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

561–570 of 1001 posts

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

#561

Post by JasserInicide »

hn-89019 wrote: post #368
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.

"Far right" as measured by a hardcore leftie, maybe. If you stand against illegal immigration, criticize superficial DEI "me-too" gestures that do nothing to solve the real issues underneath, or are moderately conservative in any other way, you will have you comments routinely downvoted into oblivion and will be called a Nazi and the second coming of Hitler. Not only in this place, it has become the the norm these da…

I find that HN is generally receptive of criticisms of those things granted you're using enough tact in your post and not just going "I'M SICK OF THESE WOKE JEWISH LEFTISTS RUINING EVERYTHING" in which case go to 4chan and cry there.

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

#562

Post by sbsudbdjd »

imgabe wrote: post #480
andy_ppp wrote: post #109

I wonder if this is coming up just before the election because of the Harris campaign’s suggested policy of capital gains tax on unrealised gains for people who have over $100m in assets? I think this is a great idea personally given what these people are doing to avoid paying tax including taking out loans against their own share portfolios. Worth thinking about what people are willing to do to not pay billions of d…

Taxes are not an automatic good. There are things we want the government to do. It costs some amount of money to do those things. We should figure out what that amount of money is, tax enough for it, and the rest belong to the person who earns it. Why do people assume we always have to give more and more money to the government? What have they done with the $6 trillion they spend every year so far? What evidence is t…

Ppl's obsessions (on both sides) on taxes is so weird.

Governments can fund themselves in numerous ways, not just taxes. Either way you'll pay.

The key issue is do we want a federal government expenditure of 20-25% of the economy? I'd say no.

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

#563

Post by sbsudbdjd »

andy_ppp wrote: post #234
jpadkins wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a coalition that contains RFK Jr, Tulsi Gabbard and Elon Musk are now far right?

I don’t believe any of them think Trump will be a good president.

No, I think they believe the alternatives are far worse.

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

#564

Post by wredue »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #460
BlueTemplar wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like it's the FBI's credibility that is shot - imagine Facebook had done nothing and it HAD been a Russian propaganda operation ?

> HAD been a Russian propaganda operation But it wasn’t. And everyone who looked the videos of Hunter smoking crack, and his text messages discussing Joe Biden involved in business dealings, and his relationship with his 24yo niece knew it wasn’t “Russian Disinformation”. It was obviously real, and hidden from everyone in order to influence the election. It was censorship at request of the government and election int…

None of this stuff was censored from reasonable sources.

Don’t know what to tell ya. If you share breitbart hot takes, expect possible takedown for disinformation.

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

#565

Post by sbsudbdjd »

kmeisthax wrote: post #157
seydor wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if this leads to decrease of censorship, i m not complaining

Tech billionaires kissing up to the far right isn't going to decrease censorship. Maybe make it more palatable to you.

Admitting they withheld pertinent and embarrassing information from the public to protect the government is far-right?

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

#566

Post by andy_ppp »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #509
andy_ppp wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love your consideration for the financial problems of some of the most privileged people in all of human history. I just don’t really care that much if they get a big tax bill (I’m sure they’ll find a way to pay) and for a variety of reasons it will be good for society.

[flagged]

This is a tax on some extremely affluent people who are doing shenanigans to avoid paying capital gains tax. Seriously, communism it is not. Great companies were still built in the US when rich people had to pay capital gains and they still will be if these rich tax avoiders get a big bill they can split over 5 years.

https://www.axios.com/2024/08/23/kamala-harris-unrealized-ca...

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

#567

Post by wredue »

carlosjobim wrote: post #397
iamacyborg wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The challenge is trying to determine who’s legitimately trying to question the science vs who’s a crank.

That is not the challenge, cranks have freedom of speech. There is no such thing as "legitimately" in this question.

There is. People saying “the sun is the main driver of climate change “are not legitimately questioning the science”.

Flat earthers are not “legitimately questioning the science”

This is called JAQing off. “Just Asking Questions”. They’re not. They’re muddying waters, often knowingly.

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

#568

Post by sbsudbdjd »

skepticATX wrote: post #427
kansface wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this is a great idea personally given what these people are doing to avoid paying tax I very strongly believe you to be wrong: 1. Unrealized gains is unworkable. Billionaires will spend tens or hundreds of millions yearly to avoid paying literally billions in taxes because the expected value is net positive. The IRS won't win chasing down money scattered across the globe. This is not a productive use of cap…

Why does no one read the actual proposal before commenting? It specifically states that this only applies to individuals with 80% of their wealth in tradeable assets. No founder is going to lose control because this doesn’t apply to them!

Because that detail, like the $100milliom limit are irrelevant details subject to change. (Most) People have the ability to synthesize issue and are worried of the proposal's fundamental core:

"Do we want the government to tax unrealized gains?"

No. I find it very scary frankly, even though I believe that the top 0.01% of the US population are parasitical and their financial and political clout should be reined in.

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

#569

Post by FireBeyond »

chrisco255 wrote: post #231
wodenokoto wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zuckerberg vs trump, would also pretty much be Facebook vs x

Trump's not going to be able to run for a third term.

Well, he's also on video recently at a church saying, "I need you to come out and vote for me. And if things work out the way we want, you won't need to vote again."

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

#570

Post by drdaeman »

jaykru wrote: post #540
drdaeman wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In Pavel's interview with Tucker Carlson He also said that he doesn't visit Russia anymore, yet a recent FSB leak indicates that he was frequenting there. And before that he heavily marketed Telegram as ad-free forever. And before that there were quite weird populist PR tactics when professional cryptographers pointed out Telegram's crypto is a mess. YMMV, but I wouldn't trust a single word from this guy.

> Telegram's crypto is a mess Telegram's crypto may be weird, as the professional cryptographers you allude to have pointed out; I don't know, not being a cryptography expert. But MTProto 2.0 has been shown to enjoy many nice security properties (including a version of forward secrecy, though one afaik not as good as that enjoyed by Signal): formal proofs available here https://github.com/miculan/telegram-mtproto2-ve…

It used to have issues, they have improved since, but I don't consider Telegram to be encrypted or private (and I'm also not a crypto expert, so the details elude me anyway) so I haven't really kept track of this.

Honestly, the issue was not about their crypto at all, but about the attitude and how they reacted. It's literally as if someone says "dude, I know a thing about crypto and you might've made a mistake there" and Pavel immediately goes into offensive defense, preaching how they have the best ACM champion PhDs and shifting the burden of proof, basically a canonical Putin/Trump-style of evading an argument.

That's what makes me wary of this guy, not his product.

Post reply on HN