36 Burst results for "Mark Zuckerberg"
Fresh update on "mark zuckerberg" discussed on Masters in Business
"Is protect the legitimate rights of private property owners by telling them they don't have to have someone walk into their establishment, but they concealed weapon. The revamp came as the Supreme Court ruled that most people have a right to carry a handgun for personal protection. The remainder of the cryptocurrency project that meta platforms founder Mark Zuckerberg took a beating over from Congress is officially shutting down. The story from Bloomberg's Charlie pellet. The service says meta's Novi pilot, a money transfer service using the company's own cryptocurrency digital wallet will end on September 1st. The company says both the Novi app and Novi on WhatsApp will no longer be available, beginning July 21st users will no longer be able to add money to their accounts, nova's advising users to withdraw their balance quote as soon as possible. Bloomberg's Charlie poet. Global news 24 hours a day on air and on Bloomberg quicktake powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. I'm Suzanne Palmer. This is Bloomberg. This is masters in business with Barry riddles on Bloomberg radio. I'm Barry Ritz, you're listening to masters and business on Bloomberg radio, my extra special guest this week is someone I've known for a long time. Perth toll is the founder of the life and liberty indexes, she is also the sponsor of the freedom 100 emerging markets ETF, it's a first of its kind strategy using personal and economic freedom metrics as key factors in driving the investing process Perth has lived in Beijing and Hong Kong. She currently lives in Texas and her experiences overseas is what helped lead to the freedom and liberty indexes, Perth toll welcome to Bloomberg. Thank you for having me, Barry. Let's start with the basic inspiration. I love the concept and it's amazing nobody thought of this before previous to you. What was the inspiration for the life and liberty indexes? So the seed for the idea was planted when I went back and lived in Hong Kong after college. I was born in Beijing and I grew up in both China and the U.S. going back and forth between the two countries. After college, I went and lived in Hong Kong for about a year, reconnecting with my dad's side of the family. And while I was there, I traveled to the mainland to Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and I saw things that as a person who grew up in a free society mostly in my formative years, that shocked me, and I realized that my life would have been very different. Had I stayed in China for my entire childhood and as opposed to having come to the United States. So it made a difference in my life. And I realized that it was freedom that made that difference. Let's talk a little bit about both personal and economic freedom. How do you use these metrics as creating an index, which the ETF is based on? So the metrics that we use come from third party think tanks, the Cato institute and the Fraser institute. And this keeps all the metrics completely quantitative and independent. So we think it's very important to have metrics that are robust that are independent and that our quantitative. And so the Cato in Fraser dataset that has the human freedom metrics encompasses both personal and economic freedoms and they rank a 165 countries in the world on these 79 different metrics. We take the 27 country emerging markets universe and just look at those countries. And those scores, for those countries based on the 79 metrics, is the primary factor that goes into our country waiting. All right, so you have 27 EM countries. Yes. You're looking at the freest ones in terms of economic freedom and personal liberty, and then from that list, how do you go about selecting the companies from within each country? Yeah, so let me just run down the whole process just quickly for you here. So first we have those 27 countries and currently we're using the same country set as MSCI because most of our clients do benchmark to MSCI. Now we're not bound by that though. So in the future, we may add or subtract certain countries from that universe. Right now, it's the same as MSCI. First, actually, we have that universe. We look at which countries are actually big enough and tradable enough to be in an ETF. Because this was always designed to be an ETF. So you need liquidity and volume and the ability to get money in and out of the country. Yes. But mostly we're looking at the market cap of the country here. As a ratio to world market cap. If you don't meet our minimum ratio, then you're out even if you're very free. So this actually eliminates very free markets like Czech Republic, which is too small. Peru, which is not liquid enough. And it also eliminates some very unfree markets like Egypt because of size. So once we have those eliminations based on market cap ratios and just to clarify, when you say size, you know what I mean size of the country, you mean the size of the companies, the market cap relevance. The market cap in the country. So you don't want micro caps correct in your index. So we want to keep a very liquid and very tradable. So once we have those countries eliminated, then we have about 18 countries left in the eligible universe. And these are the countries on which we apply the freedom weights. It's a 100% freedom weighted. It's not a tilt, and it's not in an overlay. And the reason why we do that is because with market capitalization weighting, which is the standard for most indexes, including emerging markets, you end up with a lot of autocracies with this universe. Like China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, turkey, Egypt, and so forth. So by freedom waiting, instead of market cap waiting, we're seeking to solve that problem of these autocracy heavy concentrations in the emerging market space. And so we created this for people who want to have that exposure to emerging markets, but without funding, autocracies. So there's no, we've never had any China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, turkey, and so forth. Because of freedom waiting, not because we arbitrarily excluded any country. But it's just a natural result of that freedom waiting. So you have the set of 27 countries in MSCI that gets reduced to 18 by size. Right. And you've got to be thousands of potential companies within those 18 countries. How many do you select and how do you get there? So most important part once we have those 18, we do freedom weight those 18 countries as part of that process, the worst offenders are excluded so the lowest scores are excluded out in this process. And the best of those 18 and typically it's between ten and 11 countries are included in the index. And that is a completely objective process. That's a rule space, and I my subject of opinion doesn't factor into that at all. So now you're down to ten or 11 countries, how do you take how many companies do you take from each of those countries? Yeah, so we take the top ten largest, most liquid companies in each country that is not a state owned enterprise. And that's the only thing that we do on the security level. So we're just taking the largest, most liquid companies that are non state owned. And
NPR's Rage Over Laws That Stop Individuals From Infiltrating Elections
"Here's an interesting headline in NPR, private funding saved a 2020 election. Now some GOP led states are banning it. This article by miles parks, raises the immediate question. How can private funding save an election? You have an election. Elections, by the way, is supposed to be run by, I shouldn't just say the government, but by the states themselves. Using state money. They're not supposed to be vulnerable to private funding for the simple reason that private funding comes with private leverage and private leverage can lead to control manipulation, even the takeover of an election process. Now the point here is that NPR knows that this is in fact kind of what happened, at least in certain key places, like Wisconsin, in the 2020 election. It was so brazen. It was so outrageous that no one even thought to pass laws against it. And so Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan put in almost half a $1 billion. Other people put in money as well, and then using front groups, these so called nonprofits. They were able to go to election offices and essentially say, listen, we'll give you money, but on the condition that you let our people in to help run things. Wow. So talk about manipulation of an election by private individuals using the pocketbook. I mean, here are the left rails about campaign finally campaign finance laws, big money has too big a role in the election. Dinesh, you gave $20,000 over the campaign finance limit. It's a real pity you aren't locked up for two full years for that. Your contaminating democracy, but somehow, here it comes to Mark Zuckerberg when I'm talking about $20,000 when I'm talking about $200,000, we're talking about $400 million.
Javier Olivan, who's replacing Sheryl Sandberg at Meta, built his career on international expansion
"A longtime executive at Facebook owner meta is stepping down Cheryl Sandberg the number two executive at meta has announced in a Facebook post that she's resigning Sandberg has been chief operating officer for 14 years After joining the company in 2008 four years before Facebook went public She did not announce any future plans only saying that she's ready for the next chapter in her life CEO Mark Zuckerberg setting his own Facebook post that he doesn't plan to replace Sandberg in the company's existing structure
David Zurawik: Elon Musk Buying Twitter Is Dangerous
"Listen to CNN contributor David juro wick with Brian stelter yesterday on CNN. They're reacting to Elon Musk purchasing Twitter and fulfilling his promise of free speech on that platform, free speech, terrifies them. You don't believe me? Listen to this. I think there's a bigger problem that when we focus on the personalities of people like Elon Musk and people say, oh, I think he learns thinking this or that. There's a bigger problem here about how we are going to control the channels of communication in this country. In 1927, we had the radioactive 1934, the communications act. Congress stepped in. We made rules. FCC wasn't great, but it's still regulating the broadcast industry. You can't use vulgar language. You can't do all these things with speech. We gave over our mount star airwaves. There are Internet waves to Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk. And we are in so much trouble because those guys believe in making money. We've already seen that with the 2016 election in Zuckerberg when he was taken rubles for ads from Russia and say, oh, I think it's crazy to think they had any influence on this election. Musk is the same. Musk doesn't want, you know, he's upset with the SEC, tried to quote dare they question him. You know what I'm saying? This is dangerous. We can't think anymore in this country. We don't have people. No, I'm serious. We don't have people in Congress who can make regulations that can make it work. I think we can look to the Western countries in Europe for how they are trying to limit it. But you need you need controls on this. You need regulation. You can not let these guys control discourse in this country or we are headed to hell.
