Punching down? To companies worth twenties of billions of dollars?

The impulse to label everything a “startup” and thus a smolbean little guy is fascinating.

Maybe you missed the bottom section? There's plenty of comments taking umbrage at it.

Alternatively, you think it's okay to make up stuff about young people because they got a seed round. That's stock-human behavior but it's not rational or kind.

▲

afavour 11 hours ago | parent [-]

I was specifically thinking of Cursor when I said “companies with twenty billion dollar valuations”.

My point, as I think was clear, was that criticising the founders of billion dollar companies via satire is not “punching down” by any means. Nor is it libel. You are throwing words around without meaning.

(and “young people”, there we go with the smolbean stuff again. If they’re too young to face criticism then they’re too young to be CEOs of billion dollar companies. You can’t have it both ways)

	▲	refulgentis 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		"Punching down" was about the watchlist section, not Cursor. You brought up Cursor, I didn't, and only after the fact. "There we go with the smolbean stuff again": I never said that or anything like it. You're putting an argument in my mouth and then swatting it down. Twice now. "If they're too young for criticism they're too young to be CEOs of billion dollar companies. You can't have it both ways." Scroll the watchlist. Most of those people aren't running billion dollar companies. That's the whole point. I definitely agree not all CEOs are good people and I generally agree the irrational argument all CEOs no matter of age are more likely to be net-destructive to society. That's the most extreme version of what you're saying, and we likely agree on it. So we agree the conduct towards Cursor, and whatever other companies you want to name, is fair game. The only question is whether that extends to literally everyone on the list. I don't think it does. That's it.