Hacker News Reader

Comment by spitfire | Hacker News Reader

Lets not forget that YC has endorsed Uber multiple times in public statements. When YC says "be naughty" this is what they mean.

They'll try to distance themselves from this now, but their statements were "be naughty" while holding up AirBnB and Uber as examples to be proud of.

Take what you will from that.

View on HN

Problem with 'being naughty' is there is constant pressure to 'be a little more naughty than before'. Rinse lather repeat till the grand jury issues a criminal indictment.

In jurisdictions where Uber is illegal, Uber's graywall activities are organized crime; there's no other way to put it. How is it any different than, say, an app that advises drug couriers where there are (possibly undercover) enforcement agents. This is serious stuff, and in no way does the desire to provide better taxi service justify it.

In 20 seconds of googling I didn't find pg urging entrepreneurs to be naughty. I did find YC's ethics policy[1], and the only mention the of the law that I see is related to sales tactics, "Not using misleading, illegal or dishonest sales tactics." This needs revision.

There are lots of laws that are challenging and problematic, even impractical to follow exactly, e.g., the tax code. It's one thing to interpret the tax code in your favor; it's another thing to write a program to distort your business information to avoid taxes.

[1] https://www.ycombinator.com/ethics/

EDIT: Found the naughtiness link. Reading now.... EDIT 2: I'm completely opposed to drug laws. Drugs laws are sickening and immoral, and our society and countless individuals have paid a terrible price as a result of these laws, but that doesn't make it ok for me to sell drugs on the street.

I read What We Look for in Founders[1], and I think the section on Naughtiness conveys the wrong message, unless pg actually intends to suggest that, for example, the graywall tactics that Uber has used are desireable. Is Portland's law against services like Uber's a law "that matters?"

pg makes a more specific case for disobedience in The Word "Hacker"[2], and maybe he really does look for people who will flout the law when they see fit.

I don't see an easy way to rephrase what pg is saying in a way I'd prefer to see it, except to say that the there is a distinction between civil disobedience for the purpose of insisting on human rights and mere criminal behavior. Surely YCombinator does not want to invest in criminal enterprises, no matter how clever or hackish.

[1] http://paulgraham.com/founders.html [2] http://paulgraham.com/gba.html

OK, one more thing. This "I can flout the law in my new business" attitude is a great example of white privilege, and this is why this attitude really grates on my nerves.

I thought of the same thing when I read this. I have to admit, this was really smart and "naughty" on their part.

I'm not happy to hear what kind of company Uber is, internally. However, they seem to operate how VCs want companies to act and "disrupt" markets. (Minus the harassment stuff.)

> holding up AirBnB

With AirBnB they went one step further: they invested in it. AirBnB is one of YC's biggest winners.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com