The elites that survived ended up better off. 50,000 other elites were killed during the French Revolution.
By the same token, the normal populace was also way better off after the French Revolution, since using the money and wealth of the dead elites to improve everyone's lives made a substantial impact on the French civilization that they are still benefiting from today.
In other words...the French Revolution is exactly the wrong type of example you want to be using when talking about whether violence against tech elites is acceptable.
I get that as a VC you have a deeply emotional attachment to encouraging people not to resort to violence, but your energies are best directed toward your fellow tech elite to encourage to stop doing things that are leading millions of people to contemplate violence against them.
All the jets in the world won't stop the violence once that bridge is crossed. Because the mob also has access to jets, and boats, and (at that point) an emotional reason to pursue their targets to the ends of the earth.
Ish. Most survived. And they didn’t have jets.
You have a very VC/tech-bro/Theranosesque definition of "most survived". More than 2/3rds of the French aristocracy was killed in the French Revolution. Even the low bound using just the official numbers puts almost half of the aristocrats having been executed or died in prison during the French Revolution.
Revolutions today are broadly accretive for elites.
They aren't, unless you're referring to the weapons dealers, warlords, or the complicit. Revolutions tend to have outsized impacts on reducing the wealth of elites. The only exceptions are where the elites were part of the security apparatus on the side that won the conflict and gained their wealth by murdering the people who had what they wanted. The inevitable result though is that when they lose that power, they tend to lose their lives (see e.g., Syria and South Africa).
> as a VC you have a deeply emotional attachment to encouraging people not to resort to violence
…why? Most of Silicon Valley’s elites are itching for violence in politics. To the degree they’re putting thumbs on the scale, on the net, it’s for more violence.
> the mob also has access to jets
No. It doesn’t. In zero civil breakdowns in the last half century did the mob get the jets during breakdown. The closest one can get is the Taliban seizing U.S. materiel.
> More than 2/3rds of the French aristocracy was killed in the French Revolution
Source? The majority of those killed were commoners.
> They aren't, unless you're referring to the weapons dealers, warlords, or the complicit
Complicit. A breakdown in violence would give the authoritarians a bona fide Reichstag fire.
> inevitable result though is that when they lose that power, they tend to lose their lives (see e.g., Syria and South Africa)
The former president of Syria is in Russia. Much of the South African elite is complaining about white genocides in the U.S.
If CEOs getting killed is normal, then activists against those companies getting killed is normal too. A lot more people will kill for a million dollars than because they hate some guy.
The more likely result is either that every member of the board and c-suite ends up on death row, or in a grave. There are far more people willing to avenge loved ones than there are people willing to kill for money.
Most of the population will be for the violent attacks. Techbros went way too far in gleefully describing how they would destroy most people's careers while enriching themselves. Never bothered to think whether they should just because they could. Now the rooster is coming home to roost.
The best way for the attacks on AI executives to stop is to pass meaningful legislation that limits the use and scope of AI.
I don't think most people in tech are quite aware of the level of visceral AI hatred amongst non-techies.
I work in a non-tech industry and I see this all the time from people, but it's not just limited to AI. SV itself evokes hatred in a lot of people on both sides of the spectrum.
I can't repeat the worst things I've heard, but Altman and his ilk should be terrified of the mob violence they're instigating.
The inevitable result of giving corporations and executives complete immunity from the harms they cause is that people will stop resorting to the legal system and begin resorting to extralegal measures.
And the likely result is that in most of the country those extralegal measures would have to be very extreme to secure a guilty verdict. You can see the beginnings of it now with the ICE protest trial verdicts.
Doubt it. Companies have already begun moving away from AI and back to hiring humans. LLM capabilities were vastly oversold (moreso than the DeepBlue or machine learning memes of prior economic cycles).
After several hundred billions dollars spent on LLMs, they can almost reproduce the capabilities of a partially deaf visually impaired secretary with severe brain damage.
Humans are cheaper, and they can actually learn things. Even the brain-damaged secretary can learn better than an LLM can, and it doesn't cost of hundreds of millions to train one.
There are hundreds of sites devoted to discussing game design and literally millions of posts.
This isn't a game design forum, it's a tech forum, so the focus is on the tech part of games.
Unity is very easy to use. If you want to make a game for Steam or iOS it is almost as simple as drag-and-drop, then selecting Publish from the main menu. The difficulty in getting a game on Steam or iOS is in the administrative roadblocks thrown up by the stores themselves, not the engines. You don't need to ever deal with C# in Unity. If you have difficulty using Steam, neither programming or game design is for you.
Claude and vibe programming don't lead to shipped games. They lead to crap that nobody wants to play because they aren't games. They're just poorly performing tech demos with bad art because they can't design games. They can just copy parts of other games without understanding why they work...but based on your comments about turning board games into software games it appears that is what you actually want.
...in response to someone politely asking to have his profile removed. Then the school told you to take it down and you refused.
You deserved to get kicked out of school.
Yes, this site would probably have been fine (if distasteful) in the U.S...because the U.S. has a different legal system. This site is not legal under Indian law. Defamation works very differently in India.
You should consider yourself lucky that you're able to write this blogpost instead of finding out what the inside of an Indian prison is like.
EXACTLY, anyone who told me to remove a comment, I did. the guy was just rude to me and told me to take the site down (and threatened me), and obv i wont do that
The point is that they shouldn't have had to ask you to do that because their profiles shouldn't have been there in the first place. You didn't have their permission to do that, and yet you did it anyway. How can you actually be surprised at the outrage when you are fully aware that you essentially forced everyone into that position without their consent?
You keep asking people what you did wrong, but you have refused time and again to even begin to attempt to consider why creating profiles for everyone without their permission is wrong.
HN doesn't care about virality and something being "cool" the way you think they do, especially when all you're doing is copying what a famous CEO did nearly two decades ago, the very CEO that most of HN extremely dislikes now - and you wonder why you're getting the third degree?
Step off the internet for a bit and think about the feedback you're getting. Stop insisting you're awesome and that the project was cool and that we're all wrong, and consider what you're hearing. Your ego is tremendously over-inflated.
You were rude to him and several hundred other people first. And worse, none of them asked to be involved.
If I had been the other half of that conversation and that had been your response to me, right now you would be in the ER recovering from a life-threatening beating.
By the same token, the normal populace was also way better off after the French Revolution, since using the money and wealth of the dead elites to improve everyone's lives made a substantial impact on the French civilization that they are still benefiting from today.
In other words...the French Revolution is exactly the wrong type of example you want to be using when talking about whether violence against tech elites is acceptable.
reply