141–150 of 173 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still nowhere as egregious as his shady attempt to buy out native land in Hawaii through proxy lawsuits: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/17/mark-zuckerb...
Hawaiian land ownership is a fragmented mess and this is not at all unusual. I hate fb as much as the next guy but this was not shady.
I sent Mark a message yesterday on Signal. It was "delivered" but not "read", obviously. Today, I don't see that contact as a Signal user anymore. I see a "Invite to Signal" button on that conversation view. Guess he deleted the account?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"I mean he left the people in their homes." This sounds more akin to a discussion about Oligarchs after the collapse of the Soviet Union than a discussion about an American CEO in California. Kind of eerie, even if you didn't intend it to sound that way.
Not really just kind of proves the point he didn't want people selling houses near him as. " buy now to live next to the. CEO of Facebook" that sounds like a HUGE safety problem for him AND his family.
> sounds like a HUGE safety problem for him AND his family.
You watch too many action movies. No one's going to spend the months of background checks and negotiation and tens of millions of dollars it would take to buy a mansion next to Zuckerthing's just to kidnap him or something.
The threat to rich people are from career criminals, not other rich people.
How dare you suggest Mark Zuckerberg is a hypocrite after said "Privacy is no longer a social norm", and then bought all houses surrounding his one. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/jan/11/facebook-... https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-buys-4-homes...
I don’t see how it is hypocritical. Privacy is not a norm, it is a privilege of people like Zuckerberg.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe I should have said he sounded like a feudal lord, it doesn't matter to me. I wasn't diving into the circumstances, just the phrasing of that last sentence I quoted.
So the transfer of state-owned assets to oligarchs is the significantly comparable as buying four houses and renting them to their owners? Do you even know what happened after the fall of the Soviet Union?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe I should have said he sounded like a feudal lord, it doesn't matter to me. I wasn't diving into the circumstances, just the phrasing of that last sentence I quoted.
So the transfer of state-owned assets to oligarchs is the significantly comparable as buying four houses and renting them to their owners? Do you even know what happened after the fall of the Soviet Union?
A wealthy individual (WI) coming to his neighbors.
WI: "I'm worried your homes might be bought by individuals that affect my privacy, I know you don't intend to move, so let's make a deal that you can still live here and pay rent."
Neighbors: "Ok"
Random YC Comment: "(WI) left them in their homes, rather than reneging on his deal and casting them out of their familial homes to the street."
----
A Feudal Lord (FL) dies and his heir receives the fiefdom.
FL: "You are now my serfs and I've decided you may continue to live here and pay me a percentage of the crop yield, I am a generous lord."
Serf: "OK, m'lord"
Random YC Comment: "(FL) left the peasants in their huts like the generous lord he is."
---
A state industry has been privatized and is now owned by an Oligarch, to include the housing provided to the workers.
Oligarch: "Party land now my land, you may continue to live and work here to provide me profit, I am a generous businessman."
Worker: "ХОРОШО"
Random YC Comment: "The Oligarch left the workers in their housing, as long as it still provided him a profit."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the transfer of state-owned assets to oligarchs is the significantly comparable as buying four houses and renting them to their owners? Do you even know what happened after the fall of the Soviet Union?
Man, you're reading too far into my comment. I was just saying the sentence reads like: A wealthy individual (WI) coming to his neighbors. WI: "I'm worried your homes might be bought by individuals that affect my privacy, I know you don't intend to move, so let's make a deal that you can still live here and pay rent." Neighbors: "Ok" Random YC Comment: "(WI) left them in their homes, rather than reneging on his deal…
They were offered a lease agreement, and they accepted this offer. They were not "left" there.
How dare you suggest Mark Zuckerberg is a hypocrite after said "Privacy is no longer a social norm", and then bought all houses surrounding his one. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/jan/11/facebook-... https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-buys-4-homes...
“Zuckerberg reportedly took action after he learned that a developer wanted to purchase one of his neighbor's homes and use the fact that Zuckerberg lived close by as a marketing tactic. ... Zuckerberg will lease the four homes he just bought back to its current residents.” Not sure how this paints Zuckerberg in a bad light. The bad guy seems to be the developer who was going to use his fame to advertise, thus exposi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really just kind of proves the point he didn't want people selling houses near him as. " buy now to live next to the. CEO of Facebook" that sounds like a HUGE safety problem for him AND his family.
Rich people have existed before today, you know, and yet they didn't do such things. > sounds like a HUGE safety problem for him AND his family. You watch too many action movies. No one's going to spend the months of background checks and negotiation and tens of millions of dollars it would take to buy a mansion next to Zuckerthing's just to kidnap him or something. The threat to rich people are from career criminals…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"I mean he left the people in their homes." This sounds more akin to a discussion about Oligarchs after the collapse of the Soviet Union than a discussion about an American CEO in California. Kind of eerie, even if you didn't intend it to sound that way.
Not really just kind of proves the point he didn't want people selling houses near him as. " buy now to live next to the. CEO of Facebook" that sounds like a HUGE safety problem for him AND his family.