germany.

The liberal strategy is fundamentally flawed. Fighting racism through driving
it underground is not the right approach.

Its so sad.

~~~
return0
Agree, but i hope some sense will be reinstated in europe. Merkel is the main
culprit here and she is the one who will probably have to fix it.

------
darawk
This is good news, I think? Thiel has some extremish views, but I generally
regard him as intelligent and thoughtful. And he's in close contact with other
smart, influential people (e.g. Musk, Sam Altman, etc.), which gives them some
indirect influence.

Not that this makes things substantially better. But maybe a little bit?
Hopefully?

~~~
rajathagasthya
> I generally regard him as intelligent and thoughtful

Based on a YouTube video mentioned in another comment thread
([https://youtu.be/CoxxGhLFbw4?t=2m30s](https://youtu.be/CoxxGhLFbw4?t=2m30s)),
I wouldn't regard him as intelligent by any means.

~~~
fastball
Yeah, he went to Stanford for undergrad and law school - he's obviously a
dunce.

~~~
rajathagasthya
What's with mentioning that he went to Stanford law school? This is the second
such comment (the other commenter deleted it for some reason). Is someone
incapable of having illogical thoughts because they went to "Stanford law
school"?

He says this in the video:

> Whenever you hear someone use the word science it's like a tell that they're
> bluffing

Try to make sense of it.

~~~
fastball
You said "I wouldn't regard him as intelligent _by any means_ " (emphasis
mine). If you don't want people to question your statements, try not to make
them so sweeping.

Someone that graduated from Stanford twice is definitely intelligent by some
means.

~~~
rajathagasthya
How about not putting words in my mouth? I never said I don't want people to
question my statements. Do so all you want.

> Someone that graduated from Stanford twice is definitely intelligent by some
> means.

I just don't pay attention to his Stanford degrees as much as I do to his
words. And they certainly don't impress me. Now, you may have a different
opinion and you're free to do so. But I don't agree with it.

------
raldi
Now go back and read all the HN comments from 26 days ago about how Thiel was
flushing money down the toilet:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12716514](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12716514)

~~~
tptacek
I don't think many of Thiel's detractors denied that he was buying himself
this seat at the table. In fact, many of us were animated by exactly that
concern.

~~~
raldi
"He might as well burn that money. Talk about bad investing."

"What is the point? He must know that Trump won't win."

"I think he is living in a capitalistic illusion"

"He's putting his Gawker money to good use."

"Maybe he just needed another write off?"

~~~
gohrt
Nice selective quoting.

~~~
raldi
What quotes did I omit, besides my own, that argued Thiel wasn't necessarily
throwing his money away?

------
pjdemers
Disagreeing with each other's views on the economy, international relations,
even the environment is good for the country. We need different points of view
on important issues.

But using race baiting to gain political power crosses a line that should
never be crossed. He should not be helping to legitimize this.

~~~
Moshe_Silnorin
I very much dislike Trump and would never vote for the man. Both sides use
race baiting. Spurious use of the word "racist" against those who dislike
government intervention and entitlements has basicly denuded the term of its
once-quite-considerable power. They called Bush racist, wasn't true. They
called Romney racist, a laughable claim. They called Trump racist and maybe
this time there're right, but what does "racist" even mean again?

~~~
hamtaroPhD06
When someone is racist and sexist, it is everyone's duty to call what they
are: racist and sexist.

~~~
jacquesc
Agreed. But if you call anyone who disagrees with you on economic policy a
racist and sexist, it opens the door for an actual racist and sexist to get
in.

~~~
hamtaroPhD06
Which is not the case right now. So yes the president elect of the US is
racist and sexist and a % of his supporters are openly racist and/or sexist
people.

This is not a disputed fact in anyway

~~~
Prefinem
But when you claim that "all" his supporters are racists and sexists, you lose
validity and just enrage people who are not which has adverse reactions

------
betolink
People here giving Thiel a free pass on his views and support for bigotry is
just disgusting.

