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

Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

901–910 of 1001 posts

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

#901

Post by actionfromafar »

alex1138 wrote: post #731
axus wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a choice for which social circle you'd like to view at one time. We could call it "Circles".

By far the biggest thing people remember about Google+ was the hamfisting of it (several people lost their Youtube accounts) and yet people also reported that it was otherwise a good experience (compared to the Facebook feed); one thing Google had to contend with was Facebook not offering access to the social graph so they had to build the network effects by a more difficult route eg Facebook replacing people's email…

If Google had any direction and purpose, it could have kept not fucking up Circles until Facebook (almost inevitably it seems in retrospect) messed up.

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

#902

Post by torlok »

vixen99 wrote: post #845
torlok wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tuckster is an "anti-elite" heir to a fortune who grew up in a castle. The only job he ever had was outrage baiting naive people. People like him are against regulation, but will clap any time big tech is dragged in front of congress. It's all a scam. You're being had. Why are you treating any part of his interviews as valid information.

I wonder if you're incapable of seeing what's amiss with your 'hack' job on Carlson.

Fantastic arguments. You forgot to tip your fedora.

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

#903

Post by jpadkins »

drawkward wrote: post #325
jpadkins wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a coalition that contains RFK Jr, Tulsi Gabbard and Elon Musk are now far right?

[flagged]

Vaccine hesitancy and general distrust of 'big pharma' started in left wing, hippy / naturalist culture in the 1970s. And lawyers suing big corporate pharma companies for harm caused to children is definitely a liberal thing (RFK jr's career profile).

Russian sympathizers were almost always leftwing from the 1940s on. It's only very recently that the media has attempted to flip the script to say that Trump or right wingers are pro Russia. Only gullible people believe this.

And someone who spent their fortune and life focus on fighting climate change through the EV car revolution is somehow right wing?

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

#904

Post by Dalewyn »

stavros wrote: post #886
Dalewyn wrote: post #796

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>some totally random person on my friend list who I’d never interacted with. While the Algorithm(tm) is complete garbage, you could also probably add less Totally Random Persons(tm) to your "friends" list. If Totally Random Persons(tm) are getting added automagically, we have bigger problems.

But that would be the wrong solution to the problem. I should be able to add whomever I want, and then be able to mute them permanently.

I think if you add not-friends to your friends list, the Algorithm(tm) perhaps justifiably recommends things from your friends list, and you get junk recommendations, the problem isn't entirely the Algorithm(tm)'s fault.

You feed the Algorithm(tm) garbage and it returns you garbage, and somehow it's all the Algorithm(tm)'s fault.

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

#905

Post by bryant »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #856
theptip wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

> 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%. All companies eventually go to zero and some of them do it without a lot of notice. How many people in the year 2000 expected Kodak to be bankrupt in a dozen years? But that isn't even the main problem. Suppose you own 51% of your company,…

> Suppose you own 51% of your company, i.e. a controlling interest. The company is doing very well under your leadership -- value doubles. But then you have to pay tax on the unrealized gain. The shares are your main asset so the only way to pay is to sell them. Now you no longer have a majority of the shares and control of the company moves to the soulless Wall St vampire squid which only cares how much money they can extract from your customers by any means necessary.

One of the reasons I'd like this policy even more if the shares were sold to the government and the government is forbidden from voting outside of exceptional (e.g valuation crash over x years) circumstances.

But the reality is that companies play games with voting rights on shares all the time, so your scenario is easily worked around by founders themselves.

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

#906

Post by maxehmookau »

fma wrote: post #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.

The fact that he honestly believes Facebook has any sort of content standard is hilarious anyway.

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

#907

Post by mandmandam »

laidoffamazon wrote: post #898
mandmandam wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... What? Apologies if I'm missing the sarcasm, but Instagram, Twitter, Youtube, Reddit, Pinterest and even LinkedIn all suppressed certain stories, keywords, etc. For Twitter and Google at least we have documents proving Biden admin requests. I think there's a whole lot more, but the point stands regardless. > unless he is lying, he wasn't forced to do this "We could make things real hard for you for four years. We…

> The choice is yours. Correct, the choice was theirs. They probably didn't want to keep spreading ivermectin conspiracy theories, it's bad for advertisers.

You don't find it interesting that both Meta and Google had monopoly lawsuits aimed at them in 2020?

And at the exact same time, the exact same people were "asking" for scientific discussion of many kinds to be shut down across Whatsapp, YouTube, Instagram and Facebook, among many others?

Because it wasn't just Ivermectin. It was the lableak hypothesis, investigating the WIV, following back GOF funding, vaccine contracts, vaccine side-effects, vaccine effectiveness, lockdown effectiveness, natural immunity discussion, etc etc etc; all restricted and suppressed to fit whatever the Biden admin decided.

That's not hyperbole, that's simple and well documented fact. And, as was directly pointed out in this letter/article, the Biden admin wasn't above using lies to shut down politically inconvenient (and true) stories.

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

#908

Post by amrocha »

imgabe wrote: post #899
amrocha wrote: post #870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a stupid argument. Is your issue that the number is too high? Why? What’s the right number? Should government spend 25% percent of GDP? Who cares. Governments shouldn’t aim for a specific number, they should spend enough to make sure full employment is achieved, according to saving desires and the private market’s appetite for investment. Whatever the private market isn’t willing to invest, the governmen…

The government only gets money by skimming off the top of private enterprise. If the percentage is too high then there’s nothing left to skim and the system collapses, so yes we should care what the percentage is and we should want it to be as low as possible. We should be demanding ruthless efficiency from the government, not dreaming up new ways for them to take our stuff.

No, you have no idea how sovereign economies work. Taxes don’t fund government spending. Learn about economics before you complain about the number being too high.

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

#909

Post by shadowgovt »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #804
acdha wrote: post #766

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re thinking of the FBI, who reported to Trump. The Biden campaign reported things like the non-consensual nudes which did not have any justification as a public interest story.

>You’re thinking of the FBI, who reported to Trump. You wrote that I’m sure doing your very best to believe it. Bless your heart.

Out of curiosity, if Trump was President for 4 years and near the end of that term, didn't have control over the FBI (which seems to be what you're insinuating, please forgive me if I've misunderstood you)... Why would anyone want to elect him again?

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

#910

Post by properpopper »

codedokode wrote: post #759
drdaeman wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In Pavel's interview with Tucker Carlson He also said that he doesn't visit Russia anymore, yet a recent FSB leak indicates that he was frequenting there. And before that he heavily marketed Telegram as ad-free forever. And before that there were quite weird populist PR tactics when professional cryptographers pointed out Telegram's crypto is a mess. YMMV, but I wouldn't trust a single word from this guy.

This is not the first time Pavel being not very truthful. I rememeber when he was the CEO of Vkontakte, in 2012 he published a post claiming that he is living a modest life: "I don't own planes, cars or homes. My world is walking or riding the subway and sleeping in a 215 sq ft rental apartment. Those who want to be me would also have to give up meat, alcohol and expensive clothes". And just a year later there were t…

AFAIK all this info was leaked by the enemy of Pavel's brother, they had a conflict over a woman, not saying the information is false

> while driving a Mercedes it's typical for the rich to register their properties to a friend/family/classmate

Post reply on HN