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

Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

staradvertiser.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 195 posts

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#71

Post by samirillian »

aresant wrote: post #24

How do we even judge moves like this? On the one hand this is one in a continued series of "I don't care how it looks" real estate moves by Zuck. EG like his plan last year to build fake houses on 4 zone residential lots around his Palo Alto residence and turn the block into his private compound http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/09/15/palo-alto-mark-zuckerb... And I get it, can you imagine being internationally famous…

Look, donating a small percentage of ill-gotten gains, however impressive the number sounds, does not change anything. At all. How expensive has Facebook's ecosystem of control been to humanity? Surely more than a morsel of that very institution's stock?

And donations are always so ambiguous. For one, I wish someone would attempt to quantify how much less a donated dollar helps than a dollar made at the expense of the population hurts (ounce of prevention vs. pound of cure). For example, what percentage of that donation is going straight to that organization's advertising budget? Moreover, what is Zuckerberg getting in return? Political clout? Further control over the city?

And if this is how he justifies kicking people off their land (which, yes, clearly he is), it simply doesn't add up on the existential scales.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#72

Post by amaks »

jonathankoren wrote: post #55
amaks wrote: post #26

Where is his appropriate extensively liked facebook post on that subject?

I'm sure his staff is crafting a soft focus photo spread on the issue as we type. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-18/this-team...

This explains a lot. Zuck, essentially, is: http://blogs-images.forbes.com/kathleenchaykowski/files/2016...

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#73

Post by refurb »

3131s wrote: post #45
mjfl wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The news story also reaks of a cliche smear-job though. I have a hard time Zuckerberg sits on moneybags in his house cursing the filthy peasants. Seems like it's more just a weird land practice (many people own the land he thought he bought) and he wants some privacy.

> (many people own the land he thought he bought) and he wants some privacy. Then tough luck for him. He should have figured that out before he blew 100 million dollars on it. This "weird land practice" is likely meant to protect native Hawaiian people from being forced out of their homeland which, if this article is accurate, is what Zuckerberg intends to do. EDIT: I did go looking and a few others are reporting on…

This "weird land practice" is likely meant to protect native Hawaiian people from being forced out of their homeland

That seems like wild speculation on your part. Any evidence to back up your claim?

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#74

Post by pyre »

disordinary wrote: post #40
curun1r wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why isn't that enough? According to the article, the owners of the parcels have the right to traverse the land he already bought. From the sound of the article, this is making a mountain out of a molehill. He wants his privacy and, thanks to bizarre land ownership practices in Hawaii, these parcels are fractionally owned by hundreds of individuals making it impossible to make a traditional offer. This legal process…

It's only Bizarre to you, it's not Bizarre to the people who own the property I'm sure. What's Bizarre is being forced to sell land that you've owned for generations.

This sounds like the sort of thing where you have to sue someone to force the court to sort out legalities. Sort of like the RIAA/MPAA suing Joe Does that are associated with an IP to figure out who is on the other end of it.

If Zuck is using the court to force a sale, then it's a total asshole/dick move. If he's using the court to sort out ownership of land so that he knows who he needs to deal with to buy it (as a normal transaction), that's another story.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#75

Post by thr0waway1239 »

"Three Zuckerberg companies — Pilaa International LLC, Northshore Kalo LLC and High Flyer LLC — filed eight quiet title lawsuits Dec. 30 in state Circuit Court on Kauai."

Hmm.. so the man who wants all of us to "open up" on his conglomerate of social networks - sometimes even if we don't want to [1] (it is not for him, you see, it is for this grand vision of connecting the world together) is troubled by a reduction of his privacy.

Even more priceless stuff:

"Defendants have 20 days to respond to the legal complaint after being served with a copy. If they don’t respond, they get no say in the proceeding. If they choose to participate, it could be expensive if they want to be represented by an attorney."

Hmm.. I wonder if the timing of the court filing might have to do with some other major event happening around the 20th of January which might drown out this "not-fake" news. Like, say, the inauguration of the President of the USA?

It is very interesting that by the time this news shows up on HN - the 20 days are already up. Is it possible that FB could have suppressed this news in the name of stopping fake news from spreading? I can't prove that the suppression happened, but can you prove with certainty that it didn't?