~~~
supernintendo
Ironically, bigotry is defined as "intolerance toward those who hold different
opinions from oneself". I'm not defending Trump but it's fairly obvious to any
non-partisan that the left wing is just as guilty of this.

~~~
pryce
Call me when your American Left Wing creates a system where Christians,
Republicans and Libertarians are forbidden to dine in restaurants because of
their identity, or are prevented from using restrooms, or are afraid to call
the police should they be victims of crime, because they expect that the
police will either make things worse or at best not take their experience
seriously.

"just as guilty" is a false equivalence. The Left has much to answer for
certainly; but the claim that there is somehow comparable bigotry in both
sides of the political spectrum is not remotely credible.

~~~
adventured
For decades the strongest core of such policies you're describing was the
southern Democrat.

~~~
dragonwriter
Yes, but that was before the realignment when the racist white southern
conservative faction of the Democratic Party, that had been it's core prior to
the New Deal Coalition, abandoned the party over Johnson's support of civil
rights and became the base of the Republican Party.

Has nothing to do with the Left Wing.

------
DLA
This thread is sad. We are ALL Americans. President-elect Trump is OUR
president. You know how we can make this next four years a success for all of
us, realize the Constitution sets out a process for how we elect our leaders.
Go read it. No really, now many of the people burning flags, talking about
"end of days" BS, and other nonsense have ever read the Constitution? Let
alone swore an oath to defend it? Yeah. As I suspected.

Stop the hate online. Stop the hate in the streets. Stop talking about states
leaving the union (not going to happen). Stop judging people for their choice
--voting freedom is sacred. Many have died defending it. Regardless of how you
voted get behind the President of the United States of America. America is
still the greatest nation the world has ever known. If we all work together
and stop this hate, America will be become even better.

~~~
beerbajay
> Stop the hate in the streets.

Go tell that to the people scrawling white power slogans, painting swastikas,
putting up signs for "colored" drinking fountains, wearing blackface, calling
people "niggers", etc.

> voting freedom is sacred

No, your right to vote is enshrined in the constitution, but you have no right
not to be judged a horrible human being for your choice.

~~~
Chris2048
> people scrawling white power slogans, painting swastikas, putting up signs
> for "colored" drinking fountains,

These things are considered acceptable by the majority of republicans/trump
supporters/whites?

------
ilovecomputers
Don't expect him to protect net neutrality just because he is an exec from
Silicon Valley:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2g4g95/peter_thiel_te...](https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2g4g95/peter_thiel_technology_entrepreneur_and_investor/ckfjl5p/)

------
cmsmith
Given the choice between Thiel (favors reconstitution of our political
establishment and believes in science and technology) and the rest of the
Trump hangers-on (are ambivalent towards reconstitution of the establishment
and are anti-science), this is a decent outcome.

~~~
randycupertino
"believes in science and technology"

Not really, since he denies global warming:
[https://youtu.be/CoxxGhLFbw4?t=2m25s](https://youtu.be/CoxxGhLFbw4?t=2m25s)

~~~
mikekij
Not believing in a particular scientific viewpoint does not mean one does not
believe in science. Most of the great scientific discoveries were at one point
contrary to the collective scientific wisdom, e.g. heliocentricity, evolution,
quantum mechanics, relativity.

*Note: I'm not equating a lack of belief in AGW with relativity.

~~~
couchand
...and when presented with the weight of evidence, we accept reality and start
to account for it. For instance, when we noticed that our refrigerants were
busting a hole in our house, with strong political will we stopped making
them, and today the ozone layer is recovering.

Imagine if Reagan had torpedoed the Montreal Protocol. That's what we're
talking about here.

------
mrslave
I come to HN because of the high level of intelligent conversation.

This article, and ever more sadly so the comments herein, are a huge
disappointment.

Trump is the non-establishment candidate the left asks for from Republicans
every presidential election. Hillary is, at the very least, the establishment
candidate the left profess to despise.

The propaganda is strong in this one.

