Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

Post by jazzyjackson » Tue, Aug 27, 2024, 8:39 PM UTC

Gud wrote: post #400

silverquiet wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few years back it started showing me obvious political ragebait. I ignored it and then it started showing me pictures of women whose nipples were obviously showing through their clothing, which was an improvement, but still not the reason I signed up for Facebook. I've always understood it as the algorithm is looking for engagement and will try some lowest common denominator tactics to engage in it. As someone who…

That Facebook would turn into a soft core porn site was pretty unexpected, at least for me.

Post by _heimdall » Tue, Aug 27, 2024, 8:41 PM UTC

VirusNewbie wrote: post #599

ragnese wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Property taxes exist because we want to tax externalities like land use. Taxing fake wealth because you own a company and some VC assigns it a valuation is insane. Why should you dilute your ownership share just because of some arbitrary number?

Post by moosey » Tue, Aug 27, 2024, 8:41 PM UTC

mypastself wrote: post #69

toofy wrote: post #60

here we go again. another election cycle where some of the loudest voices with some of the largest platforms ever in history will be declaring they’re not being allowed to speak. the reality is, they’re loud, they have easier and larger access to more people than anyone ever in history. the reality is also that they’re just mad people speak back to them. people talking back to them is what they’re really upset about.…

Did Zuckerberg himself support conspiracy theories? Or does he regret succumbing to government requests for censoring that type of content? Sounds to me like he wants to allow certain kinds of speech on his platform, regardless of whether or not he personally agrees with them.

Post by alxmng » Tue, Aug 27, 2024, 8:43 PM UTC

this_user wrote: post #321

kjkjadksj wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well when you have over 100m in assets in your pile of gold in the dragon lair, its time to be extractive.

Nobody with assets over 100m has a "pile of gold", as you put it. Those assets are always productively invested in some form or another. But you would prefer that those investments be pulled, because the government are clearly much better at employing those assets productively?

Post by muaytimbo » Tue, Aug 27, 2024, 8:44 PM UTC

kjkjadksj wrote: post #402

this_user wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody with assets over 100m has a "pile of gold", as you put it. Those assets are always productively invested in some form or another. But you would prefer that those investments be pulled, because the government are clearly much better at employing those assets productively?

Its not a question of who is better at managing money but more who needs benefit in our society. The government supports welfare programs. Someone throwing 100m in the market does not unless they are taxed to do so.