[HN Gopher] Chris Sacca's Act 2: Lowercarbon Capital
___________________________________________________________________
Chris Sacca's Act 2: Lowercarbon Capital
Author : simonebrunozzi
Score : 90 points
Date : 2021-02-14 17:02 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (lowercarboncapital.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (lowercarboncapital.com)
| cjbenedikt wrote:
| Go for it Chris: www.shypbv.com
| solosoyokaze wrote:
| > Four years ago, Crystal and I retired from venture capital to
| carve out more time for things that matter, with Earth's climate
| disaster at the top of the list.
|
| "Retired" is a nice way to put: pushed out for being a sexual
| harasser. This looks like a classic case of whitewashing your
| image via philanthropy.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| So someone accuses someone of something nearly ten years later
| after the alleged incident and we are supposed to take it as
| hard evidence? Sorry but that's not enough and I am not willing
| to simply believe extraordinary claims without it being judged
| in court.
| elicash wrote:
| You're referring to a disputed allegation of inappropriately
| touching a woman. Other acts were not disputed:
|
| > I said and did things that made some women feel awkward,
| unwelcome, insecure, and/or discouraged. In social settings,
| under the guise of joking, being collegial, flirting, or
| having a good time, I undoubtedly caused some women to
| question themselves, retreat, feel alone, and worry they
| can't be their authentic selves. By stupidly perpetuating a
| culture rife with busting chops, teasing, and peer pressure
| to go out drinking, I made some women feel self-conscious,
| anxious, and fear they might not be taken seriously.
|
| https://medium.com/@sacca/i-have-more-work-to-
| do-c775c5d56ca...
|
| It's fair to say he sexually harassed women, even if you
| think he should be forgiven after apologizing for it.
|
| Also, an "extraordinary" claim would be "the Earth is flat."
| The harassment of women in the workplace is known and even
| quite common!
| optimiz3 wrote:
| Consider the iterated consequences if you don't allow
| people to admit a transgression, reform, and move on.
|
| Such a society ultimately turns into a gaslighting double-
| down deny-everything debacle, where everything must be
| proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law. In
| this situation court cases will be dragged out forever, and
| asymmetric resources and power really will come into play.
|
| Failing and fixing fast is much more preferable.
| thryway21421 wrote:
| > It's fair to say he sexually harassed women, even if you
| think he should be forgiven after apologizing for it.
|
| Sexual harassment is a broad label that doesn't
| discriminate between coercing sex and an inappropriate
| joke. However given that he also brought Twitter into the
| world, the lack of nuance here seems ironic.
| no_wizard wrote:
| That's not how it works, at all. This is dismissive of a
| number of facts:
|
| - power dynamics in the workplace and culture (often those
| who raise these issues are punished not taken seriously and
| protected adequately)[0]
|
| - when someone is reporting this kind of behavior their
| professional aspirations can and often are[1] hampered or
| damaged regardless of the outcome of any investigation.
| Backlash is common and frankly unacceptable
|
| - Chris Sacca himself admitted to sexist behavior[2]
|
| Given all this, I don't think this is outlandish at all. In
| fact the odds of getting the correct eyes on a report of
| harassment is often so hard the only thing left often is
| whistleblower or public opinion to motivate something being
| done about and that is a sad untenable state of affairs
|
| [0]: https://diginomica.com/how-can-companies-tackle-tech-
| sectors...
|
| [1]: https://hbr.org/2020/05/why-sexual-harassment-programs-
| backf...
|
| [2]: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/03/chris-sacca-and-dave-
| mcclure...
| optimiz3 wrote:
| That's right! No one is ever allowed to change. Ever.
| [deleted]
| elicash wrote:
| I think this is too harsh. It's fair to acknowledge the
| reality that doing good things doesn't erase bad things. Even
| if he has changed, damage that he inflicted onto others lives
| on.
|
| But, yes, I'd rather he fund these great companies than
| disappear.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Until what date does everything sacca does have to come
| with a warning about how he allegedly behaved in 2010?
| shock wrote:
| _Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events;
| small minds discuss people._
|
| - Eleanor Roosevelt
| 9387367 wrote:
| Who knows? Some actions carry consequences that can
| easily outlast a lifetime
| optimiz3 wrote:
| Google doesn't even show any convictions - implying
| someone should carry a scarlet letter due to allegations
| is IMO insane.
| loceng wrote:
| I'd personally like to know everyone's full history-story
| - and trust that my own judgement and reasoning and
| compassion will make an adequate decision taking all
| factors into account; I'd like to know the other side of
| the stories as well of people who may be harmed, how they
| were treated, how they're doing now, etc.