Dinesh D'Souza: '2000 Mules' Shows What Happens With Ballot Drop Boxes
"And this is important to expose this not just to show what happened in the 2020 election although that would be enough But this is why the Democrats keep demanding to have these drop boxes no changes to what took place earlier In fact to nationalize this process in every State of the Union isn't that correct Yeah you've stated it beautifully They want to legalize the frog And so movies like mine can't really be made because I'm not exposing a crime because they've made it now legal The other thing is that when people think about Mark Zuckerberg they think that these cities and counties wanted to have the drop boxes and Zuckerberg just gallantly said I'll pay for it But no what Zuckerberg and his cronies did is they went to the cities and they said listen we got a whole bunch of money but you don't get any of it If you don't install all these drop boxes particularly in these heavily democratic areas So what I'm seeing is that Zuckerberg and his kind of front groups used financial muscle to get these cities and counties to establish these drop boxes without which by the way the mules wouldn't have any place to go to drop off all these fraudulent ballots
Hans Von Spakovsky: The Purpose of the Hatch Act
"In fact I've given her name I think it's zuck buck's two Because remember what happened at what happened in the 2020 election was Mark Zuckerberg and these other liberals funneled $450 million almost exclusively into big democratic densely populated urban cities and areas to basically move the get out the vote campaign into government election offices because that's where the money went Well the same people who engineered that are now in control in the Biden White House And so Biden almost as soon as he gets in issues this executive order ordering All executive cabinet agencies and offices to prepare a plan to enhance voter registration in the next election And I think what they've done is basically now moved to get out the vote campaign into federal government offices And look Dan here's a problem with this of course And you look you know this remember when you were a Secret Service agent you had to operate right under the patch act That's the same Federal employees officials can engage in political activity but a lot of people are forgotten The reason that law was passed in 1939 was because of all these scandals it turned out that in the 1938 congressional elections like the ones we are coming up are these federal Roosevelt government officials particularly in the works progress administration We're using their power over federal benefits
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on The Vergecast
"If he backs out? Because it hasn't changed. It didn't change when he announced he was going to buy it. Well, there still has premium in there from when he first disclosed his stake. It would go 30 or below for sure. Yeah. So Alex, I think that those are two possible outcomes. I do not think that they are the only possible outcomes. And again, the reason I don't think so is because now Twitter is in play. And it is an incredibly influential service for all that it is like all versus all fighting and very unpleasant if you have more than about 2000 followers. Because whoever controls Twitter controls a lot of what happens on cable news. And to some degree, buying Twitter, there was this comparison that I saw on Twitter. But about Bezos buying The Washington Post and Musk buying Twitter. And they are actually pretty comparable. The Washington Post, I think, Bezos has been a great steward of. But with Twitter, what you're controlling is essentially the comments section for the entire Internet. And that's really powerful. So if I'm at another tech company, I'm like calling my lawyers to see what I can buy without triggering antitrust. This was the Mark Cuban tweet. Yeah. Because that actually is a very, very powerful tool for marketing for culture making for all of those things. And I think that there are probably people out there who are interested in it and at this point, if you're the board, maybe you're looking for a white knight. So we might see another player emerge. Oh no, you're totally right. I would not discount the power if you go for some of this. If you're one of those players, you get to put one over on Elon. That's fun. There's more interest in that than I think you would imagine. No, I guarantee you if the year was 2015 and antitrust scrutiny had not reached what it was. Mark Zuckerberg has a blank check right now. Absolutely. What he did for WhatsApp, he put this like zuck multiple on it that made no sense like he did for Instagram like he's done for all the deals he cares about. He'd buy Twitter for a $100 billion if he could get it right. But he's also just a rich guy. Why isn't he just staking someone else to do it? There's a lot of that out there, right? You actually do know who we never got to this, but you know who doesn't have all the cash to this is Elon Musk. He does not. No, he's not liquid. And he's already got a bunch of loans against his shares. Tesla shares. Yeah. Maybe he'll just like, I don't know. So advertising the side of SpaceX rockets like race funds. We've gone way over on this segment. Liz, thank you so much. I imagine you're going to be back to talk about this a few times over the next few weeks. Listen, you know, I got relaxed, right? After 2018, things calmed down and I was like, okay, okay. I don't have to like, I don't have to constantly pay attention to Elon. I can take the alerts off his tweets. And now I regret it because the Elon cycle has started again. So I'm sure we're going to be talking about this again. Liz, every now and again, I would get a text message from Liz. In the depths of early on cycles, here's Elon again. In the Elon Musk war room would spin up in slack. Here we are. That's great. All right, we got to take a break. Addy Robertson is going to come and join us to talk about content moderation because that's another whole side of this. Thank.
The Right, the Left, and the Ideological Bubbles
"Right, now you're a progressive from Silicon Valley. And I've been up there. I've had dinner with Mark Zuckerberg at his house. I'm one of the token conserves that show up there and talk to people up there occasionally. And I think dignity in a digital age may be the best case for the progressive agenda that I've read. I'm not persuaded. But I'm curious if the, if you agree with me, I think that the overwhelming oppression of the left in Silicon Valley means conformity and thinking that it drives out center right points of view. Do you agree with me that the mind think up there is a deep blue bubble? Yeah, I believe in this country. We have a problem that we're all in our bubbles. And that we're unwilling in certain cases to subject our ideas to scrutiny. I think that's a problem. At times on the left, I think it's a problem also on the right. So, you know, I think this cancel culture and goes, in my view both ways. You know, there was my Alma mater. Yale law school, I was embarrassed that there were students yelling down the speaker because they had a conservative point of view. On the other hand, the idea that, you know, you don't read what they Toni Morrison's beloved, who was one of the great American writers, objectively taking from faulkner. I think that's also silly.
Zuckerberg, Chan Not Making Similar Donations to Elections This Year
"Extraordinary announcement came out today, which is a great announcement for the security of our elections and the integrity of our elections. Mark Zuckerberg Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, have said they will not give another $400 million for this next aid of elections. The nonprofit that distributed most of the $350 million in donations from Zuckerberg to election offices in 2020 said Monday that it won't disperse similar donations this year after backlash from conservative suspicions that the contributions tilted the outcome of the presidential race towards Biden. This tells me a couple different things. Number one, it shows that the backlash that Zuckerberg has received has really bothered him. And it should bother him. I don't know Zuckerberg's intentions. I don't. But what I do know is that Zuckerberg is not exactly excited about further alienating half the country. By the way, on Facebook and Instagram, it's conservative content that performs way better than left wing content. If it wasn't for all the algorithm changes and all the games and the thumb on the scale that Facebook plays.
Zuckerberg money won't be in next round of aid for elections
"Hi hi hi hi Mike Mike Mike Mike Ross Ross Ross Ross you're you're you're you're reporting reporting reporting reporting mark mark mark mark Zuckerberg Zuckerberg Zuckerberg Zuckerberg money money money money won't won't won't won't be be be be donated donated donated donated in in in in the the the the next next next next round round round round of of of of elections elections elections elections the the the the nonprofit nonprofit nonprofit nonprofit that that that that distributed distributed distributed distributed most most most most of of of of the the the the three three three three hundred hundred hundred hundred fifty fifty fifty fifty million million million million dollars dollars dollars dollars Facebook Facebook Facebook Facebook founder founder founder founder mark mark mark mark Zuckerberg Zuckerberg Zuckerberg Zuckerberg donated donated donated donated to to to to election election election election offices offices offices offices in in in in twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty says says says says it it it it will will will will not not not not this this this this personal personal personal personal or or or or donations donations donations donations this this this this year year year year instead instead instead instead the the the the center center center center for for for for technology technology technology technology and and and and civic civic civic civic wife wife wife wife says says says says it it it it is is is is launching launching launching launching a a a a different different different different program program program program a a a a new new new new program program program program called called called called US US US US alliance alliance alliance alliance for for for for election election election election excellence excellence excellence excellence will will will will be be be be an an an an eighty eighty eighty eighty million million million million dollar dollar dollar dollar five five five five year year year year program program program program with with with with the the the the goal goal goal goal of of of of creating creating creating creating a a a a network network network network for for for for local local local local election election election election officials officials officials officials from from from from throughout throughout throughout throughout the the the the nation nation nation nation can can can can apply apply apply apply for for for for aids aids aids aids to to to to improve improve improve improve their their their their technology technology technology technology and and and and process process process process sees sees sees sees the the the the sucker sucker sucker sucker Burke Burke Burke Burke donations donations donations donations in in in in twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty were were were were criticized criticized criticized criticized by by by by some some some some conservatives conservatives conservatives conservatives with with with with the the the the rise rise rise rise of of of of the the the the so so so so called called called called sucker sucker sucker sucker box box box box helped helped helped helped tilt tilt tilt tilt the the the the presidential presidential presidential presidential election election election election for for for for Joe Joe Joe Joe Biden Biden Biden Biden hi hi hi hi Mike Mike Mike Mike Rossi Rossi Rossi Rossi up up up up
Arizona AG Mark Brnovich: The Serious Issues With Ballot Drop Boxes
"Then when you throw on top of that this use of ballot drop boxes and the fact that there was a lack of chain of custody for 20% of the ballots And so we're talking about upwards of 200,000 ballots that had an insufficient Tina custody when it came to the procedures as to how those ballots were transported and stored and so those are really really serious issues and then once we've got the last layer you throw on top of that the fact that private grant money from people like Mark Zuckerberg is being used to help finance elections that's going to the democratic Secretary of State the democratic election officials in the largest counties Maricopa and pima county I mean that's something that once again we as voters should be very very wary about some rich dude dropping in and spending millions of dollars for supposedly election awareness whatever they say And then at the end of the day it tends to not only hear in Arizona put out throughout the country go to democratic officials that run elections
Previewing 'Rigged: The Zuckerberg Funded Plot to Defeat Donald Trump'
"He has put out a wonderful movie it's called rigged the Zuckerberg funded plot to defeat Donald Trump so he's focused he's focused specifically on Zuckerberg and his 417 $1 million which had an enormous impact in this election Dave bossie how are you my friend Hi I'm fantastic a great one How are you sir I am doing great Tell us about your movie and tell us where people go to watch this movie Well people can go to rig 2020 dot com and stream it live anytime they want And it's a fantastic film It's 40 minutes long markers It can't be much longer than that these days But it is like you said solely focused on Mark Zuckerberg and how he put his thumb on the scale of this election this past November of 2020 And what we prove beyond a shadow of a doubt is the $400 million was run through the Chan Zuckerberg initiative through these two 501c3 nonprofits that are supposed to be nonpartisan and the chief strategist at the Chan Zuckerberg initiative was David plus And we had hard to remind everybody who he is Barack Obama's campaign manager
RIGGED: An In-Depth Examination of the 2020 Election With David Bossie
"A phenomenal movie out called rigged, which everyone has got to check out. It's rigged 2020 dot com that's rigged 2020 dot com. David bossie is with us, David. Welcome to the program. Thanks for having me, Charlie. Great to be here. Tell us about your movie. It's getting great response. Looks like it's doing very well. Tell us about it. Yeah, we just had we just premiered it on Tuesday evening at Mar-a-Lago with president Trump. It's been an incredible response to the film. Rigged is a film solely focused on proving how Mark Zuckerberg funded a plot to defeat Donald Trump in the 2020 election and how he spent $400 million $400 million in the last several months of the campaign totally off the books, Charlie. No one knew that it was happening. Nobody saw it coming. No federal election laws. It is an outrageous thing what he did and a couple of things. One is, we have to find out what happened in 2020 to make sure the American people understand why president Trump says the election was rigged and stolen. And two, the second part of that is to make sure they can't do it again. Because the left will use any means necessary to win. And whether it's cheating or not. Yeah, I mean, so let me ask you so
A Political Extinction Moment for the Woke Left
"But there's something that's happened in the last 12 months that is very significant. And every single one of you have played a role in that. You could have gave up. This election, the last election, the 2020 election was the most interfered with corrupt election in our lifetime. And we need to say that over and over again. $400 million from Mark Zuckerberg, the inability to talk about these issues on Facebook or Google. And it would have been very easy for all of you to give up. Instead, the opposite happened, and the people in charge of our government, Hollywood, the media. They couldn't really understand why all of a sudden dads kept on showing up to school board meetings across the country. They couldn't understand sudden people started to run for precinct committee positions. They couldn't understand why the energy or the conservative movement only increased when they controlled everything. And what we saw over the last year is the regime controlling every aspect of our life. Literally whether or not and how you can breathe. Vaccination status. Let me just say one thing. No one should ever be forced to get a vaccine against their will. Period. End of story, hard stop. And instead, we have seen an unprecedented rise of the citizen in the last 12 months. And the regime doesn't know where this is coming from. CNN's ratings are collapsing. Their top cable news hosts are taking time off. They're already getting ready. They're bracing for impact for something completely and totally historic. But I don't know about you. But I don't just want to win. I want to look at what's happening right now. And I want to be part of an extinction event for the political woke left to put them into complete and total irrelevancy for the next 20 or 30 years.
