[HN Gopher] Show HN: 30u30.fyi - Is your startup founder on Forb...
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: 30u30.fyi - Is your startup founder on Forbes' most
fraudulent list?
Author : not-chatgpt
Score : 111 points
Date : 2026-03-30 22:10 UTC (49 minutes ago)
(HTM) web link (30u30.fyi)
(TXT) w3m dump (30u30.fyi)
| dsr_ wrote:
| More useful for most people: is the company you are considering
| doing business with run by one of these fine upstanding folks?
| NewsaHackO wrote:
| This seems extremely mean spirited.
| TallGuyShort wrote:
| Some of the comments are unnecessary, but things like this:
|
| > wiping $40B and several people's life savings
|
| Okay, you shouldn't dump your life savings into a
| cryptocurrency that claims to be doing innovative things in the
| first 2 days. But if that's true that guy ruined multiple
| people's life's work. That's a bit mean-spirited, wouldn't you
| say?
| NewsaHackO wrote:
| Did you read the page? The first portion is whatever, but
| then it lists random founders with no record of doing
| anything nefarious based on a random ranking list. It's
| literally bullying.
| ForHackernews wrote:
| Correct. It's abusive to apply probabilistic AI models to
| real human individuals and penalize them for things they
| haven't even done yet with no recourse.
|
| I hope you will remember this the next time your employer
| asks you to build an AI moderation, credit evaluation, or
| anti-fraud system that will harm much larger numbers of
| innocent people far than one mean website.
| gmd63 wrote:
| To put it into context, 40 billion dollars is about 22,000
| average lifetime earnings of a man in the US.
| brcmthrowaway wrote:
| The Nikola founder, and Anthony Levandowski for that matter
| (seems to have gone under the radar), have got to be the most
| egregious case of corruption and pay-for-play. It's so depressing
| that no one can do anything about it.
| itsankur wrote:
| Levandowski is back with TK at Atoms
| seamossfet wrote:
| Some of these really don't make sense. The implication that
| Cursor is a fraudulent company is a little weird considering they
| actually have real users.
|
| Like sure, is it a VS code fork with agents stapled to it? Yes.
| But are they on the same scale as most of the people mentioned?
| Ehh probably not.
|
| It reads more like a hit piece from someone with a grudge against
| random SF companies than anything else.
| throw03172019 wrote:
| They should have left off the last section. No reason to shame
| founders if no wrong doing
| reaperducer wrote:
| _No reason to shame founders if no wrong doing_
|
| If there's no wrong-doing, then there's nothing of which to
| be ashamed.
| enoint wrote:
| What is a "satirical risk analysis" and am I to believe that
| the bottom section is built from anonymous submissions?
| andy99 wrote:
| Are they being unfairly singled out or do the meet some common
| search criteria? If it's the former I agree it's not really
| fair, if it's the latter it's interesting.
| dancerofaran wrote:
| the stupidity to this is that it takes a meme and treats it like
| facts
|
| yes, numerous 30u30 have committed frauds, and yes this list is a
| paid list. but it's also full of other people who have been duped
| by what this list represents. compounding memes at the expense of
| truth just creates more problems than it solves
| arjun810 wrote:
| it's not a paid list. Or at least it wasn't, can't say with
| certainty it didn't change.
| moomoo11 wrote:
| I wouldn't work for a company where the founder/ceo was younger
| than 35 and had zero real world experience.
| paxys wrote:
| Forbes "30 under 30" actually has like 600 people a year in 20
| categories, and that's just in the USA. Add in international
| lists and the number rises to well over 1000. Since 2011 there
| have probably been, what, 10-15 _thousand_ total "honorees"? ~12
| instances of fraud in total is probably _significantly_ below the
| corporate average.
|
| And the "risk index" is idiotic. Basically just companies the
| creator doesn't like, or is jealous of.
| ForHackernews wrote:
| Some might say a list of "30" that in fact includes thousands
| of people every year is itself a bit fishy.
| enoint wrote:
| There was a running total of $18.5 B in fraud from inductees.
| That's about half of the size of card fraud. Maybe 2% of
| worldwide fraud.
| cmiles8 wrote:
| It's amusing and bemusing how these lists have become so
| associated with grifters and fraudsters.
|
| It's gotten to the point that legit folks are wanting to steer
| clear of them simply because of the negative stigma with being
| seen as an XuX grifter.
| raincole wrote:
| A tranquil heart gives life to the flesh, but envy makes the
| bones rot.
|
| I feel a little bit sad for the author of the site. May they find
| tranquility one day.
| spencerflem wrote:
| Why do you think they're jealous of fraudsters?
| paxys wrote:
| What fraud have any of the companies under "risk index"
| committed?
| spencerflem wrote:
| Why do you think they're jealous of future fraudsters?
|
| But like genuinely, this sort of take confuses me so much.
| It's like, if someone made fun of Putin and the consensus
| was that they're just jealous They don't have a country of
| their own to run.
| afavour wrote:
| I don't know, it reads more like a "told you so" than envy to
| me. I don't get the impression the author wants to be these
| people.
|
| "Told you so" can be quite a tranquil feeling.
| dwedge wrote:
| How old is this site, because most of the reference links are
| dead links
| paxys wrote:
| Probably ran out of tokens halfway through
| Lerc wrote:
| What is a person who makes a site like this thinking about when
| they do it?
|
| What is their motivation? What are they trying to achieve?
| afavour wrote:
| They're pointing out fraud. Is that a bad thing now?
|
| I think it's fair game to point out that the the 30 under 30
| hype list is just that: hype. And there's often very little
| substance underneath hype. And sometimes there's outright
| deceit under it.
| jwpapi wrote:
| Is the formula based on the actual probabilities. I'm pretty sure
| you could do that, but it's not clear it it.
| spullara wrote:
| percentage wise they have more billionaires than frauds on the
| list, at least so far.
| lasky wrote:
| how is making a website like this legal?
| reaperducer wrote:
| _how is making a website like this legal?_
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_...
| rogerkirkness wrote:
| I've met several of the people on the first few pages on the
| watch list, and they are among the sketchiest Silicon Valley
| people I've met. The criteria are plausible.
| czhu12 wrote:
| Would say, the 30 under 30 list has like 600 people, not 30. So
| the fraud rate is quite a bit lower than headlines of seemingly 2
| / 30. Its more like 2 / 600, which is maybe the baseline fraud
| rate?
| throwaway85825 wrote:
| Doesn't matter. It's always been based on vibes, now the vibe
| is fraud.
| oefrha wrote:
| > Risk Index
|
| > Mercor -- 3x on 30u30
|
| Interesting, I only know this company because they're the leading
| spammer hitting my inbox in the AI job board category.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-03-30 23:00 UTC)