| elicash wrote:
| I'll take this question in good faith. Here's the
| guideline I suggest:
|
| If I were a woman who was considering working with him,
| would I appreciate a heads-up to maybe be a bit careful
| around him? It's clarifying to understand these as
| workplace issues.
| da_big_ghey wrote:
| I believe the question here is very similar to that posed
| by the sex offender registry. To those who are interested
| in said question, I'd recommend listening to this debate
| on the topic of such registries:
| https://reason.com/2018/02/06/all-sex-offender-
| registries-sh...
|
| I generally supported them in the past, but the evidence
| presented here was the tipping point and I now believe
| they do more harm than good. I would extend that
| principle to say that past a certain point, we shouldn't
| constantly remind people of past transgressions. Though I
| do understand the other side, and there is definitely a
| part of me that would always want to know if a sex
| offender lived near a child of mine.
| stefan_ wrote:
| In VC, given the state of the industry? Probably forever.
| But if he wants to take up gardening or programming with
| the "bros", I'm sure 4 years will suffice.
| [deleted]
| fireeyed wrote:
| Dusting off the newly repainted Chris Sacca. It took 4 years for
| the paint job to be complete.
|
| https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4656190/Five-Silico...
| ffggvv wrote:
| why are all the scammiest people from chamath to sacca getting in
| on the EV grift? seems like the tesla soaring has basically drawn
| the gnats around easy money
| mmaunder wrote:
| Little known fact: Chris sings an unbelievably awesome rendition
| of stairway to heaven. Saw it at a certain Utah dive bar. Fun
| guy.
|
| I find it fascinating that few backing climate change mitigation
| are addressing the 10,000 pound bright pink elephant in the room:
| Let's promote making less humans so that human population, the
| root cause of every single way we're screwing up this planet,
| simply shrinks.
|
| Advocating for having less kids is taboo, especially in the USA.
| And as with Chris the approach is to make more stuff to fix the
| fact that our growing population's appetite for stuff is killing
| the planet.
| mc32 wrote:
| Population control is problematic because often it's not
| voluntary. Also how do we decide which areas are overpopulated
| and need to slow down and which ones are underpopulated and
| need to grow?
|
| In any case the eugenics movements cast a long shadow on this
| topic.
| Judgmentality wrote:
| Arguing for population control is arguing for limiting growth -
| it's what no capitalist wants to hear. The only reason the
| stock market is climbing is because the Fed is artificially
| inflating it. Investors want growth no matter what. As far as
| I'm concerned, most investors are cancer.
|
| They don't want to solve problem. They want to get rich, and if
| "solving" problems helps them achieve that goal then that is
| how they will sell themselves.
| Ftuuky wrote:
| "May we live long and die out." -- Motto of the Voluntary
| Extinction Movement
|
| Covid19 might cause male sterility.[0]
|
| [0] https://www.rifters.com/crawl/?p=9711
| shock wrote:
| At the time I'm posting this, there are two comments related to
| the low carbon tech the article is about, the rest are about
| Chris Sacca and what he did. I for one, don't find much value in
| the latter, past the initial awareness of his past. Would it be
| possible to separate the two threads of conversation so one can
| participate in the thread that is most valuable for them and not
| waste time with the other?
| h00dui wrote:
| I tend to disagree with this sentiment only because our actions
| in life have consequences. The SV bro club have/had their
| issues for obvious reasons & I think its more than fair that
| entrepreneurs that might be interested in funding from so etc
| should be aware of such a past.
|
| Harvey Weinsteins's new fund is here to help save the world...
| Should we not mention his past?
| shock wrote:
| I did not ask for his past not to be mentioned, I asked if it
| could be discussed in a different thread, as an optimization.
| It is much easier to join a discussion in anither thread than
| to filter out comments in an intermingled thread.
| h00dui wrote:
| Would you send your daughter to Saccas house and not
| mention his past* because he is an investor?
| thryway21421 wrote:
| > his past*
|
| Allegedly "touching someones face" at a private party
| social event in Las Vegas 12 years ago?
|
| I think that doesn't needs a warning. I also think it
| shouldn't be equated with a convicted serial rapist
| (Weinstein).
| elicash wrote:
| Putting Sacca's previous bad behavior aside (and I have no idea
| whether or not we should), the no-jargon descriptions of each of
| the companies that they've backed is fantastic and I'm excited
| for each of them.
|
| https://lowercarboncapital.com/companies/
|
| - MAKING CHEMICALS WITH ENZYMES, NOT OIL.
|
| - FUSION WITH PLASMA-TAMING MAGNETS.
|
| - 100% BEEF THAT NEVER HAD EYES NOR HOOVES.
|
| - KELP-FARMING CARBON-SINKING ROBOTS.