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Lex Fridman Podcast
"I'd be some computer construct and not the person who created that meta company. But that would truly be meta. Right? So this could be somebody else using the Mark Zuckerberg avatar who can do the mark and the lex conversation replay from four decades ago. When it was first I mean, it's not going to be four decades before we have photorealistic avatars like this. So I think we're much closer to that. Well, that's something you talk about is how passionate you are about the idea of the avatar representing who you are in the metaverse. So I do these podcasts in person, you know, I'm a stickler for that because there's a magic to the in person conversation. How long do you think it'll be before? You can have the same kind of magic in the metaverse, the same kind of intimacy and the chemistry, whatever the heck it's there when we're talking a person, how difficult is it how long before we have it in the metaverse? Well, I think this is like the key question, right? Because the thing that's different about virtual and hopefully augmented reality compared to all other forms of digital platforms before is this feeling of presence. The feeling that you're right, they are in an experience and that you're there with other people or in other place. And that's just different from all of the other screens that we have today, right? Phones, TVs, all the stuff. They're trying to, in some cases, deliver experiences that feel high fidelity. But at no point do you actually feel like you're in it, right? At some level, your content is trying to sort of convince you that this is a realistic thing that's happening, but all of the kind of subtle signals are telling you now you're looking at a screen. So the question about how you develop these systems is like, what are all of the things that make the physical world all the different cues? So I think on.
Here’s How Many Billions Mark Zuckerberg Lost in the Stock Market in One Day
"Facebook is terrible. Recently, I see that they removed the page promoting the freedom convoy by the truckers. And they have tried to block exposure of the whole trucker resistance to forced vaccine mandates. I've had my own miseries with Facebook I'm currently demonetized. I don't care about that so much, but I'm also restricted, which means they are people who used to get my page. They would come in their feed and now they restrict my distribution. It's all based upon a completely bogus. I posted innocuous clip about Kyle rittenhouse. They said, oh, by posting this clip, you're promoting a dangerous individual, then they themselves decided after a rittenhouse was exonerated that he's not dangerous, but since my post was in the period where he was deemed dangerous, they refused to take him down. This is the Shia arbitrariness. She unreasonableness of Facebook, which also now goes by the idiotic name meta. Now, generally, I like to see the economy doing well. I like to see the stock market doing well, but the stock market took a kind of hit, and Facebook was leading the downward drop. And the blow to Facebook, I'm looking here at report from CNN, wipes out $31 billion of Mark Zuckerberg's personal wealth. Isn't that great? It's awesome. In fact, it's threatening to kick Zuckerberg out of the top ten richest men in the world. He's currently number ten. He dropped like four places. And Facebook itself saw a sharp decline one day market value drop. In fact, it's apparently a 20% drop the biggest single day drop for any U.S. company ever.
Mark Zuckerberg Loses Billions for Loss of Users on Facebook
"So Mark Zuckerberg has just lost billions of dollars Why Because Facebook suffered its first ever downturn in users Could it be that a bunch of conservatives got sick and tired of being silenced and it happening all the time and so finally people just said the hell with you We're not going to use your platform as much anymore Could it be I think it could be I think the chickens are coming home to roost And I think people are realizing that on Facebook you do not have freedom of speech if you disagree with Facebook That's what I think
Mollie Hemingway Talks Democrats' Voter Registration Drives
"Here's Molly Hemingway talking about all these Democrat voter registration drives, and we better keep an eye. Closely, we better be very aware of what the Democrats are capable of doing. One is that a lot of times these democratic efforts happen at the same time as other problematic things, like in New York City, you don't have to be an American citizen to register to vote. It makes it very hard to separate out voter registrations from those who are legal to vote in statewide races or presidential elections and those who New York City says can vote in municipal elections. Their problems with one in 8 voter registrations across the country. And there are all sorts of problems with decreasing security with the rampant rise of mail in ballots. But I'm also a little bit concerned that Republicans don't seem to be aware of how much effort needs to be done on their side of the aisle as well. They should be doing massive voter registration drives. And they also need to be familiar with what the problems are with decreased election security. Just this weekend, senator Mike rounds from South Dakota, said that the 2020 election had no problems whatsoever. That's a ludicrous thing for anybody to say, but particularly a Republican senator who at this point should know so much about all of the problematic things that happened, whether it was changing all of these laws and the run up to the election or having Mark Zuckerberg engaged in a private takeover of government election offices or big tech censorship or media censorship, all these things that make our elections more problematic. You would really expect more from Republican
MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell Gives Breaking Update on Eric's Show
"Now here's where we're at Eric I'm announced in this on your show. Okay. What we've done, now, now I did a Facebook Live two date or yesterday. I did a Facebook Live and I'm and I told what I'm gonna tell you right now. I said, you know what? Dominion deleted is deleting the whole 2020 election and they have to preserve evidence Tina Peters has a before and after, they have to preserve evidence in any lawsuits. There's been over 200 lawsuits and threatening letters from dominion in this country. Now, they help to preserve evidence. It's a felony. You kept keep stuff in the machines of to federal crime because you didn't keep it for 22 months. It's a state Colorado state crime and other states do. We've got them in all the states. Well, also, they didn't preserve evidence in my case in my cases, and my pillow sued them, remember, and smartmatic. So they didn't preserve Evan. We've been sending them preservation of evidence things for months. What they did Eric is they threw the guns into the river after they committed a murder. Now, I told this story yesterday. Now here's where I'm breaking on your thing. Alan duke, everybody is ahead of the Facebook fact checker. There's 5 of them. It's a company he's co owner with a guy named Martin overseas. He's overseas. We went head to head in battles with him. They're the Facebook fact checkers called lead stories. Very famous episode on Frank speech. I went shame on it, shame on you all and duke. That's for that same came from. Alan duke has covered up more stuff on Facebook. Now remember, Mark Zuckerberg came out three weeks ago and said, the Facebook fact checkers are just opinions. He said it in court. He said they're just opinions. The no, you didn't hear about that, everybody. He took cover his own butt. He said they're just opinion. But Ellen duke, he's been late. He's been standing away from Eric until yesterday. When I announced this, that this deletion, this stuff that Tina Peters has, he put a Facebook fact check over it and said and stopped all the live stream and it says you click on it and it says, here's why it's partially false it says partially false information. At the cyber symposium, we put up on the board what Tina Peters found what they deleted, but it was just like the, you know, it takes months of cyber guys to dig into that. We put it up there and two guys at the symposium made comments. Yep, that's just not true. It looks like they came out of two machines. So he put this Facebook fact check over yesterday. Well, I got news for you, Alan duke. Since then, 5 different cyber teams or cyber people independent of each other have dug into what was deleted. It's over for dominion. We're going to get this to Alan duke too. So he's going to do a public apology to the whole country and say yes, this is true. But Eric, you know what we're doing with this, we're bringing it to the judge in D.C. and saying, hey, they deleted they didn't preserve evidence in this case.
'Rigged' Author Mollie Hemingway Tells Us What to Expect From Her Latest Book
"The book we're talking to Molly Hemingway author of rigged How the media big tech in our Democrats seized our elections What can we expect in the book Things will learn in there because I think we're all suspicious Molly and it's the most American thing we can do is to ask questions I mean we had an unprecedented at least in modern times pandemic and election with millions of mail in ballots with counties that had very little experience with mass mail in ballots Florida has a lot of experience with that Therefore their election went off pretty well So what can we expect to find in the book Because a lot of people are still really concerned about this given 2022 being right around the corner So I tell a lot of stories detailed substantiated stories mostly focusing on Georgia Wisconsin and Pennsylvania But at heart it really deals with two big issues And the first one which kind of blew me away was the role that Mark Elias played in corrupting our elections I had been following Marc Elias because he was the guy who created the Russia collusion hoax in 2016 He was Hillary Clinton's general counsel He's the one who paid the people to make up the Russia story So I'd already been calling him I couldn't believe what a big role he played in corrupting our 2020 elections by enacting hundreds of changes of important election integrity laws flooding the zone with the mail in ballots We had such a more than threefold increase in the number of mail in ballots And it was just like you said done very sloppily And then the other thing was that I had been led to believe that when Mark Zuckerberg put $419 million of his money into the election system that this was like bipartisan help for COVID relief It wasn't That was a lie It was an overtaking of governmental election offices which are supposed to be preserved from partisan politics to run the democratic get out the vote operation and they focused on blue cities and counties in swing states Philadelphia to turn Pennsylvania and the cities in Wisconsin to turn Wisconsin Atlanta to turn Georgia and it was plotted out very savvy completely wrong I mean they just brought in an army of left wingers to run democratic operations in inside our governmental election offices And it was really effective
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Software Engineering Daily
"Mark Zuckerberg parks, Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg. He sucks dicks. Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg. He sucks dicks. And I have seen he sucked my dick. Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg. He sucks, dicks, yo. Park Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg. He sucks dicks and he's fucking in your brain. Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg. Get out of my fucking life, man. Get the fuck out. I wrote a fucking book about your company, man. Now get the fuck out of my life. I know everything you're doing, you piece of shit. You ruined my fucking life. Now go away. Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg. Go away. Get the fuck out of my life. Man. Everybody that works for you wants to quit. You probably killed Sheryl Sandberg's husband, you piece of shit so you could fuck her in the ass. And that's what I know. Yes, I must sleep with eyes open. And that's what I know. I miss my love. 'cause you took them from me bartenders, Mark shepherd, Mark stepper bird. Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg. Go eat a dick. You fucking piece of shit? I know Bill Gates owns you Regina dude. Also has a dick. She had a rib removed so she could suck her own dick. Red Chino dude, ejaculates vaccine material. Into Mark Zuckerberg's mouth. You fucking need some shit. Go die. Go away. Go the fuck away, man. Just get out of my life. I didn't ask for this. I didn't ask for any of this. You piece of shit, get out of my fucking brain. I've been to the psych hospital like 6 times in the last year. Now go fucking suck a dick, man. You have no idea what I'm capable of. Do you know how insane a hand man? Do you fucking get it? Get out of my life. Get out of my fucking life. I must think with the eyes open, man. I'm asleep with eyes open because of you. I don't get any rem sleep, man. And that's what I know. Fucking Jeff Lewis is telling me to go to a psychiatrist. That's how crazy I am, bitch. I'm the craziest person in this fucking city, man. And if you doubt that, come to my fucking apartment, I'll stab you in the fucking eye, Mark Zuckerberg, I'm sorry for the Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg. Go sub 8, dick, man. Go second dick. Go set 16 deaths. Go second 19 days. Man, our ramp scissors up your ass. You fucking asshole. All vaccine your eyes, man. I'll faxing them shut. You'll get the fucking delta variant, bitch. Go snort vaccine into your fucking ass cheeks man. I will fucking ram a cardboard box in your asshole..