Grow up everybody.

~~~
zymhan
I don't think the left ever widely professed a desire for a non-establishment
candidate from the right.

They were much more worried about how the Republican party has veered right
over the years. This has led them to adopt extremist views such as branding
entire ethnic groups as dangerous, and rolling out laws that inhibit the
ability of minorities to vote.

These are just some of the worries that the left in America has with the
Republican party.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/02/this-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/02/this-
astonishing-chart-shows-how-republicans-are-an-endangered-species/)

[http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2012/04/10/150349...](http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2012/04/10/150349438/gops-
rightward-shift-higher-polarization-fills-political-scientist-with-dread)

------
danm07
I don't know why but I've got a sinking feeling in my stomach.

~~~
Fluid_Mechanics
Most of us do - the next four years should be a tour de force of everything
that's wrong with our society.

------
eis
Interesting that the moderators found it important to remove the "YC partner"
part from the submission. It also seems the submission is getting less
exposure than other submissions even though it's newer and has more upvotes.

For example this submission has 349 points and was submitted 6 hours ago and
has rank 17 while "Halite: An AI Programming Challenge" has 158 points and was
submitted 12 hours ago and is rank 16. The Leonard Cohen post has just a bit
more upvotes and was submitted also 6 hours ago and is rank 2. "Island
generator was also submitted at the same time and with just barely over 100
upvotes is rank 7.

Can some mod please give some insight into this? I'm gonna give HN the benefit
of the doubt, probably some invisible factors playing into it but the ranking
plus the editing could look a bit like the story is getting burried.

~~~
quarterto
Post with more comments than upvotes are penalised as a proxy for
controversiality (remember HN doesn't have downvotes for posts)

------
ForrestN
Is there a kind of "political correctness" that refuses the acknowledgment of
facts and likelihoods that sound similar to irrational dismissal? Does that
kind prevent people from hearing the following things which I think most
people would agree to be true?

-Donald Trump says he wants to completely deregulate the banking industry, which will most likely, in the long term, lead to a crisis on par with or greater than the last banking crisis in 2008. That will probably harm most YC companies in just about every sector, and will negatively influence the value of YC's holdings.

-Donald Trump and Paul Ryan plan to strip approximately 20 million people of health insurance, and millions more of food stamps, decimating our already weak safety net for the poor. He will do more harm to the poor and disadvantaged in his first six months than YC's non-profit efforts have ever achieved and maybe will ever achieve, probably by orders of magnitude.

-Donald Trump is part of a movement to dismantle pluralism in the United States, including the marginalization of immigrants and their descendants. He has stated, and his followers are now performing, an antipathy toward people from other countries, and views their economic success as directly opposed to the success of white Americans. YC is a network that includes many diverse people of all backgrounds, including many immigrants. These people will be persecuted by Trumps followers and oppressed by his government.

-Donald Trump has appointed a "climate skeptic," which means, "dangersous liar," to head the Environmental Protection Agency Transition. He has already sent out many other signals that he intends to cease any US efforts to combat Global Warming, which will have the effect of destabilizing the various international agreements that might have ameliorated its effects. It currently seems likely that Trump will single-handedly prevent the world from achieving a viable response to this threat for another four years. This gravely threatens the entire world, and will cause rippling suffering around the world. Every person who interacts with Y Combinator and their descendants will be unambiguously worse off because of this.

YC should not reject Thiel because "he holds opposing political beliefs." YC
should reject Thiel, cut off all relationship with him, publicly condemn him,
because he has joined an organization, the Donald Trump Administration, which
has stated its intentions to do massive harm to YC and the people of the
world. If YC continues its relationship with Thiel, if it fails to acknowledge
its association with him as a black mark on its standing among people of
conscience, and if it does not muster all of its leverage, economic and
otherwise, in the fight to curtail the power of Thiel's organization (The
Trump Administration), than they are part of a problem that should terrify
anyone who prefers economic growth, the reduction of human suffering,
political freedom and the viability of earth as a home for humanity.

Now is a test for many people and institutions in American life. YC doesn't
have many days left before it has failed.

~~~
edblarney
"Donald Trump and Paul Ryan plan to strip approximately 20 million people of
health insurance, "

No - they said they are going to repeal and replace Obamacare with something
else. That does not mean they are going to strip people of their health
insurance.