|
| - GIANT CARBON SUCKING VACUUMS.
|
| - PROTEIN FROM TRASH-EATING FLIES.
|
| - FULLY ELECTRIC AIRPLANES.
|
| - CLEAN, FAST, CHEAP LITHIUM MINING.
|
| - REAL DAIRY SANS COWS.
|
| - BATTERIES THAT MAKE SOLAR WORK 24/7.
|
| - CARBON-NEGATIVE MICROBIAL FERTILIZER.
|
| - INSANELY HIGH-TORQUE ELECTRIC MOTORS.
|
| - CHEAP FUSION POWER. SERIOUSLY.
|
| - AI TO CAPTURE CARBON AND RESTORE FORESTS.
|
| - PUMPING OIL BACK UNDER-GROUND.
|
| - FUNGUS EATS CARBON AND PAYS FARMERS.
|
| - SUPERFAST HYDROFOIL CARGO SHIPS.
|
| - PIGLESS BACON.
|
| - CARBON-TRAPPING SEMI TRUCKS.
|
| - FERTILIZER BORN FROM LIGHTNING.
|
| - AUTOMATED CARBON FOOTPRINT REPORTING.
|
| - CARBON-GUZZLING SUPERTREES.
|
| - CATTLE THAT BURP LESS METHANE.
|
| - TREE-PLANTING DRONES.
|
| - CRYSTAL BALL FOR CLIMATE RISK.
|
| - METHANE BOUNTY HUNTERS.
|
| - CARBON X-RAY FOR DIRTY SUPPLY CHAINS.
|
| - UPCYCLING CARBON INTO FUELS AND CHEMICALS.
|
| - FIND THE WORLD'S BEST WIND + HYDRO SITES.
|
| - LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS.
| breck wrote:
| I don't know what the first part of your comment is talking
| about, but I do know from my tiny tiny interactions with him he
| scores in top 1% of people for honesty, intelligence, work
| ethic, integrity. He does still seem to have a chip on his
| shoulder, which I find amusing. Anyway no one is perfect, but
| some people are true gems.
|
| I for one feel very happy to learn that his mind is focused on
| the climate problem.
|
| I don't understand it too well, but my only question is: say we
| do figure out how to control earth's temperature, what do we
| agree to settle on? I'm hoping for a nice 78 degrees. My wife
| wants 80. Not sure how we're gonna resolve that.
| [deleted]
| jamestimmins wrote:
| What bad behavior and who is the "we" you're referring to? The
| guy can invest his money however he pleases and regardless of
| his background, there is no "we" that has to have some shared
| opinion of him. IMO that kind of thinking is a major source of
| toxicity today, because there's a pervasive idea that we all
| need to judge (and agree upon the judgements of) people's
| backgrounds.
| [deleted]
| seltzered_ wrote:
| The layout is intriguing (and the kelp operation sounds
| interesting), but the problem I see is this is solely focused
| around carbon. Solutionism like this needs to be paired with
| cultural change.
|
| Nothing about the other planetary boundaries covered such as
| geochemical flows, land-use change (which alters the
| distribution of water vapor, which is very important), methane
| use change, ocean acidification, etc.
| ThomPete wrote:
| i would like to see the feasibility of these projects. anything
| to do with energy and climate related startups have to deal
| with physics first. Its not at all like technology or even
| engineering.
|
| Sounds like fluff to me.
| Judgmentality wrote:
| Yeah, I think Sacca is just trying to sell himself as a good
| guy. I'm skeptical any of these companies will succeed (I
| only looked at a few but underwhelmed is an understatement),
| and unless Sacca is putting a significant amount of his own
| capital behind this initiative it's hard to believe he cares
| about it more than he cares about being rich. And I think
| that's what this is about - a rich guy trying to improve his
| image.
| [deleted]
| c7DJTLrn wrote:
| I wonder if they are aware that there is an 'AI' that captures
| carbon and has been rolling itself out throughout the entire
| world for billions of years. Oh, right, that wouldn't rake in
| the same attention.
|
| I am pessimistic when it comes to this stuff. Most initiatives
| like this are half virtue-signalling, half VC flytraps. I
| believe the only realistic way we can halt climate change is
| with geoengineering. One proposed method is an aerosol
| dispersed between the Earth and the sun to reduce the amount of
| energy received.
|
| Oh, and fusion. But no amount of Elon Musk's reality distortion
| field is going to make that happen in 5 years. That needs time,
| a lot more funding, and educated scientists.
| brianbreslin wrote:
| Are you talking about seaweed or some other germs for this "I
| wonder if they are aware that there is an 'AI' that captures
| carbon and has been rolling itself out throughout the entire
| world for billions of years. " ?