'Our Broken Elections' Shows How Mark Zuckerberg Invested $350M in 2020 Election
"I need to go through the table at content so the audience knows the extent of your and vaness Picasso's a coverage here It's really it's really comprehensive taking advantage of the COVID pandemic to change the way we vote Another chapter the median president Trump's presidential advisory commission on election integrity the tool of choice for vote Thebes absentee ballot fraud the many ways election fraud happens Liberals dream legislation HR one and the threat to election integrity in the First Amendment Mark Elias Inc the legal general for the left Zucker box the center for tech and civic life vote trafficking automatic voter registration and rank choice voting a recipe for coercion fraud and confusion I mean you really have covered the entire playing field here You wanted to hit Zucker box Go ahead Well Mark you're a lawyer Imagine if a company that had a very spotty osha record and was really being bothered by the workplace enforcement rules for accidents decided that you know rather than clean up their act they're going to change the rules So what they do is they create a foundation of 5 O one three and they go to the local federal osha office and they say you know we're going to give you a whole bunch of money because we really believe in workplace safety All you have to do to accept this extra money which you can hire more bureaucrats with is sign a contract with us that you'll change your rules on a workplace management and enforcement And by the way those are the kind of the changes we want because they'll basically give us a pass Everybody would be outraged It would be a complete perversion of the regulatory process Well Mark Zuckerberg through his various foundations put in $350 million in the 2020 election and they went to all of these election offices around the country Most of them in democratic states almost all of them in swing states and said you know Philadelphia you've got a $10 million annual budget for elections How'd you like to make a
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"A new story from the federalist says the 2020 election wasn't stolen, it was bought by Mark Zuckerberg. This is a true story of the account of how Mark Zuckerberg privatized the government's voter registration and vote counting for Democrats in 2020. The founding fathers always believed that if there was power there must be a check and a balance against that power. What is our check and balance against Mark Zuckerberg, spending $400 million during the 2020 election, Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, spent hundreds of millions of dollars to turn out likely democratic voters. But this wasn't traditional political spending William Doyle from the federalist rights. He funded a targeted private takeover of government election, operations by nominally non partisan, but demonstrably ideological nonprofit organizations. This was done through the center for technology and civic life CTCL. We've talked about this in great detail on the show, but this new story from the federalist is shocking. We talk we are always under, we are always accused. You are a threat to democracy as we did on the show previously, just type in threat to democracy and then go to news the Pandora papers are a threat to democracy. Trump is a threat to democracy, Bloomberg, how to save democracy. New York Times had a Conor how to counter pro Trump extremism and threat to democracy. Now, we are a republic not a democracy. But if you read this story, who's the real threat that democracy? The guy playing golf at Mar-a-Lago? Or the $420 million spent by Mark Zuckerberg, who put money into local government official races, and it came with strings attached.
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Software Engineering Daily
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Software Engineering Daily
"But if you're gonna fuck some of the demon you might as well do the welcome leap transhumance bullshit. That's downright satanic. I mean we can let them do it if we want. Maybe it'll be cool. I've seen the brainwashed shape shifting victims. i've seen grace. Gong exceed nicaragua. I've seen michael vaguely. I've seen jonathan. Brill poor jonathan brill. Jonathan brill has had his fucking identity transformed because of mark zuckerberg fucking putting his dick into his now. Dude i prefer the organic human form. If you wanna fuck things up take some anti psychotics bro. Take some fucking crazy drugs dude. You don't need to fuck injecting this shit dude. Just give it to me in fucking water. Give it to me in food. Let me eat it. Don't fucking probably with a needle. You fucking crazy. Bastard mark zuckerberg go suck dick van so like after genetics. After i took genetics and verbal physiology. I understood enough about protein folding and the aren a and dna supply chain to move onto computer science okay. I've stiffed nearly all of my computer science homework to write music because music is more interesting than your fucking dumb ass computer science bullshit. Ut computer science program and today. I have eight albums on spotify. Okay but i can't get any distribution. 'cause fucking mark zuckerberg has daniel x. Dick stapled to a wall somewhere right. And i can't get distribution so if you if you enjoy what i'm saying go and listen to my music fuck immediately because it's all i really care about his music. I don't care about relationships. Don't even care about living or dying. All i care about is writing. Using academic computer science curriculum is like some kind of anal subjugation ceremony. I don't like academic computer scientists. Stupidest shit i've ever seen you know the only difference between computer. Scientists and software engineers is that suffering tears. Actually build stuff after getting an ear perfect score in my modal logic class. The first year. I was in computer science. I decided to cheat my way through all the programming classes to pass my way to a worthless accolade known as a degree a computer science degree. I skipped graduation. My computer science graduation to write a song called globus. it was about an interplanetary currency. That's right. I was thinking about fucking inter planet planetary currencies in my last year of college. Fucking bitcoin is the stupidest shit of ever heard so. After i graduated i moved to chicago because i wanted to spend more time with getty else. Lifer who is the only real friend of ever had. He's the best magic player that's ever lived and he extensively was fucking he died. He died from alcohol poisoning. I don't know if that was actually how he died. Or if he was killed but l. is the smartest person i've ever known in fucking breaks my heart. He's not there anymore. If anybody out there is listening and they knew gadeo's lifer the bucket wizard of magic the gathering you know how powerful this guy was and it's so sad that he died so when i was in chicago i was working at peak six investments where i was the best student in their trading class despite. Not even being a traitor. I didn't write any software peak six. I did not write anything. It was such a waste of time. i left peak six to go work in a shitty backwater ad tech company owner q by the way owner. I q makes all of its money from bought. add traffic. Sorry sorry to break it to you guys. You make your money through ad fraud. I know it you know it goes suck a day the way that ad fraud works. Is that actually the way. The ad tech works is basically an internet mafia. The more you pay the more you can have your code injected onto any site on the internet and with that code. You can spread any message you want. That's why. I know that mark zuckerberg has his code in fucking everything on the internet. Most of the best ad tech companies are in israel and their through identities. That i don't even remember anymore. That's right. I own a bunch of ad tech companies. Iona fuck trinidad ad tech companies. I own the fucking internet. I owned the internet as much as mark zuckerberg wants the internet. I'm going to take over. Mark zuckerberg whole fucking company. You know what mark. I know that the fastest way to make money on the internet is to show all your ads to boss. Did you think i'm dumb. You think i don't know how to make money. You get the boss to make even more antic botch and then you make that ad tech to make more butts this is how orrin hoffman's business live ramp makes money. It's just straight ad frog grow. And eventually i started to wonder why not. Just take over facebook. I mean i don't really like the facebook product. That suck guy has been up my asshole ever since i turned seventeen. I didn't even ask for this to be in my life again there. He is up my asshole like a porcupine needle. I knew that. If i could own it facebook would be a great venue to share and grow all kinds of information about all kinds of needles and disguises lives and then the theory in presale happened the athenian presale gave me an opportunity to compound my millions of dollars from poker and ad fraud into something much more significant by the way. Remember how i worked at amazon. I did jack shit there. I was just looking to learn about the company. It's called corporate espionage bro. By the way here's a quick cut to the chase interlude if you have covert or if you think you're gonna get co vid. The best preventative measure. That i found so far for cove is to drink. Lots of bottled water. Drink a wide variety of bob waters. The top candidates have right now. Are the kirkland brand spring water from costco. And then there's crystal guy here which is owned by japanese pharmaceutical company this pellegrino which is a sparkling water and then there's also dasani designees owned by coca-cola which warned bumping i'm not sure we're in buffy.
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Software Engineering Daily
"Daily suffer mark zuckerberg welcome to software engineering daily mark. Show mark So usually the way that i do is say. Hey hey welcome. The guest name to suffer jane daily and then and then they say hello like Mark what what is it. Was it in your hand dude. Is that oculus this. A new oculus rift Do why why don't you saying why aren't you saying anything you want you on front oculus. Rift okay are okay. I'll put on. Peron he i i. It fits fits on my face pretty snugly. That's that's kind of nice. You know i've never. I've never actually worn one of these things while i did wore went on. What an f. Eight and it was kind of cool. Okay all right. So you're turning on is that is that you're okay cool. So i'm i'm kind of in your This is like a dentist office right. This is like your dad's a dentist right. So i'm in your your dad's dentist off so i'm on your on your on a dentist chair in your office Interesting okay cool so minute dennis chair would you do what the why are you. What are you putting putting handcuffs on me with the fuck dude. I mean what is this. Part of. The experience did what he put in handcuffs on me for. I mean i guess. You're you're mark zuckerberg. I'll trust the handcuffs to but we fucking leg cuffs do leg cuffs so get handcuffs and leg cuffs and now you're in the vr experience. I mean i guess that's okay but Do this fucking it's kind of weird Okay all right fine. Saw the dennis chair dude. What is that your dad with his dick. What the hell do have was putting my mouth. Oh you for fucking.
