I do just want to focus on the 'even without the politics' asterisk though because sometimes there is a risk people think everyone on x side (x meaning 'a given side', not x.com) is wrong
You can claim Elon bought x as some sort of power trip. Fine. Willing to entertain it, I have no dog in the fight. I'm not a member of the Elon fan club. And yet Twitter (under Dorsey though I don't think he was involved) was banning tons of people under guises of 'misinfo' that wasn't misinfo
And also even if they never had Onavo you have Zuck furiously backpedaling in an email about I'm not saaaaaaaying we should acquire IG to wipe them out from the landscape of competition, but........
And then you have the WA founder (Acton) famously saying delete facebook
Some acquisitions make the product better or are altruistic. Zuck's war chest isn't one of them
Yes and then Facebook did everything they could to subvert granular privacy controls (Myspace was decent, it had a wall but that was about it) which is of paramount importance for people with real safety issues
FB would have been invented. It's just another layer of authentication anyway. Myspace was an interesting experiment for its time
...Comparisons of Tom to Zuck are rife I'm aware but somehow Myspace isn't known for "they trust me, dumb fucks"
A common one is "users don't care about privacy. that's why they use facebook. [zuckerberg was right?]"
No, you silly, silly people. People want to use products that allow them to communicate or reconnect with people or ...
They don't 'want' constantly changing privacy settings or changing TOS. If this is the best HN can come up with, ostensibly filled with S Valley people... well, it says a lot
I'm sorry if it's a non sequitur but I feel even beyond superintelligence/AI/LLM whatever of the last few years... they've always done this, it's always been somewhat hamfisted
Examples abound of "I reported Nazi hate page. Didn't violate community guidelines. I called my friend a jerk, jokingly, got a month ban
For years. Not restricted to when ChatGPT et al arrived on the scene
(Because, AI in theory makes sense. If you want to monitor things at scale you might use AI - however that's defined - to make your workload easier. When is an account being hijacked? When are bad actors infiltrating the system? Or whatever)
It should also be said Niemann has also had incredibly good results since the whole thing
So it casts doubt on what Magnus said somewhat
(Of course, on Rogan, I think, Magnus defended the allegations. And of course he's world's strongest player for a reason. Other young players have beaten himm before such as Esipenko and he never said anything like that)
- Paul Morphy, lawyer (I think). One of... well. Greatest of all time discussions are hard (times evolve) but he murdered his competition relative to his time
Naroditsky played a match against Magnus that he streamed where it ended (this a 1+0 time control; yes you can cheat in bullet but it's clear he wasn't) in a 40-40 tie, this after he lost the first game from being distracted getting his stream set up properly
He was one of the world's best bullet and blitz players, it was obvious he was never cheating. Kramnik was apparently one of his heroes. It was despicable behavior