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

Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

dispatch.techoversight.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 342 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#91

Post by buellerbueller »

4ggr0 wrote: post #82
jaybyrd wrote: post #64

i remember when i was a kid i used to think if you broke the law you went to jail. i miss being a kid.....

the financier's island files gave me a huge dose of this. i always got the feeling that laws don't really matter for truly rich people, now i'm convinced. which means that we need different methods than law to handle such people.

We just need to elect a wave of politicians that will hold the wealthy accountable. That's the single issue we should all be voting on at the moment. Once the lawless are brought to heel, and their wealth kicked out of politics forever, then we can actually start solving the other problems that face us.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#92

Post by butlike »

Larrikin wrote: post #65
marginalia_nu wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They threw Epstein in prison. Maxwell is doing time now as well. Bernie Madoff got 150 years, died in the same prison R Kelly is doing a 31 year stint in.

Black men are usually punished no matter how much money they have. Rich Women have a lower threshold than rich white men, if their crimes hurt or have the potential to hurt rich people. Holmes was punished for defrauding the investors, not the people who took her fake blood tests.

You don't address Epstein or Madoff in your retort.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#93

Post by delichon »

Fulgidus wrote: post #62
koakuma-chan wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

congresspersons

congresspigs

Your slur on pigs is unkind. What have they done to you? I knew a pig and she never lied to me or passed legislation. She did accept a contribution from a lobbyist though.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#94

Post by mystraline »

khalic wrote: post #86
mystraline wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely, yes. When China's civil war with Chaing Kai-Shek happened, the communists won. After that, landlords, business owners, and industrial owners were presented with an ultimaturm, of which many took. And that was to return to being a worker, or be jailed. Given how capitalists amass wealth and options to evade all governments, this does seem like a valid solution. A modern viewing is after Jack Ma (CEO of Ali…

lol are you seriously trying to frame the Chinese cultural revolution as something good? It was an anti-science, barbaric and corrupt movement

Even the Chinese admit that the anti-science was a wrong choice. So were the witch-hunts for perceived-West-ness.

But it was "has anybody dealt with monied elite". I was pointing out a case in point that there was a situation. And the choice to the elite was "be a worker, or be jailed".

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#96

Post by JLCarveth »

bronco21016 wrote: post #39

I haven't paid a lot of attention to this issue but after reading some of the statements in the article I can't help but agree with Tech Oversight's conclusions. It's just anecdotal but recently, when mindlessly scrolling reels, (yes, bad enough already) I came across a reel that was unquestionably sexually explicit (in USA, I think policy varies on locale). I reported the account and reel because after clicking on t…

I've reported direct threats of violence and Instagram told me it wasn't against their policies.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#97

Post by kakacik »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #35

Remember when he bought IG and one of the conditions was that he not merge IG / FB but its definitely merged behind the scenes. IG somehow knows your FB and vice versa. Also, when one goes offline, both go offline.

He is a manipulative POS from the start (remember the 'dumb f_cks' quote? How much more do you need to know about the person which is still the same person we discuss?). High level and high functioning sociopath.

So is everybody else up there regardless of the name of the company, only their quality of PR and luck varies. Now are you happy that most of this forum works for similar or worse people, can you internally accept that and come back to work like nothing is happening? Or do you need to invent a bit of alternate reality where its not your/your company case somehow and you are on good moral mission because XYZ?

Not that many people can actually properly do this from my experience, most need to somehow feel they are on the good side of history even if they were doing/helping very questionable stuff to be polite. Just one small example - companies living from ads.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#98

Post by thmsths »

buellerbueller wrote: post #91
4ggr0 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the financier's island files gave me a huge dose of this. i always got the feeling that laws don't really matter for truly rich people, now i'm convinced. which means that we need different methods than law to handle such people.

We just need to elect a wave of politicians that will hold the wealthy accountable. That's the single issue we should all be voting on at the moment. Once the lawless are brought to heel, and their wealth kicked out of politics forever, then we can actually start solving the other problems that face us.

Or maybe stop allowing people to pay for their own legal defense? Public defenders for everyone and then we will indeed all be equals before the law.

Billionaires being able to outspend the prosecution by such a wide margin that they can turn the legal battle into a war of attrition that they are likely to win is a complete travesty of justice. But I am not holding my breath on that one, too many people benefiting from the current system.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#99

Post by thaumasiotes »

Larrikin wrote: post #65
marginalia_nu wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They threw Epstein in prison. Maxwell is doing time now as well. Bernie Madoff got 150 years, died in the same prison R Kelly is doing a 31 year stint in.

Black men are usually punished no matter how much money they have. Rich Women have a lower threshold than rich white men, if their crimes hurt or have the potential to hurt rich people. Holmes was punished for defrauding the investors, not the people who took her fake blood tests.

> Holmes was punished for defrauding the investors, not the people who took her fake blood tests.

There's more to this than you imply. I'm unfamiliar with the details, so take this comment more as a discussion of a hypothetical (that is phrased as if it was all factual) than as fact.

1. The formal charge was defrauding the investors. But that isn't necessarily the behavior that got her charged. If you're a prosecutor looking to score some political points, you prosecute an outrageous person over a crime you can convict them on, but the crime doesn't have to be outrageous itself.

2. If someone had been harmed by a fake blood test ("the test said no cancer, but there was cancer!"), that would have made it into the prosecution. As you note here, it makes the prosecutor look better and Holmes look worse.

3. But if you don't rely on the results of an experimental blood test and suffer harm, there is no injury to prosecute for. Theoretically people who paid for experimental tests could sue for a refund.

4. Holmes' conduct, restricted only to defrauding investors, was outrageous and easily merited a hefty prison sentence.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony

#100

Post by 4ggr0 »

buellerbueller wrote: post #91
4ggr0 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the financier's island files gave me a huge dose of this. i always got the feeling that laws don't really matter for truly rich people, now i'm convinced. which means that we need different methods than law to handle such people.

We just need to elect a wave of politicians that will hold the wealthy accountable. That's the single issue we should all be voting on at the moment. Once the lawless are brought to heel, and their wealth kicked out of politics forever, then we can actually start solving the other problems that face us.

i wish that would be the solution. mind you, i am not only talking about the sexual abuse. there's also corruption, tax evasion(excuse me, *optimization of course), closed-door deals, arrangements etc.

i unfortunately don't believe we'll ever be able to vote these things away. what do votes do if we have over 3000 billionaires worldwide who treat the world like their playground. add to the 3000 the other thousands of people who "only" have 100M+.

good luck finding voters when the people with money can launch huge marketing(aka. propaganda) campaigns and control virtually every social media platform, news site, radio- and tv channel, podcasts and what have you.

something i only recently heard about and am thinking a lot about is, 'The purpose of a system is what it does'.

JE feels like a symptom, not a disease.

Post reply on HN