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on The Vergecast
"Catch the the bad things when it happens and keep it at a minimum and keep driving the trend in a positive direction and be in front of other issues too. So we're going to do that here. And four for the metaverse. I think that there are different types of integrity questions. You know one of the big issues. That that i think people need to think through is right now. There is a pretty meaningful gender skew at least in virtual reality where there's a lot more a lot more men than women and and in some cases that leads to harassment. And i think one of the things that we've been able to do better in some of our experiences than than some of the other games and things out there is people easier tools to block people. Just be able to have a sense of when there might be harassment going onto a a safe space that that can be inclusive for everyone that everyone wants to be a part of because ultimately you're not going to have a and vibrant community if it skews so much towards one gender or the other whole part of the population doesn't feel safe so this stuff is going to be critical. It's critical for having a good social impact. It's critical to building good products. And it's something that we're focused on from the beginning here. Yeah i mean that's good. That's good to hear one of the things. I've been thinking about as i've been reading more about. The metaverse is that it seems to me that it promises to host much more information generally than social networks. Do today right. Like this isn't a network where i'm spending twenty or thirty minutes. A day scrolling through a feed potentially spending eight plus hours here working and as you noted it's not just text or voice communications. You're also virtually moving through these spaces. It's an office. It's a performance space. So do you think the systems that you have now to to work on making spaces safe and healthy extend naturally or are we going to have to rethink this. Just given the volume of information that is contained here will clearly be new challenges. You even in just the tutte world of of the social media apps that we work on there going to be new challenges so this is not a thing that you ever done with but when we started working on a lot of these problems in a much bigger way through the middle of the two thousand ten in a leading up to the twenty sixteen election in really turbocharged a lot after that. We just knew that if you're going to go in and try to build these systems to be able to proactively identify harmful content. That's not something that you can stand up in six months right we we basically put together a roadmap that it was a three or four your roadmap to get through all of the work that that we needed to get to to a good place it sometimes. When you're working on long term projects it can be a little painful because you realize hey we want this today but it just isn't gonna take a few years to get there but i do think the reality is that now that we've built up a lot of that work and we've hired a lot of the content moderators. I think it will be easier to add new use cases and be able to adapt the systems that we've built two different types of harm so it's something that we're thinking about. From beginning you know for example that the gender skew that i just mentioned the the feeling that that a number of women have around being harassed in space. Those are more acute problems potentially in gaming and in vr. Then then obviously that's the thing that exists in in in the other platforms as well. But but i think that the mix of the problems that we see may may may vary in. I'm sure there'll be too so this is just something that will need to keep focused on up. I want to ask one more question about responsibility. i was talking to eli. Who runs the verge about all this. And he asked me the question who gets to augment reality and he talked about a world where. We're all wearing our headsets. And we're looking at the us capitol building and most of us have an overlay. That says this is the building where congress works and then some people might see an overlay that says on january six. Twenty twenty one. Glorious revolution began. And then maybe some other people see an overlay that says lizard people are inside doing experiments on humans and i think the real question in there is does this metaverse further splinter our sense of shared reality like does it let us sort ourselves into a bunch of unrelated bubbles. Should we be worried about that. Well that that's that this. I think is one of the central questions of our time. There are clear pros and cons of this. I think the the positive version of this is that if you go back twenty or thirty years. A lot of people's individual opportunities in experience was dictated by their physical proximity bright. So i grew up. I played little league baseball in my town. Not because i am kinda made to be a baseball player but because that was one of the few activities that was available there is i think one of their kid in the town who is interested in computers out his lucky that there was one other kid and that was that was my world long distance. If i wanted to call someone who i met when i was a camp or something and wanted to stay in touch with a friend i would have to pay a lot more abusive. Long distance calls cost more than than than you know talking to people nearby. I think one of the things. That is most magical about the present and then i think is going to get even more. So is that flattening out distance creates a lot more opportunities for people in not just in the sense that that a version of growing up today wouldn't be stuck playing playing little league. But i'd get to find people who are interested in the same thing so i i could explore coding and have much more vibrant community around that or surfing or whatever. Whatever the thing is that. You're interested in. I think that's probably quite compelling Positive i i also think it is really important for economic opportunity of in one of the big issues today in society is inequality you one of the people i think has done the most interesting research on this is This guy raj chetty. I think he's at harvard now. And basically some of the research that he's done shows that the zip code in which you are born and raised is the basic is highly correlated with your future mobility. And what your income is going to be. And i think that just goes against the sense that we have in this country that people should have equal opportunity but in a world where there can be more remote work. I don't know what the is doing. But i can tell you at facebook. We've basically since we knew that this pandemic was going to be going on for a while and we probably wouldn't be offices pretty early on. I basically just told our team. Okay look stop. Just constraining ourselves from hiring people who physically close to an office that they can't go into anyway. Remote work is going to be a bigger part of the future. I think within you know five to ten years probably about half the company is going to be remote. Let's double down on that now. Hire people and all these different places. Which i think is going to create more opportunity but then you have this question. Which is now that we're going back and your of this hybrid world. There's all these cultural questions of okay. Well the people who are working remotely really be able to have exactly the same opportunities as the people were physically there with each other. And i think when you have technologies like holograms from you know. Augmented and virtual reality. The answer gets closer to yes. Then it would have been before when when those people were were just videoconferencing in on a flat screen or doing phone calls or not. Seeing each other as is often the better that this technology for presence gets the more you can live where you want be a part of the communities that you want to and and and basically ivan that. That's that's more more positive. I think in terms of creating more opportunity for people so then now obviously you also have the downsides of the need to get managed. In order to have a cohesive society you wanna have a shared foundational a fame foundation values and in some understanding of of the world and the problems that we face together. And i think part of what. We're all trying to figure out. Now how do you. How do you build that in a world where people have so much freedom in opportunity to go kind of explorer the things that are interesting to them and and get different opportunities but are less anchored physically. But i think we're probably just going to go more in that direction. I think we will solve or at least figure out how to come to an equilibrium on the cohesion. Point but i think overall we should be celebrating.
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Tech & Society with Mark Zuckerberg
"Democracy. To which degree. Are you worried about it? Well, if it gets hard not to be worried looking at some of the trends that are going on right now. But I think the case to be optimistic is that democracy, and free expression are inherently chaotic processes, and you have to believe if you believe in them is that by getting all the information out there by creating more transparency, even if the results in the near term aren't necessarily what you would hope for you are putting the issues on the table, eventually helping society confront them in work in work towards them and progress isn't linear, you don't always move in the direction that you think you should. And certainly the tools can be manipulated and misused, and we have a massive responsibility. Both the internet companies and Facebook in particular, but society overall to make sure we set the right rules for governing this to make sure that the bad things that people are going to try to do that. We we minimize that. And keep that to a bare minimum. But, but I at least sitting here today knowing everything I know now, I still believe that giving people a voice to share their experiences. Get that out on the table share their ideas, even if it's a contentious process, even if it's not as orderly as some of these more authoritarian places, I haven't that's what has made this culture flourished over time. And and I would bet that it will continue to be that case going forward to with Facebook, and extraordinary responsibility. Some people see Facebook as a potential threat to democracies. You would make the case it can be the fundament of a better democracy. I'd be interested to hear. Whether YouTube dot us maximum August and your thoughts about their future and the world that they are going to live in. Made a difference on your personal priorities and views about Facebook's, responsibility and Facebook's future. Well, certainly having kids changes how you think about things so. So yes, I do think that that and just the events over the last few years, and what we've all the different negative ways that people try to abuse these products that we become aware of certainly have created a massive. Sense of what we have a much bigger responsibility than we'd realize to make sure that we minimize harm everything from nation states trying to interfere in elections to terrorism to people trying to spread hate speech and divisive content and cyber attacks to get people's private information. There are all these things that we need to get the when you get right? And do it's why one of the more interesting stats is. We're now spending more as a company on safety and security than the whole revenue of the company was when we went public earlier this decade read so that just I mean, this is like a massive effort for many billions of dollars every year. It's just this is like a huge focus for us. But but going back to your question. I do think that over the long term giving people a voice and helping people connect with the people that they care about in the interests and forming new kinds of communities that might have not been possible in in the physical world off line. I think that over time that will help us build a stronger, social fabric, and and be a positive for democracy. But we have a lot of work to do to to make sure that we we make we make this work. Well, and I think we need to make sure that we execute on those values and principles make sure that the diversity of content providers of creative people great. If industries and published as journalists is going to remain is going to be strength. And I'm also sharing that's a critical part of society and democracy. It needs to stop. And that's that's gets us to the the whole first part of the conversation. We had well thank you so much for sitting down. We could spend hours going through all this content. But but I think we. A lot of ground in an hour. So thank you so much. It was a pleasure. Thank you.
