Live data from Hacker News

Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

politico.com

781–790 of 1001 posts

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

#781

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He donated 400m to funding election infrastructure. How is that donating to Democrats?

[flagged]

This is an extremely disingenuous and intellectually dishonest strawman of the views that people of the political party that you're attacking actually hold. This shouldn't be on HN:

> Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.

> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#782
I wonder how his wife, a medical doctor feels about letting medical informative spread.

His line "we should not compromise our content standard" tela me he doesn't personally use Facebook. I can't scroll down more than a few screen length before closing the app due to poor quality ads and recommended content. I rarely see posts from my own network.

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

#783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unrealized gains taxes is an extractive and totalitarian tax. Someone is always risking 100% loss until they realize those gains. It's an affront to entrepreneurial risk-taking and it's capricious. It would be just as ridiculous to allow someone to write-off unrealized losses.

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

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

This is emotional pleading, not a serious argument of any sort, based on the core premise of "this person has more money than me, and I don't like that, therefore I should get some".

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

#784

It'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

Why is it called a “newsfeed”? It’s a collection of opinion posts, personal notices, and ads. I’ve never seen any actual news there.

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

#785

It'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 started showing me pictures of women whose nipples were obviously showing through their clothing,

I’m using Facebook wrong

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

#786

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…

Unrealized gains taxes is an extractive and totalitarian tax. Someone is always risking 100% loss until they realize those gains. It's an affront to entrepreneurial risk-taking and it's capricious. It would be just as ridiculous to allow someone to write-off unrealized losses.

The point is that none of these guys are risking 100% of anything. Meta stock is liquid. You can sell it or hedge. You might slip 10% but it’s vanishingly unlikely to lose 100%.

The well-known tax dodge is to avoid realizing gains by borrowing against your stock. Say you pledge $1b as collateral on a loan. If interest rates are lower than your stock appreciation, the loan is free. So you don’t ever need to realize the gains, even though you are unlocking capital.

Of course, in the bear market you could get a margin call and have to liquidate at unfavorable prices (and pay taxes then). But not if you are keeping a big enough buffer.

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

#787

It'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

On Twitter you can at least just switch to the "following" chronological feed and forget that the algorithmic one exists.

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

#788

It'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…

You're probably using it wrong. I never see the stuff people complain about. When one of my half-dozen Facebook friends posts something, Facebook emails me and I click the link for that specific post and don't see any other crap. I also occasionally participate in some local-only groups which don't have political ragebait or soft porn, just local people posting silly things they saw in the street or local marketplace groups where people sell their household junk.

I don't even know how to find this feed people keep talking about.

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

#789
post #488

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. Same experience. Then, after ignoring that, I've started getting posts from mystery people who seem like they could be aquaintences (because hobbies) bu…

> I just want to go back to where you could use facebook to share what you're up to and see what other folks you know are up to; but apparently that's too 00's to hope for. But do folks you know post? I’m under the impression that the slop churned out for clicks are all that’s left.

Over time, fewer and fewer of them post, and they post less and less.

I post a lot less than I used to as well. At least in part this is because my feed is drowning in unwanted noise. Facebook's desparate attempts to wave stuff in my face 'for engagement' drive me away from posting more, so it becomes a vicious circle, driving down engagement, making people post less, round and round we go.

Maybe I'm weird, but if my friends aren't posting much, that's OK, that's what I came here to check. Instead I'm assaulted by noise, quite a lot of it either scammy or offensive.

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

#790

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably those accounts are dead because of repeated rule breaking, not because their specific post in this thread broke the rules. And there might be more dead comments here on average because politics+tech draws a lot of a certain type of commenter(the type of commenter that might get banned)

"Presumably" ?? which ones? How do you know?

It's possible to search for moderator replies (dang, earlier sctb and pg) to specific userIDs with the syntax:

  https://news.ycombinator.com/replies?id=&by=
E.g., dang's replies to bigbacaloa:

https://news.ycombinator.com/replies?id=bigbacaloa&by=dang>

That (presently) turns up two admonishments dating back 11 months and two years: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37423572> and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33132910>.

The first of those (11 months ago) is where the account was banned.

If you have specific questions on accounts, users, sites, comments, posts, etc., which you feel are improperly flagged, killed, or banned, you can always email the mods at hn@ycombinator.com. I do this frequently, usually with suggestions (e.g., title or URL changes), sometimes with questions (earlier today a site which showed up dead, turns out it's a hard paywall, which I eventually tracked down dang's comment on, though not in an easily-searchable way).

Post reply on HN