• 7 Posts
  • 73 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 17th, 2024

help-circle








  • 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.











  • Well when I asked DeepSeek, because you can see it thinking, you sort of see it trying to please the user and deal with the censors and political environment lurking in the background, it’s like instead of just thinking it has to sort of do this dance of politeness to not upset the censors. I even cut and pasted information from Wikipedia about it and it was like “no, I need official sources” so I cut and pasted the bibliography part from Wikipedia and it was like “the user is crazy and making up official sources” (jk). It said something else, but it was odd that when even when given overwhelming information, it seemed almost afraid to budge or purposely stupid. It seemed like “official sources” was the slang it used for government-approved information, just like “misinformation” in the US often meant during the Biden administration “not approved by the US administration.” (Although misinformation was sometimes applied to false things, people got banned on Facebook for saying the lab leak theory when saying anything other than “it came from a bat” was misinformation and they had said scientists had done genetic tests proving it came from the bat, gain-of-function covid lab next to the market be damned.)