"Donald Trump is part of a movement to dismantle pluralism in the United
States, including the marginalization of immigrants and their descendants"

This is a lie. Trump has consistently supported all legal immigrants, and
voiced concern against those entering the country illegally. Again - your
position misrepresents reality and paints anyone who is against illegal
immigration to be against all immigrants, and a 'racist' etc..

As a non-Trump supporter, you should easily be able to win someone like me
over - but you can't when you mix in so much hyperbole.

It's comments like this that basically made me stop supporting progressive
causes about 10 years ago, even though in general, I do support a lot of it
... I never give them the benefit of the doubt anymore.

~~~
sgdesign
So if Trump's problem is only with _illegal_ immigrants, I'm sure he and his
supporters would be more than happy to relax immigration policy and regularize
the illegal immigrants that are already in the U.S., thus solving the issue?

~~~
hueving
If someone steals money from you, you don't gift it to them to stop them from
being a thief. The illegal immigrants that are here should have to go through
the same process as the rest of us immigrants. Otherwise it's just moral
hazard disincentivizing immigrants from following the legal process.

~~~
carapace
I was talking with a Chinese coworker who had the same objection: He had gone
through the arduous proper channels to immigrate, and wondered why the folks
who came here illegally should be granted special favor. It seems unfair to
him.

I pointed out that many of the people here now as "illegal immigrants" are an
indispensable part of our society and economy. They are _de facto_ citizens,
denied the full benefits of citizenship. We _can 't_ throw them out because
our economy would tank. The options are to leave them in a twilight class or
legitimize them.

I definitely think that people coming here should do so legally. I'm not sure
what to do about "the Mexican Problem" (to describe it in 18th century terms.)

------
novalis78
This would be fantastic...the closest of getting Elon Musk into the driver's
seat. Mike Pence being a huge space advocate and Thiel wanting nothing more
than technological progress to pick up speed, this is a very positive
development.

------
slowandlow
I feel like there's a conflict of interest here...

~~~
joshmn
There's a conflict of interest in each of his secretary picks, too. It's
disgusting.

I don't write often, or even blog, but I felt the need to vent on some of the
issues of the picks here: [https://medium.com/@joshbrody_36224/dear-president-
elect-tru...](https://medium.com/@joshbrody_36224/dear-president-elect-
trump-5f4ef5b69e7b#.jbjmhzkwg)

~~~
deelowe
Did you scrutinize Obama's picks just as heavily?

[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-14/most-important-
wiki...](http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-14/most-important-wikileak-how-
wall-street-built-obama-cabinet)

~~~
heartbreak
Why should that matter?

I'm not the OP, but I was 16 when Obama formed his administration, and I was
uninvolved in politics at the time. Does that disqualify me from tracking and
critiquing the Trump Administration?

~~~
deelowe
Just pointing out how both parties are two sides of the same coin, but we're
too busy calling each other bigots and fascists to realize this.

------
frisco
Whatever Trump might do policy-wise with regards to freedom of speech and our
democracy, realize that Thiel literally sued a popular media company out of
existence over things they wrote about him. I don't think this gets better
soon.

------
all_blue_chucks
As Bezos said, contrarians are rarely right.

But rare does not mean always.

~~~
RA_Fisher
Humans tend to underestimate rare events. [http://shiny.statwonk.com/birthday-
problem/](http://shiny.statwonk.com/birthday-problem/)

------
codecamper
Just googled Peter's feelings on clean energy.

Well I'm hopeful. He has made investments into clean tech. He is both smart &
a business guy. So Trump will listen to him & that's good.

He is also a connection back to Tesla & energy storage.

Hmm. Maybe this Trump thing isn't so bad after all (for the planet).

Trump may want more oil -- but the reality of that is that oil is controlled
by the market.

------
kriro
Maybe there can be some seasteading experiment after all? I'd be really
curious to see how it would play out. Seems like a crazy idea worth trying
despite all the counterarguments I can think of simply to collect
data/experience as it might be valuable for future "crazy" endeavors like
populating a different planet.

