Or just delete it and be honest: "Our VP's rowing crew buddy from Harvard who now works at Citadel asked us to shut this down and he's more important than you."
Reminds me of when I and a whole flight's worth of people were waiting hours in line at the airline's service desk to rebook flights after a missed connection. One guy waltzes up and steps right into the front of the line. People object to him pushing in, but the guy stays where he is and says "sorry, I'm business class!". The airline employees let him do it, and just repeat to us: "Sorry, he's business class!" He ge…
quite the difference there, he payed extra to save time, you could too
But emotions of the crowd are understandable, so airlines usually have separate line/service for buisness class
Okay so I completely agree but I want to add something to what’s going on Half the fun of WSB is that it is enormously offensive. The foundation of the community is that a forum talking about stock investing strategies is, at its heart, really dumb. It’s harder than most people can manage to evaluate all the “DD” flying around and any advice other than playing it safe (r/investing) is stupid to take from a rando on a…
Agreed on WSB culture but.... The "real question," imo is not about how FB, discord or reddit handle WSB's culture. It's why have they all decided to act right now, just as this gamestop maneuver is happening? That is the fishy part... and it's too fishy to leave it unaddressed and talk content. Either way, this just shows why we can't have a handful of companies moderating most of the internet under a TOS regime.
Or just delete it and be honest: "Our VP's rowing crew buddy from Harvard who now works at Citadel asked us to shut this down and he's more important than you."
Reminds me of when I and a whole flight's worth of people were waiting hours in line at the airline's service desk to rebook flights after a missed connection. One guy waltzes up and steps right into the front of the line. People object to him pushing in, but the guy stays where he is and says "sorry, I'm business class!". The airline employees let him do it, and just repeat to us: "Sorry, he's business class!" He ge…
Yea, so? How is this the same thing? He paid for that service. It's equivalent to paid support tiers where your query gets answered faster than others. Or is it just fashion now to shit on rich people even when they are playing by the rules?
I’m sure it’s as free as a bird until you begin to criticize Putin ...
Isn't that the irony though? You can continue to use American infrastructure, be it for communication, finance, etc, unless you irritate the wrong people . There are no lack of "Putins" in Anglo countries as well.
Call me when American journalists start getting defenestrated for criticizing the government as they are in Russia.
"adult sexual exploitation" usually refers to revenge porn, but it can also refer to threats of rape. Here's my guess as to what happened. Somebody posted a joke that was, taken literally, a threat or incitement of rape. "I hope you get fucked and don't enjoy it". An admin of the group "liked" or commented on the post. Later, a human labeler determined that the post was "adult sexual exploitation". It was removed. Be…
No! It's a mob of agent provocateurs who are hired to specifically join these groups, post these content, like them and bring it to the top to get it banned.
I think this is a mistake. They already issued one correction from "20-member" to "20,000-member". The author seems to have serious problems with numbers. Look at the first paragraph: > Facebook Inc took down a popular Wall Street discussion group, Robinhood Stock Traders, in a move that its founder on Thursday described as backlash for conversations buoying shares of GameStop Corp and other companies this week. Firs…
Hmm, good point, I didn't think of that possibility. It's a very confusing article, as I mentioned in a different comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25954579
That's what got me confused too, the entire article makes zero sense if it was on Jan 7. Good catch though, I would have never noticed that.
> Facebook obviously isn’t a natural monopoly Why not? It fits the definition from the article. “An industry in which high infrastructural costs and other barriers to entry give the largest supplier in an industry an overwhelming advantage over potential competitors” In case of FB the infrastructural cost is less of an issue, at least not anymore. I think Amazon and Microsoft are capable of hosting at least a dozen F…
Natural monopolies don't have to continuously buy up emerging competitors. Facebook's network effects are strong. But they aren't insurmountable.
Not sure killing competitors is the main reason for FB’s behavior. Their stock price is somewhat linked to their userbase. This alone creates an incentive to buy competitors.
Should privately owned sites be allowed to control what content they display or should they be forced to accept whatever their users post? And we're talking about endpoints, not the carriers represented by ISPs and phone companies. It's funny to me when conservatives talk about the sanctity of private property, and then want to force the owners and publishers of certain sites to have zero control over their own prope…
It's the scale that matters. Once a company starts serving many millions of people, and becomes a nationwide backbone for some type of communications like Twitter, Facebook, Amazon services, email providers, telephone companies, etc. then it needs to be illegal for them to engage in discrimination and censorship based on political ideology. Nobody's saying you can't run a small Federated server on Mastodon, for examp…
Lumping in the phone companies with social media companies is fallacious. The phone companies and ISPs control a finite resource in the physical environment to the exclusion of other companies. Websites are not like this, they are decentralized nodes on a virtual network, the popularity of one node does not impact the capabilities or accessibility of other nodes. Arbitrary standards of popularity aren't a good metric for applying regulations, individual users make their own choices to visit various sites based on their own capricious preferences, nothing is forcing an individual to use a particular site except for their own perceptions on what they site might have to offer them.