12 ms·

Interesting how they sing a different tune once the other party finally gets certification of the election results, time to get 'cozy' with the new people in po

• taylus 6y ago
  Yep. Fuck zuck, finally deleted my Facebook account because of this.
  • thisisnico 6y ago
    Keep your enemies close.
    • inglor_cz 6y ago
      Wish granted. Facebook and its tracking cookies are close to pretty much everybody who surfs the Web, regardless of having an account or not.
      • strongbond 6y ago
        Can you point to any resources that explain how to eradicate your surfing behavior from Facebook's tracking? I'm sure it's not as simple as clearing cookies and never visiting a Facebook property again.
        • ffpip 6y ago
          You can block facebook domains with uBlock Origin. Or just install https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/facebook-container/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/facebook-cont...
        • caeril 6y ago
          PiHole or a service like NextDNS works very well for this use-case.
  • ausjke 6y ago
    a young Soros in the making, we're indeed ruled by them.
  • themihai 6y ago
    It may sound weird but I believe you have to thank Trump for this. Finally some good things come out of his mandate.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • viro 6y ago
    You deleted your Facebook account, because they banned someone for inciting treason and sedition?
    • ffpip 6y ago
      He deleted his account for the reason stated in the top comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25672752 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25672752) about Facebook is changing their policies, now that Biden has been confirmed as president to suck up for the ad deals.
    • modriano 6y ago
      Probably not because of the ban. Probably for Facebook's relentless facilitation of the person who incited treason and sedition, as well as the cultivation of conspiracy theory groups that produced the insurrectionists.
    • tetrometal 6y ago
      This spin leaves me incredulous. How does Trump inviting a protest equate to "inciting treason and sedition"? Y'all are bonkers.
      • tomc1985 6y ago
        He specifically ordered Pence to throw out the Electoral College result. Pence refused on constitutional grounds. How is that not an attempt at sedition? Never thought I'd have anything nice to say about Pence but pushing back was the right thing to do here. H/T to him To say nothing to his tacit approval of a mob storming the capitol on EC certification day...
        • cryptica 6y ago
          The reality is that we just don't know what happened. We cannot know what happened. Perhaps some nations and companies are just too big and too powerful to exist and people are now starting to realize that.
  • bmarquez 6y ago
    Whatever the reason, I view this as a good thing. Hopefully the news regarding WhatsApp privacy will convince others as well.
• sergiotapia 6y ago
  This just seems like both parties are working together including Trump to have these events be a pressure release valve for all the shit of 2020. A target where people can vent their frustrations and anger, and once Trump leaves get that dopamine hit and simmer down -- until next cycle. If none of the events of the past month happened people would have to face the reality of their situation. Now they can just scream at Trump. Who knows maybe he's being paid handsomely under the table.
  • frockington1 6y ago
    I don't buy in to the conspiracy theories because all of the big players comes out looking terrible. DNC now has to spend most of the first half of Bidens term trying to rebuild the nations confidence. RNC looks like crap because Trump. The only beneficiaries from a political perspective look to be state governments
    • netsharc 6y ago
      > DNC now has to spend most of the first half of Bidens term trying to rebuild the nations confidence. One hopes, but I'd imagine the people living in the alternate reality will just ask "What have the Romans ever done for us?!"[0] [0] Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvPbj9NX0zc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvPbj9NX0zc
• mrtksn 6y ago
  I doubt that these things are ever personal. People in position of power meet all the time and not necessarily with good intentions. Trump got power, Zuckerberg got power and they meet to discuss how to proceed. Trump loses power, Zuckerberg locks down his account because the arrangement is no longer viable. The deal itself could have been anything, maybe Trump threatening to regulate the hell of FB if they don't play ball, maybe Zuckerberg had a good idea on how to get rid of TikTok with the help of Trump in exchange of letting him do his thing. Who knows?
• rohan1024 6y ago
  Also, now this will overshadow the WhatsApp blunder. Great timing.
  • xxpor 6y ago
    Whatsapp doesn't have enough penetration in the US for that to have ever mattered. I'd watch the EU for news on that front.
    • silexia 6y ago
      Most people on Hacker News are entrepreneurs that run their own private businesses. Social media platforms are not some sort of public utility. Social media platforms are private businesses owned by private individuals who can choose who they want to let in and who they want to kick out just like any restaurant or bar or concert hall. If you dislike who a social media platform allows or does not allow, just use a different one. For example, many Trump supporters use parler... A platform which is known to kick off liberal voices. Or better yet, just set up your own blog on your own host and do whatever you want.
