Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will never, ever forgive or forget the absolute amount of censorship and tolerance for punishing “wrongthink” during the lockdown years. Ever. It completely shattered my faith in the government and “Science”. God forbid anybody show any intellectual curiosity if it went against the doomer dogma. And the worst part is the people with the “wrong think” were right. Covid didn’t have a “4% kill rate”. It almost certain…
I don't think saying any of that resulted in being banned because I saw it constantly. Also you are still wrong about most of that. The vaccine is certainly safe and effective, masks definitely help, lockdowns definitely helped the overrun hospitals. Yes there were adverse effects in some of these policies unfortunately.
Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
771–780 of 1001 posts
Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#772It's funny because Facebook's news feed in the last couple years is unusable, filled with AI slop and clickbait. Twitter similarly requires aggressive use of block + mute to eliminate scams, clickbait, and other content I'm not interested in. I don't know if this is due to their changes in moderation policy, or if AI has overwhelmed them, but I vastly preferred the old news feeds
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…
It's funny how different users can have such opposite experiences on the same platform. My Facebook feed contains zero political rage bait or soft-core porn. Mostly I see pictures of kids, pets, and vacations. I assume the difference comes down to who you follow and which posts you like, but the algorithm is totally opaque so who knows?
Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#773It's funny because Facebook's news feed in the last couple years is unusable, filled with AI slop and clickbait. Twitter similarly requires aggressive use of block + mute to eliminate scams, clickbait, and other content I'm not interested in. I don't know if this is due to their changes in moderation policy, or if AI has overwhelmed them, but I vastly preferred the old news feeds
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…
"..friend or relative.." "..nipples.." damn it, so you were the one that triggered years of the worst porn titles
Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#774Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know you have over 100m in assets? One never really knows the worth of something until it's sold. (i.e. try selling a used car. there's what you think it's worth and what you get...) And once the asset is sold, that's a taxable event.
Easy. Share price x number of shares.
> Easy. Share price x number of shares.
This doesn't work if the shares have low-to-zero liquidity, similar to housing or land. In environments where it can take days to find a buyer, the price slippage could be more than the tax itself.
Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#775Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree, Zuck has zero integrity and I think he sees the tea leaves in where things are headed in November and is trying to say he was bullied into making alot of disastrous decisions that he and he only ordered for an administration/party that he personally donated $400M+ to.
He donated 400m to funding election infrastructure. How is that donating to Democrats?
the party that controls election infrastructure is the kingmaker
thusly, if one observes the king that was made, one knows the party who decided
see: GW Bush victory in FL
see: Biden victory in >100% vote cities
Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#776Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What would trying to sell billions in stock at once Let them pay their taxes with stocks. Problem solved.
Ignoring the many other reasons why that would be problematic, what happens when the US government suddenly owns notable (or even controlling) stakes in companies?
> what happens when the US government suddenly owns notable (or even controlling) stakes in companies?
This is effectively similar to nationalization, along with the pros and cons that come with it.
Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#777Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#778Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK, but in that case people shouldn't be allowed to put up securities they own as collateral for loans ( a popular kind of financial engineering among very wealthy people).
> shouldn't be allowed to put up securities they own as collateral for loan Is that because the people making the loan aren't sophisticated enough to price those securities correctly in this context and so are being taken advantage of? > a popular kind of financial engineering among very wealthy people To use assets without a single universal price as collateral? I think everyone does this.
> Is that because the people making the loan aren't sophisticated enough to price those securities correctly in this context and so are being taken advantage of?
No, it's because using stock (and other securities) this way allows them to "convert" the stock into money without actually realizing the gains. Thus they derive benefit from the gains without actually paying capital gains tax.
Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#779I’ll say this to everyone who is so quick to get out the government overreach brush.
I was on tik tok today. I was fed a post that used an AI audio clip of Trump calling republicans dumb and stupid.
People thought it was real. They comment and believe it. The clip has been reused hundreds of time to make new posts. It will reach millions. This is one example.
There is government meddling in social media. It’s not always ours. That’s the MORE concerning part
Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content
#780Earlier quoted context omitted.
> shouldn't be allowed to put up securities they own as collateral for loan Is that because the people making the loan aren't sophisticated enough to price those securities correctly in this context and so are being taken advantage of? > a popular kind of financial engineering among very wealthy people To use assets without a single universal price as collateral? I think everyone does this.
> Is that because the people making the loan aren't sophisticated enough to price those securities correctly in this context and so are being taken advantage of? No, it's because using stock (and other securities) this way allows them to "convert" the stock into money without actually realizing the gains. Thus they derive benefit from the gains without actually paying capital gains tax.
They're not converting anything. If they don't pay back the loan the stock must be surrendered. If the stock does not have the face value required to satisfy the loan more money must be paid in to settle the debt. If the stock loses value you may very well get a call from the bank reducing the size of your loan facility or requiring you to put more collateral into the contract.
They're deriving secondary benefit from ownership and they're paying interest for the facility with the ultimate expectation that they pay back the loan and the stocks never actually trade hands.
This is not much different from any interest bearing account. Should it be that you have to take all your money out of savings and ensure you earn nothing from it if you intend to offer it as collateral on a loan?