cjhopman

18 ms·

151.
by cjhopman 7y ago
Note that that quote was already almost 1 month into the Q1 where they lost nearly $1 billion.
152.
by cjhopman 7y ago
Also: "Not by a lot, but I am optimistic about being profitable in Q1 and all quarters going forward."
153.
by cjhopman 7y ago
If you think that's a $10 billion gap, you're delusional.
154.
by cjhopman 7y ago
> SpaceX is killing it on profits SpaceX isn't open about their financials, but all indications are that they are losing money.
155.
by cjhopman 7y ago
> Now the FTC is facing a potentially big delay and a risk of no fine The risk is much higher than that. There's a risk that a court rejects the entire justification for the fine greatly reducing both the ftc's ability to impos
156.
by cjhopman 7y ago
> Facebook earned about $172 billion since 2013. Do you think facebook would have earned $167 billion while behaving legally? Considering the fine seems to be primarily based on something they stopped doing in 2014, yeah, I think they&#x
157.
by cjhopman 7y ago
> Growing ad revenue 30% YoY with users rising 8% YoY means FB is really improving on monetizing its userbase Generally for a service like FB, just by becoming more valuable and useful to its users revenue can increase non-linearly with
158.
by cjhopman 8y ago
SpaceX isn't public or open about their financials, but there's a lot of evidence that they are simply losing money. Ex. they were raising a lot of money last year, profitable companies don't do that. Also read https:/&
159.
by cjhopman 8y ago
Well they didn't do that either. They didn't do anything for it. But don't worry, FSD is just around the corner and the cars have all the hardware necessary, it's just a software problem now. And this time it's diff
160.
by cjhopman 8y ago
> This is what everyone that is not Tesla or SpaceX are doing. If your goal is to make money, I'd follow anyone but Tesla or SpaceX's example.
161.
by cjhopman 8y ago
> so did buyers in the ratio of 6:1 Right, because the choice was between a delivery of the more expensive one within a matter of weeks or paying a large deposit for the cheaper one with an "expected" delivery in months (which
162.
by cjhopman 8y ago
> Tesla has reached enough scale to be more or less sustainable (in the sense that they don't need to be posting losses anymore) I really wish that Tesla had reached that point as that would mean that it's almost possible to pr
163.
by cjhopman 8y ago
You either misinterpreted the article or pulled numbers out of your ass as they are almost 10x off of what the article states. "It was reportedly considering putting an additional 100 billion yen to 150 billion yen ($900 million to $1.
164.
by cjhopman 8y ago
Here's an article discussing it: https://gigaom.com/2011/07/06/who-owns-your-social-graph-you... Look at how angry the commenters there are that facebook would even consider restricting the access that t
165.
by cjhopman 8y ago
The rules already require that films are first publicly exhibited in a theatre, and so you are misrepresenting Spielberg's view. He, for some reason, doesn't want people to be able to see the movies on streaming services for some
166.
by cjhopman 8y ago
Oh please, what could he possibly say or do that would satisfy you.
167.
by cjhopman 8y ago
Not that it doesn't have it's benefits, though. It's just that anytime someone proposes it as a panacea, I feel they must be being either disingenuous or they just completely don't understand what they're talking ab
168.
by cjhopman 8y ago
> it needs less centralization That's a nice sounding platitude. It'd be fucking terrible for privacy and data protection, though.
169.
by cjhopman 8y ago
Yep! If a politician were proposing such regulations, we'd welcome her as a guardian of the people. But fuckin A man, this is mark zuckerberg proposing these things. He's a damn snake.
170.
by cjhopman 8y ago
When outside observers say something, they are the guardians of the people. When zuckerberg says the same thing (or even a stronger pro-regulation stance) he's the devil.
171.
by cjhopman 8y ago
It's incredibly naive to believe that nothing similar would fill that void.
172.
by cjhopman 8y ago
> Also note the timing. This op-ed comes literally one day after Facebook made headlines for "mistakenly deleting" a bunch of Zuckerberg's early posts Under what circumstances is a company evil for not allowing a user to d
173.
by cjhopman 8y ago
Are you joking? Isn't this entire post saying that he believes that he and his company shouldn't be the ones making these rules? That they should be done via a mix of regulation and trusted third parties?
174.
by cjhopman 8y ago
> regulation that makes it illegal to even get/gather/have a huge portion of all the data they amass. Like gdpr on steroids? I think this would ruin a lot of companies and make a lot of really interesting and useful services no
175.
by cjhopman 8y ago
They don't even indiscriminately sell ads. Making that claim is dumbing down the topic.
176.
by cjhopman 8y ago
Right. Because the rules from one inconvenience other people and the rules from the other inconvenience the posters.
177.
by cjhopman 8y ago
> What we really need are federated social networks. If you care about privacy and how your data is used and who has access to it, federated networks are probably the worst. You do get some benefits for the loss of those things, though.
178.
by cjhopman 8y ago
The fact that you don't even recognize that 50k/year is significantly higher than the median income in many of these places (e.g. 38k in much of Green Bay WI https://www.incomebyzipcode.com/wisconsin/54303 ) a
179.
by cjhopman 8y ago
> and continued forward with a program that nobody wants Don't presume to speak so for others.
180.
by cjhopman 8y ago
No, that's something that happened only in DannyB2's mind (I was confused for a moment because DannyB is usually reasonable, the 2 has sure changed him).

More ›