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Tech & Society with Mark Zuckerberg
"Two different areas privacy, protection, data portability. And there really isn't a very important overlap, and it's going to be important. That society figures out where we want to be on this on the spectrum. I've always really believed in portability in the sense that. As far as two thousand seven when we launched the first Facebook development platform, I basically believed that they were going to be all these different ways that people would want to interact with our friends. There was no way that we were going to build them. All so the most useful thing that we could do is make it very easy for people to bring their information and their connections and some content from their friends to other services. So that way they could get all these different things that we would not be able to build. So for example, you know, think about like you would want your calendar to be able to show when your friend's birthdays are and their names and their pictures on them in order to be able to do that you need to able to sign into your calendar and bring with it some information not only about you. And who your friends are? But a little bit of information that your friends have shared with you. And I thought that that was that was really valuable thing that I thought would unlock a lot of value. Now over time though, there's a real question between. We're do people want to draw the line on if I'm sharing with you. My birthday do I want you to be able to bring that to another app. And we've we've seen really challenging cases where now, you know, in the last couple of years in Cambridge Analytica and a lot of these. In other instances like that. It's okay. Your ability to to take that information of mine and send it to an app has led to that developer, then abusing our policies in the case of Cambridge Analytica developer turned around and sold people's data to another firm, which is against all our policies and ban the developer. The question is in a world of data portability. Whose responsibility. Is it when you're bringing information from one service to another, and that's a real question that society needs to work through is it is it Facebook's responsibilities that the internet is that the platforms responsibility to make sure that that any service that plugs in and gets access to data through us is that we ensure that safe or you want people to have the ability to bring their data or maybe some data that people have shared with them to other services as they choose. And I think that's that's a really interesting and big open question that I think needs to be explored my cleaning because it should be the customers would be individuals who decides what happens with this data. I think that is very very crucial that cannot be estate who decides it, but it can also not be a company designs it, and I think neither companies nor states should own the data the data should be owned by the individual and the individual's shoot decide. What happens if the individual likes if you share the day that with Spotify or any other company because that improves the? Services full them. That's fine. But if they don't then it shouldn't be done and also the criteria should be so well disclosed and explained that it's realistic decision that somebody can make not just a form of this. That is in the end juster checkmark at a very complex texts that nobody reads. So I think those are very important factors. But let me stick to that issue for a moment. I think a company like Facebook that is generating ninety seven percent of its revenues by advertising that is totally driven by the opportunities that come with targeting and with a smart, a I driven analysis of customer data and the usage of customer data to which degree can you really compromise on the usage of data without harming your business. And and this is my second question, would you be willing in the end to even make concessions with regard to the profitability of Facebook? And it's. Growth speed in order to surf the more important issue of privacy. Yeah. I mean, we already do a number of thing where we don't use data in certain ways. And that hurts our business. We made a big statement last year that we were going to not work with. We weren't gonna important data from from data brokers or any or anyone like that that made it somewhat harder for some advertisers to reach the people that they want on Facebook. But budgeting that that's probably the right way for us to to be working. So yeah, maybe that that hurt our revenue by you know, percent or two or something like that which had large scales is is is a lot of money. But but I've got things like that are definitely the right way to go going forward. I think we need to figure out where the right lines are. So we want to give people more controls like. Last year at our at our developer conference. I talked about this tool. Called clear history, which will working on it's turned out to be a little more complex than than than I had initially thought to build, but we're still fully committed to doing this. And we'll deliver it
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Tech & Society with Mark Zuckerberg
"Simple and would already be a big step. Yeah. That's definitely something that I think we can we should be thinking about here because the relationship between us and the publishers is different than a surface where where we're showing the content on the basis of of us believing that it's high quality, trustworthy, content rather than just okay, you followed. Some publication. And now you're going to get the stream of things that they published. So I think that that that makes a lot of sense. And there's a lot of details to work out there. But, but it's one of the things that I'm quite optimistic that could make this more sustainable, and you would be perceived as a really helpful player in healthy ecosystem. And I think a healthy ecosystem of independent journalism from various sources Ideo journalism techs journalism on your journalism rich media journalism with which is the presence in the future. I think that is in the very vital interests. Also for platform like Facebook, you need great content in order to remain relevant in order to keep your job. Yeah. And especially within a product like this, unlike a newsfeed, we have this kind of interesting dynamic where people have care a lot about news, right and say, it's critically important. But the main reason why people come to face because to keep in touch with friends. So there's been this kind of interesting dynamic or institutionally at Facebook. I think we understand in really value. High quality journalism for its social impact and the importance that hasn't society the same time. It's we also get feedback from people in the community, which is well, look when I come to Facebook. I want to see what's going on with my friends. There's there's a bunch of news that I wanna see. But, but it's not I don't want my whole news feed to be that. But I think that there are going to be, you know, call it ten fifteen maybe twenty percent of people in our community who really want to go deep and have an experience, which is that they can go to that's all news, which will give us hopefully, the ability to dramatically increase the distribution. And and if the successful the monetization to to high quality participants in that you go system. So that's something that I'm personally really excited about who'd you tell me a little bit. I mean read, of course, you're. Important post about Facebook's strategy. Reshape. Or is it a pivot? I don't know in any case the new role that privacy place. I mean also hear it used to be a kind of discussion. There's something for the old European style. Will get it in America data privacy is not so important. Could you explain a little bit? Why you wrote that why you want this? And I mean, I find it super interesting and exciting, but I just try to understand a little bit better. What led to this kind of surprising move in your strategy? And also how that relates to the things that we discussed about the future of journalistic diversity. I'd love to this. This is a huge topic. I'm so I'd love to spend some time on this actually before we go onto that do you mind taking a couple of minutes to talk through principles local journalism and how it relates. So so that I think that fits the topic that we're on then. And then we can we can spend much time on the privacy focused vision for for the future of social networking. But one of the things that I've been really focused on is local journalism is definitely under a lot of pressure from from the internet. I think we really believe that subscriptions is going to be valuable for that. We've done work with an accelerator in the US. We're now announcing the European program on this for a subscriptions accelerator. It's going to be two million euro program. Just as an initial trial over the first few months working with I think, it's twelve German German publishers. But I'm curious how you think that what's the future here? What more should we be doing? How if you're running a local local papers. How would you think the path to making me nuts? First of all, I think absolutely with pleasure. First of all, I've said that already. I think every paper that wants to stick to paper is going to die sooner than later, and we have to make sure that we redefine journalism, and that we immensely paint the idea of a newspaper from paper. If newspaper journalism is limited to paper, then it's going to die. But I don't see any reason just see reasons by journalism in general can get better in its digital version. You have unlimited access to the intelligence of user, you have more flexibility because there is no deadline. You have unlimited space. If you want to summarize something briefly, you can do it. But if you want to be profound you can have endless lengths so ever. Anything is possible. And then you have rich media, you have access to content contemporaries, you combine it in very creative ways. So there are many reasons why digital journalism is going to be smarter better more relevant for the society. If there is that framework for business model and that is also true for local local journalism. I don't see any reason why local journalism should not be able to benefit from digitization. I think you could even say for a local publisher, it may be even easier because she or he has very very exclusive very specific content. I mean what the New York Times the Washington Post? The Wall Street Journal is reporting is the same that you hear on CNN on FOX and on other TV outlets in another media. Everybody's dealing with the national international use landscape loca journal has it's very specific journalism. So if they also built platforms regional platforms local. Platforms where they also at new service levels for their readers. I would think that this contended is even more irreplaceable by others than national or international
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Tech & Society with Mark Zuckerberg
"Laying out up front is. I would hope that in the online ecosystem that new types of journalism can thrive that potentially. Will some of them are not necessarily new local journalism is having a hard time transitioning to the internet in general, and I would hope that we can be one of the ways that we can support and make that more sustainable both from a distribution and monetization perspective. But I also think that there are potentially new models of independent journalists people doing work that's more based around their own analysis, or or interest base things that there isn't that strong of a model around today, but hopefully potentially we can make that happen. Of course, we're totally new generation of journalists and publishers is fortunately arising, the digital world and that ranges from digital native publishers like Vauxhall or a bus feet or vice offering boast to which I think is even more important, a little bloggers, very decentrally, Qasim of super interesting people that have a lot to tell I think that should be all embraced, but to come back to your I think that. That will be a distinguishing factor of such a offering to the offerings that are only based on. Let's legacy media. But the two most important questions, you have mentioned, I think are related you said how about curation can how organiz that? And how do we ensure that high quality journalism is really promoted you, and I have always been very skeptical about the curation by Facebook. I have quite contrary in view here. Because I think the more you start to curate into select in to make choices the more. You oughta medically and even involuntarily transform into a publishing house into media company. Then honestly, you're just too big sooner or later, you will be split up by regulators because they will say there cannot be so much dominance in one company that makes the decisions globally who reads what? So you have to keep a degree of neutrality. So I would strongly recommend not you curate and only say we stick to the legal framework. So if something. Is illegal. You take it out. If you. If you're asked by prosecutors, and I think they should make the decisions you have to help to trace the sources you have to make sure that fake accounts are not such a big problem. I don't know how much fake accounts you think Facebook has. But it seems to be quite a big amount. Some people are saying seven hundred million. I have no clue, but however that has to be dealt with as a very serious problem. But whenever it really comes to this curation decisions. I think it's very delicate ground, and I think Facebook should be more position as kind of neutral technology network that connects people and helps people to get informed. But whether the information is correct or incorrect, a good or bad or from sources that we like you should be as neutral as possible. And that leads me to the next question. How to ensure quality? I think it is very simple. The better the business model is that Facebook provides for publishers the more professional journalists you will attract as soon as sooner is only about reach only about popularity only about audience. The seduction to be a platform for many population is so high because people want to make the business we have to make a business in order to finance investigative journalists and correspondents and big for networks. They cannot afford to do that for free, but manipulators governments from Russia to China other. Sinister sources they can all use it app use it. And then you have an image problem for Facebook. But you also have a structural problem for and so I would really focus on making sure what makes the offering the structure of the offering on Facebook attractive for the thousands and thousands of journalists bloggers digital native publishers negatively, publishers that they are attracted to put their best content on that platform. And I think that's should be the main focus with that. You oughta medically will resolve the quality issue. Yeah. Well, one of the big questions on the curation personalization front is a newsfeed today. Across Facebook and Instagram, basically, all the content that you see is stuff that from sources or friends or pages that you've either followed yourself or something that on the Facebook site, at least that they've shared it. And one of the big questions that I think will need to figure out as we embark on on creating this new surface is should be keep that principle. Should we make it? So that if you follow the New York Times, you can get their content. But if you don't follow the Washington Post than you, they you you're not gonna see that content. Or should we have some kind of understanding of here? The sources that are that are broadly trusted either across the site or in your network specifically and try to build either algorithms or human curation, we're not gonna journalists doing we're not gonna be producing news. Like you say, but do you think that there's an opportunity, and should we be trying to explore this in a way where we can surface more? Quality content, or do you think we should have stay limited to what you as a person using the service of kind of asked for and connected to yourself in the watch tab for video we have gone, a little broader. So we've. Our term inside Facebook is unconnected content. It's if you're not you haven't yet connected to the source who's making the video, but we think it's going to be potentially interesting valuable to you. So we'll show it and that creates a very different dynamic. I don't see any reason why you shouldn't be as broad as possible. I think the broader offering is the veteran this you may have some criteria which brands which sources, which institutions you accept and where you say, no that is not in line with our rule of law, and with a very principle constitutional values, but apart from that, you should be open as possible as broad as possible include everybody, it really depends on the question of a business model for the players who are active on their platform. I think that is the thing that really matters and not limited to say, you have to decide whether you are Washington Post or you New York Times or a business, sinus. Scribe? That's not I think that's no criteria