------
woofyman
I don't understand how a gay man can support a political party who's platform
wants to reverse marriage equality.

~~~
skewart
Just because he's gay doesn't mean he supports marriage equality. Given
Thiel's political views I would guess that he thinks that the government
shouldn't care about _anyone's_ marriage, gay or straight. So rather than
fight for marriage equality for gay couples he'd fight for marriage
deregulation for everyone, including straight couples (e.g. no special tax
treatment, no special legal protections for spouses).

~~~
whyenot
He has been publicly and actively in favor of marriage equality at least going
back to 2010, if not earlier.

------
seesomesense
I am far to the left but I believe that demonising someone for political
viewpoints different from mine is wrong.

~~~
BryantD
So do I, but I am comfortable demonizing people for political viewpoints that
go beyond reasonable norms of discourse.

------
woofyman
Trump gets to work helping LGBT Americans by tapping anti-gay Ken Blackwell to
his transition team.

“I think homosexuality is a lifestyle, it’s a choice, and that lifestyle can
be changed,” Blackwell told the Columbus Dispatch at the time. “I think it is
a transgression against God’s law, God’s will.”

[http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/10/1596184/-Trump-
ge...](http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/10/1596184/-Trump-gets-to-work-
helping-LGBT-Americans-by-tapping-anti-gay-Ken-Blackwell-to-his-transition-
team)

------
machbio
It was a brilliant play by Peter Thiel - it was gamble of 50:50 (I believe he
started supporting him only at the Republican Convention).. There would be
backlash by technology community, and when you have lot of money and
networking available to you; there is no one in the technology community that
will stop doing business with you.. Kudos to the HN crowd about the Freedom of
Speech, sometimes - I guess you need to be extremist in either being Left Wing
or Right Wing..

------
cromwellian
So the man whose company was funded by the CIA to conduct mass big data
surveillance is now going to be helping to decide the structure of the
executive branch, with "Law and Order" Giuliani probably as Attorney General.

What could go wrong?

IMHO, YC had their chance to divorce themselves from Thiel. They can still do
it, but this is their last chance. Silicon Valley is not going to forget this
conflict of interest.

~~~
pixl97
>Silicon Valley is not going to forget this conflict of interest.

The Silicon Valley that was giving Hillary millions so they could vie for the
same positions? Or Google staffers that met at the White House over 427 times,
during the same administration that expanded surveillance against Americans?

------
ktamura
I still stand by my earlier comment:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12915345](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12915345)

TL;DR; It's probably a good thing for Silicon Valley, considering the
alternative outcome (all other things equal): Trump still winning the election
without a single Silicon Valley influencer.

~~~
lxmorj
I like the idea that Thiel was just willing to fall on the sword to get
inside. It's a hopefully & almost certainly wrong, but hey...

------
bleamishboy
Is this (post, thread) on-topic for HN? Seems to fall pretty definitively into
the politics / TV news category.

(Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're
evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters,
or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-
topic.)

------
williamch11
I respect Thiel's loyalty to Trump. As people are hiding from Trump after the
bus incident, he comes out writing a check and giving a speech about why trump
is the right choice again knowing he will get crucify in the Valley. Hope he
does well now considering his influence in the Valley.

------
kafkaesq
What Paul may have failed to consider in taking his "tolerant, neutral" stance
towards Thiel's activities is that, in politics, one absolutely _is_ 100%
guilty by association with the forces of darkness that one allows one's self
to come into (sufficiently close) contact with. Or as that most prescient
saying, variously attributed, goes: _Qui cum canibus concumbunt cum pulicibus
surgent_ ("He that lieth down with dogs shall rise up with fleas").

On the other hand, if he's finding "heat" that he'll inevitably be taking, by
ever-rising degrees, for his association with Thiel (and hence, Trump and
everything he stands for) to be not to his liking -- it's still not too late
to get out of the kitchen.

------
FullMtlAlcoholc
Besides the whole Gawker incident, does Thiel have an obsessive need to settle
scores like Trump?

Mark my words, if Trump starts to raise the national debt by a large amount,
pull out of markets and put into bitcoin.

------
theCodeStig
Ironically, Palantir has an engineering office in Singapore.

~~~
auganov
Explain the irony?

