245
Gabe Newell was an enthusiastic supporter of OpenAI in 2018, donating $20 million and even acting as the sole member of an 'informal advisory board' (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
112 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I was of course using the word "worship" in a non literal way. Let me rephrase to be more literal:

It comes up because there are many people who give Gabe a pass on being a billionaire because it is convenient for them. The choice between Gabe being a billionaire and Valve doing the awesome work for open source is a false choice and a nonsequiter. Gabe should not get a pass for his downright unethical amount of wealth just because he is the CEO of a company you like. Yet he very often does in gaming communities full of people who are, otherwise, in favour of eating the rich. For clarity, eating the rich is also not used literally.

You can appreciate the things Valve does and condemn Gabe for hoarding his vast wealth at the same time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Lol, I think we had this discussion before. Nice to meet you again. :p

    I mean I understand this position of yours. And yes, there can't be rich people without poor people, so in that sense I agree being rich is evil by definition. But there is a difference in how to get rich, either by exploiting the weak or those who need it, or by creating good products people WANT to spend money on willingly, without getting exploited. They can get rich this way, which is not really unethical to me. Its a bit of paradox with this (my) argumentation.

    I don't think that Gabe is an evil person, or soulless like other CEOs. Especially because Gabe / Valve makes money by creating good products on a free and open market. Other CEOs make money by selling their soul and users to investors (remind you, Valve and Gabe doesn't have investors).

    However, there is something I hate Valve (and Gabe) for actually, and that is having lootboxes AND item market in Steam and their games available. If anything, this is what would I call the most evil thing and exploit Valve (and therefore Gabe) does.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    You say that Gabe has earned his wealth ethically. In the next paragraph you defeat your own stance by providing an example of how he earned it unethically. We can agree on this point.

    I would further say that no one can earn a billion dollar net worth ethically. No one, not even Gabe. Hence, to the root of the conversation, why this comes up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    I don't think the majority of his money comes from those exceptions. Without the lootboxes and the item market, Valve (and Gaben) would probably make most of the amount of money they do right now. Just because I don't like that part does not defeat my previous argument. My point is, the examples about item market and lootboxes in some of their games are not core to their strategy and their business does not stand on those legs.

    Or is your argumentation that Gaben is a bad person, just because of these two points and everyone who hates him hate him for that? Are these the central points you are calling him an evil person? I don't think so. That's not the core issue. Your core issue is, that he is rich. So it does not matter in what ways he earns his money. Therefore reasoning alone how he earned his money is meaningless to discuss at this point. You just try to find a justification and point to it, after i pointed it out. Therefore I don't know how rational it is to hate a person just for being rich (which is the main issue here, because you say nobody can get rich ethically).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    I did not assert that he is evil in this conversation, nor did I assert that I or anyone else hates him, justified or otherwise.

    Nor did I ever try to use or define "rich", or that "rich" people are evil or that they deserve to be hated.

    I believe that a billion dollars of net worth while there are starving and homeless people is an unethical act. I also believe that no one can accumulate a billion dollars of net worth ethically. I hope I have made that stance clear.

    I believe that this conversion alone acts as a good explanation of why the original commenter made their comment. I hope it's been cleared up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent