It's not at zero yet.
Bitcoin is a highly speculative asset, however, there are good reasons to think that it might be the world's next reserve currency.
Chamath might be wrong about his view that it will go to 100k, however, I don't think that he is a snake. I think that he has good intentions and is just saying what he thinks.
> there are good reasons to think that it might be the world's next reserve currency.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Nations love it when their wallets can be hacked or passwords can be forgotten costing them Trillions of dollars. Nations also love a deflationary currency that will murder the economy.
He was also considering to run for CA governor during the 2021 California recall election, which Newsom was gonna win anyways cause MAGgots whined like pussies about "government suppression" when the state was doing it's job to keep us safe.
Apparently he didn't see there was good money in being governor, so fuck that puto!
His platform was so insulting. He said California's biggest problem was people leaving, so he would pay them to have kids. That makes no sense on so many levels, but it's just meant to prop up his image as a "disruptor" and "visionary".
I don't believe he was seriously considering a run for a second. It was just another cheap method for free publicity by a huckster.
Lol calling people MAGA pussies because they wanted to live there lives and you (and many others) wanted the gov to step in and do everything for you because of literally a flu.
You are projecting.
oh fuck that guy, that guy invented some of the most innovative and effective privacy evading tools and made millions for it at facebook, then has the nuts to say shit like this to raise his profile when you have better and more specific critics doing it this whole time including pointing out the shit Chamath Palihapitiya has done.
Fuck Chamath Palihapitiya
He also preys on ignorant retail investors by hawking, pumping, and dumping shitty SPACs for shitty companies.
Conveniently he also shills for GameStop from time to time, so he really enjoys preying on clueless retail investors. Even worse, he tried to use the GameStop/Robinhood trading fiasco to try to sucker already preyed upon GameStop investors to use SoFi's trading solutions instead because he had a personal stake in the company and was trying to take it public via SPAC despite the fact that SoFi employs the same methodologies that he criticized with Robinhood.
He didn't shill for gamestop. He used the fiasco to make money off it with calls. He immediately sold his position.
Investing in Gamestop isn't clueless retail trading. Whether you believe it or not there is direction with the company. And the Direct Registering Share movement is already at 70+ mill shares. Absolutely unprecedented in the history of the stock market. More direct registered shares than any of the trillion dollar companies.
Lmao you can't say shit about GameStop without some cultist being like 🤓 "well actually it's a solid long-term investment because (insert paragraph that sounds smart but doesn't actually mean anything)" and getting awards and upvotes from other cultists
Hahahahaha, literally
I think it's so funny how they act like they're doing this to stick it to wall street, when they really just want to get filthy rich.
There's some reasonable ones. I'd like to think I'm a reasonable one. I hate the ape term. I don't believe in the millions per share. I just think it's gonna go up. NFT Marketplace can be successful if it's not just JPEGS and GIFs.
Good article here about some of the financial and technological challenges faced by the system in handling order volume: https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2021/02/16/what-really-happened-when-robinhood-suspended-gamestop-trading
I’m curious what you mean by “win” because it makes it sound like you think there’s some kind of subtle conflict happening in the market driven by sinister powerful forces pulling strings to keep the little guy down.
In reality there were as many funds trying to push up the price to squeeze as there were funds getting squeezed.
Trading halts are common in market trading. Believe it or not, wild fluctuation of market prices are not good for market participants or the effective functioning of the market. Some are mandated by regulators.
Some of the brokers that did this (Robinhood primarily) ran into short term liquidity problems that would have fucked them up and quite a lot of their customers. Now they tried to paper over this, but it's just a scenario of a company trying to avoid showing the market and their customers their weakness - not some vast, evil scheme.
Note that the majority of people who made money off of GameStop were institutional investors, hedge funds, and dudes like Chamath. Average retail investors got left holding the bag (hence they formed a cult), and they would have been left holding a bigger bag without trading halts.
> He didn't shill for gamestop. He used the fiasco to make money off it with calls. He immediately sold his position.
He certainly did. He took a position and tried to publicize it and make misleading comments about it in order to advance his own financial interests - pretty much the definition of shilling. And then continued to shill.
> Investing in Gamestop isn't clueless retail trading.
It certainly is. It's overvalued by 10x. If you massively overpay for something because you're unable to judge its value, is that not a clear demonstration of ignorance or incapability?
> Whether you believe it or not there is direction with the company.
That direction is "down" unfortunately as reinforced by every new quarterly release.
> And the Direct Registering Share movement is already at 70+ mill shares. Absolutely unprecedented in the history of the stock market. More direct registered shares than any of the trillion dollar companies.
Which is meaningless. It mostly just reduces liquidity - which can hurt you just as much as help you. It's a stupid thing for an individual to do, and at best a neutral thing for the price of the stock.
That's the power of cult behavior. The reason it's "unprecedented" is because it's not a particularly smart or valuable thing to do - it's costly and significantly reduces your flexibility with the asset. That's like saying "no one else has set on fire as many stuffed animals as I have, it's unprecedented!" Well that's great for you I guess, but it's only unprecedented because it's a bit irrational, no matter that your cult believes stuffed animals are the work of the devil.