      • randlet 6y ago
        > Most people on Hacker News are entrepreneurs that run their own private businesses. I don't think that is true at all. There's definitely lots of business owners here (myself included!) but I don't think it's anywhere close to a majority.
      • bidirectional 6y ago
        > Most people on Hacker News are entrepreneurs that run their own private businesses. Has there been a survey done on this? Because that's not the impression I have at all. Entrepeneurs are obviously over-represented in contrast to the general population, but I doubt they're the majority.
      • alsetmusic 6y ago
        I believe you’re recycling your material: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25673152 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25673152
• tobilocker 6y ago
  First thing that came to mind as well. 100% opportunism 0% conscience.
• oconnor663 6y ago
  There's no meaningful difference between Joe Biden's status yesterday and his status today. I get that pretending otherwise is a good way to frame FB in a negative light, fine, but it's also weirdly close to the deluded thinking of the people who attacked the Capitol building.
  • afavour 6y ago
    No difference for Biden, but a significant difference for the Senate, who staff panels with the power to investigate Facebook.
    • oconnor663 6y ago
      That's a fair point. I don't think it's likely that FB execs were waiting for the results of the Georgia runoffs to decide how to moderate Trump, but it's at least possible that they were. I don't think the same can be said for the certification of electoral votes.
  • jadeddrag 6y ago
    I think there is a meaningful difference as of yesterday. It now looks like Biden will have a cooperative Democratic controlled senate, because of the Georgia results.
• sandworm101 6y ago
  >> time to get 'cozy' with the new people in power and set up those dinners That is the system. Companies that want to make money need to keep on the good side of people in power. But isn't that how democracy works? Better that they adapt to every incoming elected administration than have them hold loyalties to old regimes. Seeing them so regularly bend to the will of voters isn't a horrible thing.
  • coldtea 6y ago
    >Companies that want to make money need to keep on the good side of people in power. But isn't that how democracy works? No, that's how a republic might work. In democracy companies are not allowed to yield such power, and people elected can be revoked at any time....
    • tempodox 6y ago
      What's your definition of “republic” here? You seem to see it as an opposite to democracy. I'd posit that democracy and republic (in the true sense of res publica, “public affair”) cannot be separated.
      • coldtea 6y ago
        >What's your definition of “republic” here? You seem to see it as an opposite to democracy. Yes. Democracy (government by the people) was the ancient Athenian ideal of direct government. Republic (res publica, administration of public "things"/affairs) is the roman inspired version - but it just means that the country is considered to be governed as a whole "public thing" by some body, as opposed to being a thing belonging to the emperor or king, etc. to do as they wish and for private gate). A republic doesn't have to be democratic - a cadre of "wise people" could e.g. govern one to the exclusion of the public at large. Or the public might be given some token participation (like voting for one of several bodies of government, or merely voting for electors to elect the actual government, etc., and/or, common too, voting for people with fixed 4-5 year terms on abstract platforms for the whole term taken wholesale). The discussion is blurred because modern republics (almost everyone) often label themselves democracies because "vote".
• danhak 6y ago
  Yes, this must be it. Must have nothing to do with the fact that he said "You're special, we love you!" to the people laying siege at the U.S. Capitol.
  • lalos 6y ago
    Facebook would happily receive foreign money to cause havoc in this country as long as they make a profit on it, oh wait that actually happened https://thehill.com/policy/technology/358102-franken-blasts-facebook-for-accepting-rubles-for-us-election-ads https://thehill.com/policy/technology/358102-franken-blasts-...
  • levosmetalo 6y ago
    This must have been the first time in history that President of the United States openly supports people violently "fighting for democracy" against "elected president" of the sovereign country. Wait what? But this time it's different, this time it's us / US.
    • SpaceRaccoon 6y ago
      The US vehemently supported protestors seizing the Ukrainian parliament and overthrowing the democratically elected president. American politicians were even present handing out cookies: https://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2013/12/1213-world-Nuland2.jpg?alias=standard_900x600nc https://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2013/12/1213-world-Nuland2....
• sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  Only reason was because he was POTUS. Otherwise he would have been removed long ago. The moment he wasn't potus anymore he was to be removed from these platforms. The consequence of this however will be political division. If you thought the political division was bad now because of 'echo chambers'. Wait until the camps are no longer talking because they arent on the same platforms.
  • TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
    This is what scares me. We're already seeing this start with Parler being conservative Twitter. Youtube clones are already popping up. The only saving grace is that such platforms will have difficulties finding advertisers and thus surviving, but if their movement gains traction then corporations will follow the flow of power/money and jump on board. The issue is not platforms. The issue is the lack of trust in the political system. Deplatforming is just a band-aid.
