thiel

But really Thiel is just saying that from a business perspective, you should be looking for non-competitive markets.

Nobody is pretending that receiving money from Peter Thiel makes you better at whatever it is you do.

Recently finished Zero to One which was good, but if you listen to Thiel often there wasn't much new material.

Put another way, Thiel fundamentally doesn't fund most people because most people are bad investments.

Look at the stretch he made just to suggest Thiel might be sexist.

Founded by two Thiel Fellows, REX just closed its first financing round.

Also, Peter Thiel always told his portfolio companies to allow 83b elections.

Such as Thiel running Paypal or Pao sourcing funding for RPX.

Facebook's design was set long before Thiel invested in it.

As Peter Thiel would say, because they have a monopoly, they have money to spend on things (e.g., improving their product) other than competing themselves out of business.

Wouldn't the answer be the same reason not everyone is accepted into YC, or why Thiel doesn't personally fund everyone under the sun?

I want Peter Thiel to get angry about poverty.

He quotes Thiel's "competition is for losers" statement, which is prominent in Zero to One, to suggest that Thiel doesn't believe in competition.

While true, the combination of the Thiel's beliefs ends up feeling a little bit "For me, but not for thee".

This is the part I found most interesting: "Thiel is a member of TheVanguard.

I found the article interesting because it reminded me of the "good business that no one wants to be in" category that Peter Thiel talks about.

Peter Thiel's opinion: computers complement humans, not compete with them.

Contrary to Thiel's comments, I think you're surrounded by brilliant people at a place like Google and will learn constantly and won't stagnate.

Ironic, given Peter Thiel's political leanings.