------
vivekd
If there is anyone I want at the helm of America, it's Peter Theil. If I was
going to bet on anyone to solve the nation's problems it would be him. But
then, I would be surprised if he accepts the role. He seems like a very
private individual and someone who is interested in capital than in politics.
It would be a great personal sacrifice for him to turn his back on his
business ventures to look into stuff like this that will give him very little
return and take up an enormous amount of his time and resources.

------
tn13
Good to see a conservative government put up a Libertarian gay tech person as
CTO of USA.

------
ehosca
i guess soon we'll see if conversion therapy really works...

------
return0
Ahead of schedule, and under budget.

------
robomartin
The hatred spewing out from the Left defies description. Instead of supporting
Thiel he is now the enemy. How sad.

------
plandis
It turns out you can buy access to the president elect.

------
t1m
Peter Thiel's "Mein Kampf" excludes women and minorities, who he feels have
"damaged" democracy: [https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-
thiel/educatio...](https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-
thiel/education-libertarian)

~~~
yolesaber
"Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of
the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for
libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an
oxymoron."

Wow. That is...troubling

~~~
gohrt
Why? Welfare beneficiaries and women lean socialist, and vote socialist. They
believe that's good. Thiel believes that's bad.

~~~
yolesaber
Tens of million of women just voted for a conservative billionaire populist.

~~~
t1m
Tens of millions of people are going out to the street and are not going to
let these little goons take over America.

------
magic5227
Great, another climate change denier [https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-
views-of-the-Thiel-Founda...](https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-views-of-the-
Thiel-Foundation-on-climate-change)

~~~
magic5227
[https://youtu.be/CoxxGhLFbw4?t=2m30s](https://youtu.be/CoxxGhLFbw4?t=2m30s)

~~~
zaroth
What's with posting links with a timestamp skipping the overall context?

Yeah, watch from t=0 the whole 3 minutes and 42 seconds. I don't hear anything
shocking. It's not so much a rebuke of climate change, it's a rebuke of
political correctness and the inability to have a debate.

------
_pius
Meanwhile, Trump's already got an RFS in waiting:

[http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-says-
he-...](http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-says-he-would-
certainly-implement-muslim-database-n466716)

[https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs/](https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs/)

The longer YC waits to do the right thing on this, the worse it will get.

~~~
overgard
"The right thing". Tolerance means recognizing that people have different
world views than your own.

Sometimes the people you do business with have political opinions you don't
agree with. The melodrama over Thiel's political opinions is pointless. If you
demand Thiel steps down, are you personally just going to stop doing business
with 49% of the country that voted differently?

Personally I lean liberal, but I'm pretty disgusted with all the theatrics
I've seen in this election from the left. The Trump phenomenon arguably
occurred because half the country felt ostracized and decided to lob a brick
through the window of washington in the form of donald trump. Maybe we should
all get to understand our neighbors instead of doubling down on us-vs-them
tribalism.

~~~
Frondo
Tolerance means you aren't jailing people with different views than your own.
Tolerance means you aren't out beating people up for having different views.
Tolerance isn't about putting on a happy face and doing business with someone
whose views you find odious.

If people are no longer free to use words or social stigma to advance their
views and opinion, because "tolerance," then what do we have left?

~~~
white-flame
I think most people would equate "tolerance" with "non-antagonizing" in the
general case. It's hard to claim that actively antagonizing & stigmatizing
somebody for their beliefs (not just reasonably arguing against the beliefs
themselves) counts as tolerant of others' beliefs.

It exactly means that no matter how _subjectively and personally_ odious
somebody's beliefs are to you, you can still respect their personhood, and
evaluate any associated business & products at face value.

"Tolerance" does not mean enforcement for or against selected beliefs. Waging
a stigmatizing crusade against a belief is enforcement.

The moment you think you can deem and enforce absolute right & wrong upon
others, you open yourself up to it happening to you without defense. That is
not the path of liberty.

~~~
Frondo
Of course I get to deem and enforce what I think is right and wrong, using
tools like words and association.

What on earth kind of law do you want to set up where I can't preferentially
trade with people whose opinions I like, or preferentially _not_ trade with
people whose opinions I don't?