  • jonathanstrange 6y ago
    No, the effect is the opposite. First of all, they haven't been talking to each other in a constructive way on these platforms anyway, they merely exchange hateful messages. There is no dialogue between those sides on social media, because social media are generally not conducive to reasonable and rational discussion (with exceptions like HN, of course, where there is appropriate moderation). Second, pushing radicals out of mainstream platforms is a good thing because they will go to many different places, break up into smaller fractions, and therefore not be able to reach as many people at once. The division and reality-denial we see today is the result of small minorities reaching to large audiences and looking much larger than they are, thereby allowing radical and violent positions to become seemingly more socially acceptable. It's perfectly fine if people who want to storm the Capitol (or behead Fauci, etc.) get to talk in their own, small little echo chambers. They do that already. Law enforcement is used to infiltrating closed circles and should know how to deal with those who become terrorists.
    • sleepysysadmin 6y ago
      >No, the effect is the opposite. First of all, they haven't been talking to each other in a constructive way on these platforms anyway, they merely exchange hateful messages. So nothing lost? >Second, pushing radicals out of mainstream platforms is a good thing because they will go to many different places, break up into smaller fractions, and therefore not be able to reach as many people at once. The thing about banning people on facebook, twitter, reddit, etc. You just create a new account. Nobody has gone anywhere. When there is a push for different platform like parler, then the migration occurs and there won't be cells. thedonald.win for example just as popular as thedonald was. There's no splintering. Though I can bet you within the next 2 weeks those sites will be taken down. >The division and reality-denial we see today is the result of small minorities reaching to large audiences and looking much larger than they are, thereby allowing radical and violent positions to become seemingly more socially acceptable. To be clear, the political division is not on the republican side. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-divide-1994-2017/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-d... The political divide is on the democrat side. More specifically... it was just the democrats. That's not the case anymore. The republicans just moved to the right increasing the divide. >It's perfectly fine if people who want to storm the Capitol (or behead Fauci, etc.) get to talk in their own, small little echo chambers. They do that already. Law enforcement is used to infiltrating closed circles and should know how to deal with those who become terrorists. That's the thing with reality. Those who arent involved in certain subjects can see it objectively. I'm not american nor am I there. I have never seen the politics so divided in the usa. It WAS the democrats, It's now both. The political divide has never been so bad. What are the consequences?
• rat87 6y ago
  yeah I'm sure this had nothing to do with the attempted coup
  • esja 6y ago
    Genuine request as I've seem this framing a lot and cannot understand it: Can you point to the specific things that occurred which you believe were part of an attempted coup, and why you believe they were?
    • macintux 6y ago
      Trump wanted Pence to violate them constitution and overturn the election. When Pence refused he then went to an angry protest and told them to match the Capitol and fight like hell. The then refused to deploy the National Guard to protect the Capitol and reportedly was thrilled at the fact that the certification was interrupted by the rioters. After much pressure he finally put out a weak statement telling the rioters he loved them and they should go home, but the election was still a fraud. What part of that fails to fall under encouraging an insurrection?
      • esja 6y ago
        A coup requires that power is taken illegally (usually violently), and held. Are you saying this rabble of idiots were intending to take power somehow (what power?), just by occupying a building? How could this have ended with them (or even Trump) in power?
        • cycrutchfield 6y ago
          Did you conveniently ignore that some of the folks who broke into the capitol were armed with spears, clubs and firearms, carrying ziptie handcuffs? If the capitol police were not able to secure the escape of the senators and representatives, what do you imagine might have happened when the mob descended upon them?
          • 6y ago
• dspillett 6y ago
  Exactly. If they wanted any respect for this they should have had the courage to do it a few years ago. As it is it shows moral weakness, not strength. This is at best closing the gate after the horse has bolted, made it to the next county, been hit over on the motorway causing a massive multi-vehicle pile-up which left a fireworks transporting lorry in flames such that its rockets went off setting light to nearby chemical processing facilities.[1] And that is being charitable. This is simply sucking up to the new regime the same way they've effectively sucked up to the old one, on the very day the transition was finally confirmed by all parties. It can't hurt that it will distract some attention away from the bad PR relating to WhatsApp. [1] I look forward to the final stages of the story though: the horse in question declared lame after the accident and processed into glue.
• artiszt 6y ago
  quite right Zuckerboi the greedy one. w/out him and his FB Inc. lot, and that vastly overrated egotist Assange [who never ever has been even close to ethical grounds of, for instance, E. Snowden] the sick-orange cretin HeWas45 never would have made it in the first place just fits to what's been posted here earlier https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25662215 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25662215