for you. You should remain all to you as neutral as possible. So so let's go to the business model then because I think this is such a critical part of this. And I mean, we've worked together a lot on on this on subscriptions. And you were one of the original people who I talked to who really encouraged us to move towards I'm trying to to enable better. Subscriptions. In a lot of people in our community to more actively subscribe to two different different publications, but that's off to a reasonable start. There's a lot more to do there. But but generally optimistic about the direction that's going on instant articles. We do a very favorable revenue share that with the vast majority of the revenue goes to the publishers wouldn't more. Do you think we should be thinking about in a surface like this in terms of making sure that that the this is as sustainable and profitable for journalists and publishers as possible, and we're coming to this from I think a very different perspective than than some of the other players in the space who view news as a way that they want to maximize their revenue that's not necessarily the way that we're thinking about this. I want to make sure that that to the extent that we can were funding as much all journalism as possible. And that's always been the conversation that we've. Had on this. So first of all, I've always been totally convinced that quality journalism in the digital world can only exist if there is also an element of paying rita's. And when I suggested that more than ten years ago for the first time and also said that we need to sort of legal framework for that people were laughing about it and said, this guy does not have the internet and the internet everything has to be for free. And it's only about reach and it's only about data, but not about money. Of course, it turned out that with reach you cannot pay your rent and to also don't get your breakfast. So in the end now, it seems to be a consensus that journalism oxygen? And that is the journalism of today in the journalism of future papers are going to disappear sooner or later. This journalism that we call quality journalism can only exist if there is a paid element if this digital subscription now, we have fortunately achieved after ten years of discussions last week, very important approval in the new parliament about a copyright reform. That will make sure if somebody is using a publisher's content being video of being text for commercial purposes too. So wants to use it in order to drive reach and monetize with advertising there should be license agreement. And I think that would be my first in my very obvious suggestion to think about it. Instead of saying we have here three hundred million budget, and we distributed more or less philanthropic money to publish. This means indirectly don't believe that is going to be decent business model. You need to be subsidised instead of saying that just say, okay, we respect that law. Whoever. The content that we use from publishers from journalists from bloggers needs to be indirectly funded financed by a tiny percentage that is a license fee, and that basically that is the parallel has been so absolutely crucial for the music industry. Over the last decades, the music industry wouldn't exist today, and they these license agreements already since the sixties. It wasn't the music industry. Always an obvious thing because music was fluid. Good. So every day could use it. Every Radi radio station could play a song for a newspaper or magazine. It wasn't relevant because nobody would put it on Xerox machine. So this has changed now. I think that would be a very simple and obvious thing to simply say, okay, if we're using for this new tool, anti pieces of content or summaries of stories, breaking news exclusive stories service journalism than we are going. Pay a license fee? I think that would be very simple
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Tech & Society with Mark Zuckerberg
"To spend some time talking about. What our role in in helping to shape an ecosystem sustainable ecosystem for journalism can be. And the reason why I brought up that story and Slovakia's just it to me exemplifies both the danger that investigative reporters undertake for what is truly important work that shape society and really profound in positive ways. And how important it is that there are models that can help to support and fund that kind of work in increasing levels going forward. So one of the things that I'd love to talk about. And maybe we'll break a little bit of news here during during this discussion is. One of the things I've been thinking about it. Facebook is how to make it to the people who who use our services and want to get more newest content can do that in a news feed. Primarily people come to the service to connect with friends to get updates on people's day to day lives. There's a lot of news content in there because it's so important, but there's a lot of people who have a demand to want more news, and one of the things that's really worked over the last year or two because we've launched this watch product for video that we people weren't getting all the video that they wanted in newsfeed could go to a place that was a dedicated space to to get video. And because that has started to really grow quickly. And is that's a lot of the video that now people us through our services, we've decided that there really is an opportunity to do something like that with news as well. But rather than do the typical thing that I think Facebook would have done a year or two ago. I'm just say you have some engineers and product managers internally say, okay, we think that there's something to do with news. Let's go build what we think is best. I I want to try to build this in a more consultative way where we go around. And we we talked to the folks with the experts in the field who have been doing this work to work out what the principles of of this surface should be. So I'd love to talk live to spend some time talking about that with you today. If can you concretely what your plans are? I mean, whatever Facebook does to strengthen journalism is very much appreciated by the industry as long as there is some sort of fair model either that it is possible for the publishers to really have direct access to their consumers and really built that customer relationship directly with them. And or to have a fair revenue share these I think these things I absolutely vital because otherwise face believes transforming step. By step into publisher itself with its own curation than of course, that I think as I said creates a very unpleasant dynamic. I think also in the long run for you. Because then people would say well with at the moment two point two billion customers worldwide. It cannot be you to decide who get's which news, and what is good news and bad news and fake news and series news. So I would be really interested. How concretely you wanna do that? We know instant articles some published country boot of us don't because they say there's no upset in us in it for us. What is the new project perhaps explaining? Yeah. So let me go through some of the principles that that were starting to think through and I love to discuss them in more detail. And also here if you think that there are other principles that we should have for the project. So the first one is is just we don't want to build us in a vacuum. So we want to be consultation. And and we're at the beginning of this. We haven't built out a lot yet. We want to go talk to people about about what the best way to make this work is the second prince. Simple is that we want this to surface, high quality and trustworthy information. So of course, anything that we do is going to be personalized. But there's a question that I have which is what is the level of curation that we should have in order to. We're not gonna have journalists making news as. From publishers from broadcasters from video journalists and from all sources is that correct? We'll we'll we'll this is a clean sheet of paper. So, but I think what we wanna do is make sure that that this is a a product that can get people high quality news, right? And. So one of the questions that I'm curious to talk about with you and. Is how you think we should think about that mix of of whether we should be doing any curing of the content that comes in versus it should be all personalized that's one question. And we can get into that. I don't know if it's maybe it's useful for me to go through the three or four principles that and thinking through up front, and we can just hit each one one at a time. So that's the first question. How do we achieve high-quality trustworthy information in the balance of curation and personalization the second is monetization? If there's a real opportunity within a a separate news surface to have better monetization for publishers than we have today, a news feed because the relationship that will have there is that unlike a newsfeed where friends my seal link somewhere and pass it along and in this case. Facebook could potentially have a direct relationship with publishers in order to make sure that their content is available in this. If it's if it's really high quality content. So there's a whole set of questions around. How do we build a a service that is contributing to high quality journalism through increasing modernization? And and I think that people can tell through the way that we've done subscriptions so far. We don't take a revenue share of do we really want to to the extent that we can build services that that helped to fund more investigative journalism and high quality journalism do that. There's a question of how we do that. Then the next the last principal that I think is probably worth laying
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Tech & Society with Mark Zuckerberg
"Hey, everyone this year. I am doing a series of public discussions on the future of the internet and society and today, I've traveled to Berlin to do today's discussion with the CEO of the largest news publisher in Europe Matija stuff ner from exile. Spinner Matisse has has a really fascinating background starting as journalist and a music critic and Frankfurt. Right. And and now, I'm is running this this really large company that publishes a lot of the top newspapers and media outlets across the continent. And you've really dedicated your career to freedom of the press figuring out how to how to trans transition to digital business models and a lot of how to make sure that the journalism is sustainable going forward. So one of the things. And I'm really looking forward to talking about today is the future of the internet and journalism and how those two relate to each other. I don't know if you wanna you wanna start off there. We have a lot of stuff to cover and the the time that we have today, but I'm really grateful to have the chance to sit down and talk to you about this. Thank you so much really before. Great. Yes. Yes. So I don't know where where do you? Where should we just dive in on on the future of journalism in the internet? I mean, I I love to start off just by getting a high level of of where you think about how you're positioning the company, and and where you think things are going. What are the biggest opportunities and challenges that you see with the the internet with just briefly on the company. I mean, the the the companies today only two newspapers and the rest of the portfolios digital digital journalism integer classified so these basically transactions that are important for people if they're looking for the ride home or for the right job that has always been the kind of essential part of a media company of a newspaper, and we have digitized that so that is entirely digital eighty five percent of our prophets. Eighty four percent of all prophets are digital today. Less than ten percent of advertising revenue comes from print only two remaining papers that are transforming into multimedia brands and the the main goal of our strategy is to make sure that digital journalism is going to prospect. I'm super optimistic about journalism and its quality in the digital world. Also about its role in society, if we have the framework of decent business models and also a fair share of value generation that is happening in the new ecosystem. And I think those will be interesting topics to discuss today. Yeah. I mean, so you appreciate more than almost anyone else. The importance of journalism in society. I think you just had with the Slovakian election that just happened. I mean, this must be such a an interesting moment. I guess one of the journalists who worked at Axel Springer undertook this incredibly important investigative journalism into into issues of tax. And fraud in Slovakia, which inspired the woman who ran for president in who I think just one to go and and campaign on a massive anti-corruption campaign. I think that that just symbolizes so deeply the importance of the work that you're that you're doing it's a tragic symbol of the relevance of the work because young Kupchak the investigative reporter all one of the digital news platforms that we run together with a partner he got killed. He feels say got killed as a consequence his critical journalism and industry Gatien into organized crime. And in a way that shows how important it is that we have independent. Organizations publishers and courageous journalists who dare to take big risks in order to. Bring light to the truth. And sometimes it's for some people very valuable to avoid that. And then things like that happened. We had a correspondent of one of our brands for more than a year in prison in Turkey. Then it's usual, he didn't do anything illegal. He just reported independently about some things that the government didn't want to have reflected in the media, and those are examples how relevant independent journalism is and how relevant it is to have a sustainable business model because only if journalism is a business young bloggers young startup entrepreneurs motivated to do things to innovate in that industry and only they we will have that plurality and diversity of sources, which is absolutely relevant. It. I think it is also not in your intention that Facebook is one day transforming into a publisher that is employing thousands of journalists in order to do it all yourself. I hope that you wanna. Be that you want to be a neutral platform that helps that echo system to generate money also fathers and have the plurality because otherwise I think that would be a different society that we live in. Yes, that's the goal and actually love to
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on Grumpy Old Geeks
"Back to my friend mark zuckerberg him started growling i said mark sundberg bam bam you don't like mark zuckerberg mark zuckerberg wants killed a goat with a stun gun in served a dinner to twitter c._e._o. jack dorsey yeah and apparently wasn't very good jackson it was cold and jack just had a salad because jack lake salads this was part of mark zuckerberg's you know year of killing everything that he ate yes i remember hearing about that yeah he's just didn't cook it well he apparently he didn't cook it enough but the thing about it i mean i don't know who's the biggest moron is here because i mean because toss up it's tossup it's a tossed salad tossup because jack dorsey just said he ate a salad you know 'cause jack lake salad but there's a new interview on rolling stone with jack dorsey which i cannot bring myself to read i cannot put that in my head i'm going to have a lincoln the show notes for anybody that wants to read it but yeah the fact that this is like you know news that oh yeah i had cold dead goat from mark soccer blood i guess it's better than cold live goat for mark zuckerberg but true yeah at least in mark zuckerberg didn't even butchered himself all he did was kill it now that is just an okay here's what i'm going to do people i'm going to spend a year killing things but you you little friend over there you have to clean it clean it and bring it back to me in the form of a stake that's all i just want to kill i'm i'm gonna tell you a little dog i'm gonna kill it cow i'm going to kill a horse i'm gonna kill democracy that's it gonna kill privacy kill everything so yeah check those out if you if you're interested and this is just a retro more on of the week as many as eleven thousand five hundred and forty three microsoft employees got swept up in a reply all email apocalypse turns out reply all isn't just as shitty podcast it is still the worst feature of email and yes and this just comes back from people who were all all the employees have microsoft or had a get hub accounts registered some moron sent a reply all email thread and it goes back to one thousand nine hundred ninety seven do you remember this when all of microsoft's internal email servers were down for days because there was no reply all circle yup my i remember that yeah because this is right when i was coming out it was just like oh this is beautiful this is a beautiful thing so what's old is new again what's old is new again and finally because i i don't know how to react to this when i need i need your input on this one brian i really need your input on this one there's a company called oboe and what they do is they make product decisions software to.