Again, tolerance means I don't want to imprison or kill people with
distasteful opinions; it doesn't mean I have to like them or their distasteful
opinions.

People can be bigots, they can be jerks. Go nuts, folks, be bigots or jerks, I
don't care. But I'm not going to trade with bigots or jerks, I'm not going to
hire them, and I'm sure as hell not going to say "hey, you're a bigot and a
jerk but tolerance so let's have a beer".

Some people have no place in my life, and the beliefs they hold are a big
determining factor in that decision. If they really wanna be my friend or
business partner, they can change their beliefs.

~~~
white-flame
> Some people have no place in my life, and the beliefs they hold are a big
> determining factor in that decision.

That is pretty much the definition of not tolerating a person, to remove a
person from your life, not tolerating having their existence in your sphere.
If it's mostly based on their beliefs, then it's an example of not tolerating
that belief.

You're perfectly fine to do that, as people do, but then you can't claim that
you're tolerant of others' beliefs just because you happen not to be killing
or imprisoning them.

> it doesn't mean I have to like them or their distasteful opinions.

Tolerance does NOT mean liking them! I keep hearing false dichotomy over and
over. To be decent and civil to a person, to tolerate their beliefs existing
around you, does not require condoning them. It's simply being a decent human
being and not being an overprovoked reactionary, intolerantly policing all
others around themselves, determining what others are not allowed to be like.

------
techxit
Peter Thiel is a neocon nightmare who thinks the 19th Amendment was a mistake.

Can we have a black bar for America, please?

------
ilostmykeys
Palantir, one of Thiel's companies, will now be able to embed itself even
deeper in the surveillance state. It's what Trump needs to "get even" with
people who make fun of him or oppose him.

------
234dd57d2c8db
Excellent. I look forward to seeing Peter's expertise help Trump continue the
wonderful progress we have made in improving tech in government under the
Obama administration.

------
pervycreeper
A chance to once again demonstrate the truth of the great man theory of
history. May they be favored by fortune.

------
davexunit
Not surprising that this website doesn't see the problem with Thiel's bigotry.

~~~
tdaltonc
Can you share a link that concisely demonstrates Thiel's bigotry?

------
zeluve
I hope this will lead to the so called "revolution" by Thiel in the beginning.
He had vision in the past and hopefully that will not become extreme and lead
to something bad. I don't think there is no one can control Trump..

~~~
umedzacharia
There will never be one.

~~~
lucodibidil
Thiel is smart enough to support Trump from the beginning despite all the
disagreement from his circles. Although I think he is somewhat an extremist
but with a vision. I think there will be change, and in good way.

------
t1m
I am a Canadian, so I neither have a say, or really can comment on American
politics.

This Saturday, my two daughters (ages 11 and 8) are driving a 1,700km journey
to North Dakota to show our support for the #NoDAPL movement. I am doing it
because my eldest is really into Aboriginal rights right now. These people are
just trying to preserve their land.

I hope we don't get shot by Peter Thiel.

------
the_decider
Perhaps California's exit from the union will hep YC re-establish its moral
integrty. Sam Altman, you wanted to radically change the word (in a positive
way)? Well now is your chance!

~~~
charia
Is this satire?

~~~
the_decider
No. Its a legitimate idea currently making the headway in our community. And
if you think its ridiculous, let me ask you...Is the notion of a seperatist,
intelligently run Californian sovereign state any less ridiculous than the
notion of a Trump Presidency two years ago? We've always been a community of
disruptors...well, now's our opportunity to really
distrupt.[https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/10/calexit-is-silicon-
valleys...](https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/10/calexit-is-silicon-valleys-plan-
to-pack-up-its-toys-and-leave/)

~~~
Turing_Machine
Where are you planning to get your water?

~~~
the_decider
The Water issues can be resolved using technologies developed / enhanced by
Israel. [http://www.haaretz.com/israel-
news/science/1.698275](http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/science/1.698275)

~~~
Turing_Machine
Maybe. I would strongly advise resolving those issues _before_ seceding. I
would also advise considering what would happen if the Central Valley (and
other rural regions of the state) didn't want to join the new entity.

