I don't think that's really the case here, HN doesn't seem to have many kind words for the makers of sham ICOs. How you get rich matters - if it's from making a huge business that's generally helpful, people admire you much more.

> How you get rich matters

It really doesn't. There is a very narrow set of circumstances that would aversely affect your place in society based on how you earned it.

Just think about how often it actually comes up regarding the wealthier people you may know or have heard about. Your wealthier neighbor.

Odds are you never dug for all the civil litigation they encountered, or the relative morality behind each case or circumstance.

They are just wealthier and society will reward them for that in perpetuity with access to better housing, better schools, better healthcare, and even more capital. End of discussion.

Even simpler, plenty of 9 figure tech folks sold companies that quickly got written off by their acquirers.

People definitely judge someone based on how they made their money. Look at trust fund kids, for a trivial example.

I'm not saying there aren't a number of advantages to being wealthy, there certainly are.

The Bushes made their money smuggling drugs, two presidencies later I’d say they’ve overcome the stigma. Papa Kennedy was hardly a saint, and JFK was alright.

“How you get rich matters...”

Peter Thiel. The Bushes. Bill Gates. George Soros. Warren Buffett. IBM. Bayer.

What's the point you're trying to get across?

How you get rich doesn’t matter to many people, especially those “strivers” like so many here hoping to become rich themselves. People don’t tolerate the likes of Thiel, Weinstein, Etc because they’re decent people... it’s just money and power.

Edit: Do you have a point?