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on KSFO-AM
"Welcome back. This is the Ben Shapiro show. Conservatives have been very critical of a lot of the leaders in Silicon Valley for a long time. The complaint has been these folks are out of touch that they are ensconced in their own particular little bubble. The show Silicon Valley is a really really good explanation of what goes on in Silicon Valley written by Mike judge on HBO the shows extraordinarily funny. It's definitely are rated, but it's very funny show, and it is indeed an accurate depiction of the nerds who live up in Silicon Valley and think that they should be the gatekeepers to decency Jack Dorsey over Twitter has had a bad habit of banning accounts that he just personally doesn't like while leaving the accounts that he apparently doesn't mind all that much his inserted himself in politics Google with their don't be evil sloganeering has done more to promote evil by acting in concert with the government of China than pretty much any corporation on planet earth. In that context. There's a great interview fantastic interview with Rolling Stone. Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter, and it just tells you everything you need to know about a lot of the leaders in Silicon Valley who are wildly. Lawrence of religious people in the country while the intolerant of conservatives from supporters. It's just it's just delicious. I enjoyed it. It was like eating an Oreo cookie incredibly slowly with a glass of milk. That's that's this interview. So for example, Jack Dorsey we talked about it on the show last year. Jack Dorsey went to San mar genocide going on against Muslim Yanmar right now, he went there for a silent meditation retreat, it is described by Rolling Stone. As a grueling silent. Meditation retreat, grueling like a marathon or something. So he tweeted touristy had Dorsey had tweeted out a picture of himself sitting in a cave, and then a picture of his arm he'd been stung by mosquitoes some hundred and forty times as though it was a Mark of his own virtues, which I say, maybe where you should wear some bug away. Like in any case in the interview, he's asked about me on mar. And he says this quote, I went there. He says a lot of the monks. I talked to said they believe anything. That is on the phone anything that comes through Facebook is believed. Brad went there specifically for meditation. I do intend to go back next year and the following year. I do intend to talk with more people about what's happening in the area. And anyways, I can help you have to start somewhere. It's a country deeply care about when they say they ask him. This is the second year in a row you've gone on a week of silent meditation. What does it do for you? And Jack Dorsey answers what I was going there for was to practice focus. It's very physically painful. There's no talk over religion. There's no taco, spirituality. It's a physical body practice. You sit down. And what you're told to do is focus your entire consciousness. I'm not the breath, but the feeling of your breath passing through. It's amazing. How made all the really small things in life really really big the first year was the hardest for me because I looked around during a meditation. I'm like man, everyone looks like they're Buddha right now. Everyone looks enlightened and I'm not getting it. But that night there was a lesson and we meditated at crystallized for me feel completely right? It felt like pure joy without any noise. And then I love this Rolling Stones liberally asked him. They said there's an idea out there. And you could be the character out of Silicon Valley show. How does that affect the way you communicate with the world? And he said I have to ignore it. How do I get in touch with anything experience? It am. I not supposed to do these things. Are there experiences that I should not have in the world because I'm in technology. I've meditated for twenty years cares. The meditate dude everybody is kind of annoyed with you that you virtue signal about it when you get bitten by mosquitos for sitting in a in a country. That's in the midst of a genocide so probably that. Now, the best part of this interview is not there the best part of this interview is his statement about Mark Zuckerberg. So this is just glorious in every way so Rolling Stone asked about Mark Zuckerberg. And they say what exactly is your can you describe your most memorable encounter with Zuckerberg? And he says well there was a year when he was only eating what he was killing. He may goat for me for dinner. He killed the goat. Like what what happened now and Rolling Stone s in front of you. And then Jack Dorsey said, no he kills it before. I guess he kills it. He kills it with a laser gun and then the knife. Then they send it to the butcher. A laser gun, and he says, I don't know a stun gun they stunt. And then then they send it to a butcher evidently in Palo Alto. There's a rule a regulation you can have six livestock on any lot of land. So he had six goats at the time. I go we're eating you killed said. Yeah, I said have you eaten before he's like, yeah. I love it. What else are we having salad? Whereas the goat. It's in the oven. Then we waited for about thirty minutes. He's like, I think it's done. Now, we go in the dining room. He puts the go down. It was called. That was memorable. I don't know if we went back in the oven. I state my salad. Yeah. These are the people who we should definitely be trusting what the future of our civilization. We should definitely be trusting these people to set all of our standards for the future of our civilization people who think that virtue lies in meditating in Myanmar and shooting goats with a laser God, I love that so much. I can't tell you. It's just great. Can you imagine Mark Zuckerberg out in the backyard of his palatial estate? Just pulling out a laser got my doctor evil and there's a shooting the goat in the head. And then the goats not dead grabbing a knife. And just starting to carve into that. Goat. Savagely starts eating the flesh of the goat. Pretty amazing. Pretty amazing like the foam masculinity of this stuff is just great thing to have a family and take care of a family and be a responsible person. But I love the in Silicon Valley the way that you are masculine. Is. You kill what you eat. You kill what you eat. Now. This is not a hunter down in Alabama who goes hunting. And then kills what he eats like as as you know, has been doing this. He was a kid, and it's a way of life. And it's something you do. This is Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Zuckerberg, right? Nerd galore. Who's like going out hunting the goat guys? It's like he's going out in the backyard and finding his hipster little mesh fence it opening up and being like come here, Mr. Dixon, bringing it out and just shooting the head fantastic. Silicon Valley the people who should definitely guide us toward greatness. Okay. Coming up in just a second. We're going to be having on Representative Dan Lipinski's democrat from Illinois. He may in fact, be the last remaining pro-life Democrats in the United States Congress. I wanna talk about why abortion has become such a partisan issue. And why it is that so many Democrats, it seemed to be embracing a radical view of abortion, the state of New York just passed a radical abortion law that allows women to kill their babies.
"mark zuckerberg" Discussed on The Goal Digger Podcast
"Reason number one is this social media by itself isn't cutting it anymore weights. Why you didn't expect that to come out of my mouth considering my absolute love of Instagram Pinterest in vase book? Listen, I'm not telling you to quit those things not in the least. But I want for you to hear me out have you ever discovered someone on social media that you just love every single thing about them. Like, you talk about them like, they're your friend. And you introduce them to other people like, you know, them, maybe they serve up content. That is exactly in line with what you need or you're incredibly inspired by them. Like, you are hard core fan girl you lie. Getting gauge with in comment on every post. Now, have you also ever had a time where you think to yourself that you haven't seen post from that person and business lately like maybe you've gone to check out their page, and you've missed out on so many of their posts in you. Disappointed. You wanted to see it all you buy anything. They put out you've read any blog posts. But it just didn't reach you. Like what the heck Mark Zuckerberg? You don't want this to happen to your fans and followers. Did you know that only six percent of social media posts are even seen by your audience six percent? And a message is five times more likely to be seen in an E mail than via Facebook, all of the social media sites are heading towards a pay to play model. Hello like Facebook owns Instagram. So buckle up and get ready. We have to do better than six percent. If our businesses are going to be profitable. And and it's difficult to reach even the people who are dying to hear from us. Like, how are we going to expand our reach and grow our audience hack. How are we going to actually get to a point where we can sell? Let's take this a step further and imagine what we would do if social media just disappeared. Like, you might laugh to yourself as I say. That. But seriously guys like a hate to break to you. But we don't own our social media followers. Mark Zuckerberg does and what if one day he would just decides it changes plan, and that would impact your business like what if your business is strictly fueled by social media, and you're running it on borrowed land. There's also the possibility of things happening like your account gets high or you lose followers, or you get banned for one reason or another out of your control. Now when I think about this. And when I think about Email is what I want to encourage you to understand is that social media should be like the handshake not this sales pitch. I love social media marketing, I teach it it fires me up use it every single day. But social media has never ever been my endgame because I know that I don't have a ton of control over the way people see my posts, I know that I'm not in control of how the algorithm spits my information out into the world. I know that I can. Count on my followers reading every single line in seeing every single image. And we honestly don't have a lot of control over social media. Like, more importantly, we can't offer an actual experience on social media. Because of this our goal on social media should be that introduction that handshake that invite to your followers to get them to a place like your website, where you can paint a more complete picture of who you are what you do how you serve the world, and you can take them on a journey aimed at converting people to your Email list. Like social media is such an important part of your strategy because it's a first step, but we have to continue the process thoughtfully on our websites and using Email marketing strategies, so that they are all working in tandem. No, a lot of people that I know that have tons of followers on Instagram have no plan. They don't know where. They're trying to take their followers. They don't know how to reach them beyond hitting published on a new post in that scares the crap out of me like my account has been hacked before. And I'd ask myself like if I had to start at square one again, would I be willing to put in that time and effort that it took to get all of those followers..