Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 1001 posts

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#411

Post by orangecat »

ragnese wrote: post #337
_heimdall wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd much prefer seeing us close up the tax loop holes than create an even more complex system. Taxing unrealized gains will be extremely complex, and given that they aren't allowing us to deduct unrealized losses its a pretty shitty setup for the taxpayer. We need to drastically simplify our tax code rather than further increase its complexity.

> Taxing unrealized gains will be extremely complex, and given that they aren't allowing us to deduct unrealized losses its a pretty shitty setup for the taxpayer. I pay taxes on the unrealized gains of my house appreciating in value over the years. I'm not arguing one way or the other about whether various wealth tax ideas are good. But, I don't believe that the concept is as infeasible as some are making it out to…

I pay taxes on the unrealized gains of my house appreciating in value over the years.

You pay taxes on the assessed value of your house. It doesn't matter what you paid for it, or how much equity you have in it. It's more of a use tax than a capital gains or wealth tax.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#412

Post by AlbertCory »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #355
AlbertCory wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fourth is a bit more borderline The vast majority of comments on political/social topics fit your description. If you're thinking of the one I'm thinking of (not mine, if it matters), I can't think of any reasonable test that would conclude "this should be dead, but all those others can stay." Edit: it's bigbacaloa's

I agree that the vast majority of comments people would like to make on political/social topics violate the HN rules. Having seen political threads on Reddit, where any genuine insight is buried under a flood of namecalling and polemics, I think that's for the best.

> the vast majority of comments people would like to make on political/social topics violate the HN rules

Correction: delete the "would like to"

Also, comparing this to Reddit is sort of Godwin's Rule transposed to a different domain. "Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick" is pretty much what you're saying.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#413

Post by gwbas1c »

seydor wrote: post #344

Is that a US constitutional violation by the biden government? I guess not because they weren't really forced to. Yet again , putting pressure on media is not negligible

The first amendment specifically uses the word "congress," and the President is not congress.

> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/

From what I understand, the executive branch generally uses the power of persuasion to influence media. There's no legal consequences for failing to comply; but instead the media has to weigh political consequences.

To put it differently, if your social network is used to push conspiracy theories and otherwise undermine democracy, you're going to have a tough time asking for political favors.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#414

Post by mrgoldenbrown »

zooq_ai wrote: post #340
sangnoir wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN allows everyone with sufficient karma to vouch for dead comments (or flag comments), I suspect most of the comment-level moderation you see is crowdsourced to fellow commenters; a still-dead comment means most of those who see choose to keep it dead. HN is awesome because of the rules and moderation (including bans); any unmoderated forum devolves into a cesspit; and it only takes a surprisingly few bad apples to…

The HN crowd like reddit leans massively progressive/democratic. As such any thinking outside normal or contrarian views are massively suppressed. Classic contrarian (to HN) around WFH, Capitalism, Elon Musk, Tesla, Regulation is downvoted and even flagged

I would not call HN progressive. Democratic yes, but Democrat nowadays means centrist at best/leaning right.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#415

Post by hsdropout »

seydor wrote: post #344

Is that a US constitutional violation by the biden government? I guess not because they weren't really forced to. Yet again , putting pressure on media is not negligible

This was recently decided by the US Supreme Court.

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-social-media-biden-...

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#416

Post by TiredOfLife »

Malidir wrote: post #152

In Pavel's interview with Tucker Carlson, he mentions how he (VK) met with Zuckerberg, and he told them new features they were planning. And Zuck nicked them all. Zuck is on a major PR campaign drive, I would not trust a word he says.

The same Pavel that visited Russia more than 50 times since his "exile" in 2014?.

https://istories.media/en/news/2024/08/27/pavel-durov-has-vi...

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#417

Post by giantrobot »

techostritch wrote: post #116

The thing I'm getting out of this Zuckerberg letter is that we've basically learned nothing. It's a nakedly partisan letter designed to signal to Republicans that he's not taking sides. Which I guess is fine, but I'm thinking about Paul Graham's recent tweet about the next round of social networks being designed to be built in to combat trolling, and it makes me think. This time there was valid concern about issues l…

> This time there was valid concern about issues like the lab leak theory being censored on social media

You need to be very clear about what you mean by "lab leak theory" because that term has a number of definitions that are very different.

There's the definition where COVID was the result of gain of function research that leaked from a lab through negligence. There's also a definition that it was an entirely natural virus being studied that was leaked through negligence. Then there's the definition that the virus was "leaked" with malicious intent from the virology lab in Wuhan.

While the definitions are similar they have very different implications. Because social media tends to perform nuance destroying compression of concepts down to sound bites no two individuals using the term "lab leak theory" can be assumed to be using the same definition.

You even have an assumed definition of what you mean when you say "lab leak theory". Of everyone that reads your post your definition doesn't match that of half the audience. Even then, plenty of people claimed to be banned from social media for one reason while the reality they were banned from a network for other (or a combination) of reasons. So even the general statement of people being "social media censoring lab leak theory" elides important information and nuance and derives its validity from third hand accounts.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#418

Post by hnpolicestate »

gruez wrote: post #364
hnpolicestate wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The HN crowd is far right but they would never admit it. Most people are unaware of how political parties shift in composition and ideology over the decades. The contemporary American software engineer resembles the professional class Reagan Republicans who dominated the suburbs in the 80's and 90's.

>The HN crowd is far right ??? Is anyone who isn't a card carrying DSA member "far right"?

Most of that stuff is a LARP.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#419

Post by gosub100 »

swader999 wrote: post #371
lawlessone wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's funny because Facebook's news feed in the last couple years is unusable, filled with AI slop and clickbait. It's brutal. (i know this is my own fault for arguing with once probably) I constantly get recommend stuff about flat earth, portals around the world. It's like this weird toxic mix of new age cult with maga. More generally to all media ... What happens when flat earthers start using AI to generate videos…

There are only a few hundred genuine flat earthers. They aren't a problem. It's more of a problem to tag anyone raising questions that threaten the status quo as 'like those flat earthers'.

I daresay even the "debunkers" are profiting off the misinformation. It doesn't need to be debunked anymore. I think the demand for this material is created by mid-low intelligence level people who want to feel smarter than (those who they perceive to be) "believers", of whom nearly all are, for various reasons, trolls.

Just by repeating the words "flat earth" the debunkers are giving it a platform, and thereby profiting off it.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#420

Post by AlbertCory »

sangnoir wrote: post #349
hnpolicestate wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> HN is not at all "awesome" at moderating content objectively I made no such claim.

actually, you did, although you may have deleted it by now:

"HN is awesome because of the rules and moderation"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41369717

Post reply on HN