Hacker News Reader

Comment by phreack | Hacker News Reader

>The statement here is that ASKfm is not at all afraid to rise to challenges. They're conquering Everest because it's out there to conquer. By doing so they claim: if they're bold enough to do it, they're bold enough to turn a social network into a blockchain ecosystem, and they're definitely bold enough to overturn the market with their new product.

This nonsense could be an absurd line from HBO's Silicon Valley, and people would have found it hilarious. Instead it's not only real, it's cost _a life_. I can't believe this.

View on HN

When watching Silicon Valley I found some lines to be too over-the-top, only to find out they were quotes from real people.

Do you have any examples or a resource with some of the best ones?

I found it hilarious when Gavin compared his treatment to the plight of the Jews in Nazi Germany [1]. And then I found out it was actually based on this guy [2].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5zQpN28xa4

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN-vUaawaF8

Saving this for later

The person who died was a sherpa - the people who willingly take the job to transport rich people up the mountain. The sherpa knew what he was getting into, and the context of the expedition seems highly irrelevant. Would it be better or worse if the sherpa died during a normal trip where he was ferrying a multimillionaire Englishman up to the top?

This is completely backwards way of thinking about the world, and you should really take a moment and think about it.

Consider this: Somewhere in the world, someone is going to eat poison on camera to get some ad money on YouTube. Would you say "Well it was going to happen anyway, so I might as well pay them to tattoo my brandname on their forehead while they're at it"?

No, you'd probably say "Wow, that sounds like a risky thing to do, and maybe it would look really bad for my brand, especially if they actually did die". So you should take a moment and ask "Why am I blaming the sherpa for the death, but absolving the rich people who paid him to do it?". There is a world view where you can think that maybe people shouldn't pay people to do risky things for stupid reasons.

If you really think it is that dangerous, you should argue against anyone climbing Mt Everest then, not just people who happen to be sponsored with a publicity stunt.

I'd encourage you to pitch that to the sherpas and see what their reaction would be to you wanting to take away pretty much their only source of income.

People shouldn't be climbing Mt Everest. There is little to be gained by doing so. Unless of course somebody creates a reason by artificially choosing to incentivize it, but they could just as well incentivize doing something else instead.

Pretty sure it was the “climbing Mt Everest” part that cost a life, not their stupid marketing copy.

So, someone paid money to someone, and it resulted in someone dying. Why do you think that's okay exactly?

A consenting adult pays another consenting adult with more experience to do a life threatening task together. One dies. How is this not okay? What are you expecting? For people to never climb Mt Everest again?

In the USA, it's illegal for me to pay you to kill yourself. The issue isn't as cut and dry as legality anyway. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's morally justifiable. So yeah, there is a world view where paying people money to risk their lives to advertise your buttcoin is immoral.

>So yeah, there is a world view where paying people money to risk their lives to advertise your buttcoin is immoral.

So there's legit no reason to pay someone to climb Mount Everest?

What about raising money? Is it still immoral? What about if that person was going to climb either way (which was also true in this situation)?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com