"There are a bunch of things that I think are value-destroying for me to talk about, so I’m not going to talk about those."
    • The Snark Urge@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      24 days ago

      Seriously. If everything I said leaked to billions of people, I’d be a comedic phenomenon, a trendsetter, and a terrorist.

  • I3lackshirts94@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    23 days ago

    “There are a bunch of things that I think are value-destroying for me to talk about, so I’m not going to talk about those…”

    Well have you thought about not being a piece of shit 😂

  • I Cast Fist@programming.devEnglish
    1·
    23 days ago

    Mark Zuckerberg did not address Meta’s $25 million settlement with Donald Trump that will see the company paying $22 million for the eventual establishment of the Trump Presidential Library.

    My biggest surprise is that trump wants to establish a presidential library. Probably has some plan to steal the money from there.

    I want to be able to be able to talk about stuff openly, but I am also trying to like, well, we’re trying to build stuff and create value in the world

    PFFFFFFFHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH

  • TransplantedSconie@lemm.eeEnglish
    1·
    23 days ago

    Imagine being worth 229 billion, and you look like that.

    This realities Bond villains are so pathetic looking.

        • iopq@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          23 days ago

          I have the same hair and it’s fucking impossible

          It dries and frizzes immediately. If you don’t have time to care for it daily, it inevitably looks like this.

          • acosmichippo@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            23 days ago

            this isn’t some schmoe like you or me, he’s a billionaire. he can afford a daily stylist, or at least before conference calls.

            • angrystego@lemmy.worldEnglish
              0·
              23 days ago

              It’s ok not to spend time and money on looks. No matter how much money you have. There’s no obligation to look good for anyone. The way he looks is not the problem with him.

              • acosmichippo@lemmy.worldEnglish
                0·
                23 days ago

                of course it’s not “the” problem with him, we are clearly circlejerking here.

                and i’d say as the founder/ceo/face of a company you do owe it to the company, including the employees, to look presentable.

  • M1nds3nd@lemmy.caEnglish
    1·
    23 days ago

    I’m reminded of this:

    The king himself rode a horse and shot arrows at a deer. However, the horse stumbled, causing him to fall off, but he was not injured. Looking around, he said, “Do not let the historians know about this.”

    — The Veritable Records of Taejong, Vol. 7, article 4

  • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    20 days ago

    I hate Facebook and that they will ban people, without notice, unless they record a video selfie from multiple angles, and then still sometimes permanently ban people even then, without a way to pay to prove the person is real or talk to someone or even get a reason for the ban. I also think Facebook is an arm of the government and is not really a company (quasi-governmental) and is basically a corporate rebranding of LifeLog and Zuckerberg probably got a 1600 on his SATs and was recruited to join the government while in high school.

    So that all being said, despite my hatred of Facebook, what he is saying isn’t that illogical.

    Let’s say Zuckerberg personally supports trans rights and thinks Trump is an idiot. He can’t say that in a meeting that will obviously have leaks. It would be “value-destroying.” Say what you want about Zuckerberg, but most people with enough intelligence don’t hate trans people because they understand science and how prenatal hormone conditions and epigenetic conditions means that sometimes internal senses of gender don’t match biological at birth sex. (Musk is the rare exception to this and it seems like his reaction comes from ego and anger about being estranged from his daughter and autism/lack of empathy, and so he’s a weird data point that doesn’t neatly fit if we take his reaction at face value.)

    So let’s say Zuckerberg wants to say “We support trans and gay people, we have to do this so Trump doesn’t go after us to remain profitable and not end up needing to decrease our head count, I hate Trump.” If he said that, someone would immediately leak it, Trump would go Ape Shit, and the company would lose value.

    It’s hard to know for certain if this is what he’s talking about, but if he is, this isn’t really something to fault him on.

    Facebook labeling linux as somehow evil, on the other hand, is a bizarre and shitty thing to do, so fuck Facebook and fuck this asshole who is letting linux be labeled as a cybersecurity threat. I also think Facebook doing this is because government, which has backdoors in Microsoft and Apple OSes, doesn’t like linux and sees it growing in popularity and so I believe the government requested Facebook do this. I can’t fathom a social media company would do this for no reason on their own, it makes no sense, but if Facebook is Lifelog and always has been Lifelog and Zuckerberg gets his orders from someone else, then it would make sense that they implement policies regarding labeling linux as bad to try to keep their backdoors in as many users’ OSes as possible.

    • meeeeetch@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      23 days ago

      He can’t say that in a meeting that will obviously have leaks. It would be “value-destroying.”

      What’s the point of having “Fuck You Money” if you don’t say “Fuck you” when it matters?

      • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        14 days ago

        He may have made a calculation about this not based on money and can’t disclose it without altering the calculation.

        Example:

        Scenario 1: Tell Trump to fuck off for treatment of transgender people. Result: Trump using monopoly power to break up Facebook, truth social increases in power, no way to monitor hate groups effectively

        Scenario 2: Pretend to agree with Trump and move hard right, monitor hate groups, come back slowly center in subtle ways, no rise in Truth Social users, ability to shape acceptance over time

        Even with fuck you money, saying fuck you makes scenario 2 possible. Say what you want avout Zuckerberg, but he’s no idiot. If I as an indifferent person can do a simple decision tree example in 3 seconds in my head, imagine how much he analyzed such a big decision.

        My point is Facebook sucks because they make it almost impossible for users to use Facebook without submitting to surveillance capitalism and ban people without giving them recourse in a mean shitty way. He must be aware of that and for allowing that, he sucks. And as a US company that is likely in bed with surveillance capitalism and the intelligence community, their “private” ways of verifying individuals is unlikely to be private, and they offer no alternative. So he sucks for that, but I’m not sure he specifically sucks for this reason. He’s even heavily implying strategic thinking is requiring him to do things he otherwise wouldn’t and can’t discuss it without altering the outcome.

        Whether the end never justifies the means (same “we won’t vote for Kamala because of Gaza stance” mindset) is better ethically even if impractical is another debate.

  • LillyPip@lemmy.caEnglish
    1·
    23 days ago

    If I’d had to bet whether this was The Onion before clicking this link, someone would be breaking my knees next week.

    This timeline is absurd.