The best part in all this is how tuned out FB employees are about these kinds of things. I bet they don't even see the connection between what they claim is good for everyone (a private entity purporting to connect the world as its grand mission and violating all manners of decency in the process) and what they claim is good for their boss (an individual who knows exactly what it is like to be on the receiving end of privacy invasions). "Do as I say, but not as I do". But it is important to show how tuned out they are, because otherwise you can bet they will come back a little while later claiming that they had no idea these things are going on.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12588449

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#76

Post by ryandrake »

cooper12 wrote: post #60
_m8fo wrote: post #47

Is there a historical precedent for those above the peasants, but still below the king, to constantly rationalize and serve as king apologists? I notice an interesting trend with a large chunk of the discussion being centered towards why [rich person's] [behavior] is not [as bad] as you think. Maybe it's because the king enables those above the peasants to retain that position? It's really interesting, actually. Kind…

I have some quotes that might provide insight: > Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires. - purportedly by John Steinbeck > It is a crime for an American to be poor, even though America is a nation of poor. Every other nation has folk traditions of men who were poor but extremely wise and virtuous, and therefore…

An old article, I'd like to see the results today now that America has gone through the latest recessions. But from 2003, "Nineteen percent of Americans say they are in the richest 1 percent and a further 20 percent expect to be someday." [1]

1: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/opinion/the-triumph-of-hop...

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#77

Post by cooper12 »

ryandrake wrote: post #76
cooper12 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have some quotes that might provide insight: > Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires. - purportedly by John Steinbeck > It is a crime for an American to be poor, even though America is a nation of poor. Every other nation has folk traditions of men who were poor but extremely wise and virtuous, and therefore…

An old article, I'd like to see the results today now that America has gone through the latest recessions. But from 2003, "Nineteen percent of Americans say they are in the richest 1 percent and a further 20 percent expect to be someday." [1] 1: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/opinion/the-triumph-of-hop...

Wow thanks for sharing. I'm glad to see that an apocryphal quote can have a source backing it up empirically.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#78

Post by NegativeLatency »

abtinf wrote: post #58
disordinary wrote: post #15

Surely his lawyers informed him of the situation when he bought it. In Hawaii (or the US in general) can people own beaches below the high tide mark? Surely it's impossible to have 100% seclusion anyway as people can land by boat when the tide is low and enjoy at their leisure?

Real property rights vary by state. Here in WA, you can own some beach and, based on my very limited knowledge, there is some process to acquire tideland rights in order to, say, build a dock.

WA beach owernishp is to mean low tide. Not sure how socks work but I know in most places in the places in the Puget Sound won't let you build bulkheads out into the beach anymore to protect the environment.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#79

Post by pyre »

ci5er wrote: post #30
haywardsmyfault wrote: post #2

You could argue some of the land parcels in question are owned by growing numbers of family members with each new generation, and that therefore it's likely some (even most) owners wouldn't utilize the land. However, it's also interesting to digest this situation alongside Oxfam's report [1] on 62 people accumulating more wealth than half the world's population combined. Zuckerberg owns 700 acres of Kauai[2]. Why isn…

> Why isn't that enough? Who is to judge how much is and is not enough? Do you want an international tribunal allocating a "fair and equitable" amount of square meterage of various quality levels of real estate to individuals?

While there may be no legal entity making a decision on the question "how much is enough," people are allowed to make value judgements on the actions of others based on how much they personally think is "enough" for said others.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#80

Post by meanduck »

ryandrake wrote: post #65
_m8fo wrote: post #47

Is there a historical precedent for those above the peasants, but still below the king, to constantly rationalize and serve as king apologists? I notice an interesting trend with a large chunk of the discussion being centered towards why [rich person's] [behavior] is not [as bad] as you think. Maybe it's because the king enables those above the peasants to retain that position? It's really interesting, actually. Kind…

Simple divide-and-conquer. The 1% retain/grow their power by convincing 49.5% of us that the other 49.5% of us are the bad guys.

Your math is little wrong.

    1%: The Politicians, Bureaucrats & Friends.
    19%: The Rich paying with money.
    80%: The Poor paying with freedom.
Guess who takes shelter in tax havens like rich but at the same time pretend to be altruistic to/for poor.
Post reply on HN