| anon294892 wrote:
| According to these comments here on HN, Sacca is a sexual-
| harrassing pariah. But I remember the original accusation against
| him years ago, and thinking at the time that it was a mild
| charge, and one where his immediate apology and promise to
| improve was the appropriate correction, not a banishment from the
| tech world.
|
| To revisit, here is the claim of sexual harassment against him:
|
| > Another woman, Susan Wu, claimed that Chris Sacca - who founded
| Lowercase Capital in 2007 - had made her feel uncomfortable when
| he allegedly touched her face without permission at a tech event
| in Las Vegas in 2009.
|
| https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4656190/Five-Silico...
| nodesocket wrote:
| Unfortunately this sort of level headed, second chance,
| everybody makes mistakes apathy is not "allowed" in today's
| environment when it comes to cancel culture. Especially if
| there is even a whiff of sexual undertones or male misbehaving.
|
| > In 2017 the New York Times reported that a woman had accused
| Sacca of touching her face at...
| ec109685 wrote:
| He doesn't sound cancelled to me.
| thryway21421 wrote:
| That article says Lowercase was founded in 2007, however
| Wikipedia[1] and Sacca's response [2] claim Lowercase wasn't
| founded till 2010. But we can't let that get in the way of the
| VC super predator narrative.
|
| > At the time, we had known each other for years, were in a
| private party setting in Vegas, not a work event, with no
| investor-investee relationship, we were not in business
| together, we didn't work together in any capacity, and I also
| wasn't even a venture capitalist yet as I didn't close my first
| fund until May of 2010. There was no imbalance of power between
| us.
|
| 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowercase_Capital 2.
| https://medium.com/@sacca/i-have-more-work-to-do-c775c5d56ca...
| EcoMonkey wrote:
| This is exciting to see. Like it or not, we live in a market-
| driven society, and the biggest climate solutions will ultimately
| be market based. If business isn't on board, it won't happen.
|
| Make no mistake, the government is going to have to do a lot,
| too. The single biggest intervention the government can make,
| according to the IPCC[1] is to set a high price on carbon
| emissions. And one of the closest times that the economics
| profession has come to a consensus is when thousands of
| economists signed a statement[2] that the most effective way to
| price carbon is to put a high, steadily increasing price on it,
| give it back to people as dividends, and use a carbon border
| adjustment to maintain trade competitiveness. This approach is
| called carbon fee and dividend [3], or sometimes just "carbon
| dividends".
|
| MIT built a climate policy simulator[4] called EN-ROADS that lets
| you move sliders to see what moves the needle most in terms of
| energy mix, and by extension global average temperature above
| pre-industrial average by the end of the century. It's hard to
| get anything real to happen without moving the Carbon price
| slider.
|
| We need to pass carbon fee and dividend legislation at the
| national level. The legislation that has so far gained the most
| traction is the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act [5],
| but ultimately we just need something that actually solves this
| problem while being fair to people and good (or at least not bad)
| for business. It also needs to be as bipartisan as possible so
| that it doesn't get tossed around every time there's a shift in
| administrations.
|
| The bottom line is that there's a cost to society from continuing
| to use fossil fuels, and that cost should be reflected in energy
| prices from carbon-intensive sources. That cost is currently
| reflected as $0, despite the billions of dollars in damage that
| climate impacts will have on our economy, according to the 2018
| Fourth National Climate Assessment[5], a massive and rigorous
| report from more than 300 experts and 13 federal agencies.
|
| We have to supercharge capital investments into the future of
| clean tech. VC funding like Lowercarbon Capital is part of that,
| but we also need carbon dividends to greatly multiply that
| effect.
|
| [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/climate/carbon-tax-
| united... [2] https://econstatement.org/ [3]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend [4]
| https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/climate/carbon-tax-united...
| [4] https://energyinnovationact.org/ [5]
| https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/
| anewaccount2021 wrote:
| I'm underwhelmed. The world is swimming in money, there are
| founder/company-sponsored funds everywhere. Is greentech really
| gated on seed investment? Is anything? This seems like a lazy
| way for the rich to participate without doing much. These
| boutique funds seem much more focused on the vanity of the LPs,
| not so much on outcomes. Elon Musk is still your best bet.
|
| I expect to see Lowercarbon Capital appear as one name in a
| dozen making low-risk small-round investments in meh fad-
| chasing startups. The world needs builders more than funders.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| > It also needs to be as bipartisan as possible so that it
| doesn't get tossed around every time there's a shift in
| administrations.
|
| I just don't see how you can do that (in the US) when one of
| the major parties seems completely convinced--for reasons I
| simply can't fathom--that Climate Change is a giant hoax.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-02-14 23:01 UTC)