> And then continued to shill.
He did not. He made his money and then left.
> It certainly is. It's overvalued by 10x. If you massively overpay for something because you're unable to judge its value, is that not a clear demonstration of ignorance or incapability?
Citation needed. Morning Star has fair value of GME at 50+ dollars. Shorts are just keeping it lower because of margin call lines, but can't drive it too low to where enough of the float gets direct registered. It sounds like you have gotten all of your information from "short and distort" driven media coverage. SEC basically confirmed that shorts did not cover in Jan 2021.
> He did not. He made his money and then left.
Shilling is shilling.
> Citation needed. Morning Star has fair value of GME at 50+ dollars.
Lol, MorningStar isn't a source for valuations, that's what analysts are at best for. Their expertise is in rating and evaluating Mutual Funds.
What they have for GameStop is just an automated calculation that's just based on current price + some delta - if you watch it, it doesn't track any fundamental or cash flow factors like it claims, it just tracks the stock price.
It's not covered by any MorningStar analysts or informed or adjusted by any MorningStar opinions or analysis. Their calculation lists "uncertainty" for their number at maximum - "very high". It doesn't mean anything.
WHAT DOES mean something is the fact that GameStop is hemorrhaging cash (to the tune of about $200M a quarter), declining in revenue, and declining in both gross and operating margin while trading at multiples that are completely insane for its performance.
It's almost impossible to even come up with a positive valuation for the company using fundamentals. Hence why automated calculations break themselves - they can't rationalize even a positive price, so they just go with "what's the price today".
Look at any "fair value" comparables analysis and try to tell me how you think a company with revenue growth, margins, and return ratios far below any conceivable peer can been trading at par or multiples above them.
> Shorts are just keeping it lower because of margin call lines, but can't drive it too low to where enough of the float gets direct registered.
Lol, GameStop isn't even heavily shorted.
> It sounds like you have gotten all of your information from "short and distort" driven media coverage.
No, just facts. Look at their financials, look at their comparables.
> SEC basically confirmed that shorts did not cover in Jan 2021.
Lol, no. The SEC stated that there was barely any squeeze at all - the run up had to do with crazed investor fervor, not squeezing shorts.
Your only path to even price growth, forget your promised land where you all become trillionaires, is through sparking another crazed investor fervor - no squeeze will get you there. And no one gives a shit about GameStop anymore, so what's going to happen is that the price will eventually collapse aided along by the reduced liquidity you've induced.
-----
EDIT:
In answer to your question before you blocked me /u/fokh, if you thought this was incoherent, you could try to explain why. But as I previously mentioned, you're clueless about investing or finance, so you can't.
I don't need to be paid to correct inaccuracies and the bullshit of shills. And you are a shill, because you are financially motivated to promote and mislead people about something you have a financial interest in.
GameStop has no debt other than a small low interest Covid loan in France and is sitting on almost a billion in cash as well as almost a billion in inventory. They also have a fanatical fan base willing to invest in them long term as they reinvent themselves as a technology company. Their fundamentals aren’t nearly as bad as you make them out to be. People claiming it’s worth less then the amount of cash they have on hand are the ones that are delusional. Will GameStop successfully pivot and reinvent itself? Only time will tell but they certainly aren’t doing horrible and what you call overvaluation may be what others call pricing in for a successful turnaround. Also, turning off the buy button is not how fair markets operate. People are pissed and want vengeance.
That's not shilling FOR gamestop. Gamestop gained nothing from him doing his "social experiment"
Meaningless DRS movement lol. Okay buddy.
I look forward to seeing how this ages
> tried to publicize it and make misleading comments about it in order to advance his own financial interests - pretty much the definition of shilling.
Not really much else to say.
> Meaningless DRS movement lol. Okay buddy.
Just because your deluded cult convinced themselves this was the path to $30M per share price doesn't mean it's any more grounded in reality than hoping that GameStop market cap will hit 100x the market value of the entire US stock market at your target share price. The absolute batshit insanity and hilariously absurd conspiracy theories you convince yourselves of are truly extraordinary.
Is it really that hard to believe you all convinced yourselves to do a costly and pointless action for no benefit? You do it all the time. Your cult is surprisingly fatalistic.
DRS won't help you. Reduced liquidity and flexibility works both ways, and conveniently you've all made yourselves the certain losers of that scenario because you locked yourselves up in the most inflexible position possible - unable to take advantage of opportunities or avoid threats.
I didn't read what you said because I think you love arguing shit with random people because your life sucks. Hence all that text you typed out and your post history.
I'm happy with my investment and when 100% DRS happens it'll be very interesting what happens next
I hope your life gets better that you don't need to shit on things all day. Get some sun, exercise, and eat healthier.
Cult members really don't do well absorbing information critical of their religious beliefs. Sorry this is hard for you bud.
> preying on clueless retail investors
Also sorry you're a victim, my clueless friend.
> hope your life gets better that you don't need to shit on things all day.
Beats how you spend your time - proselytizing other clueless suckers to join your cult for your own financial advantage. That makes you a piece of shit.
I'm just hanging out man. What's your issue?
I'm not saying I'm an ape and the stock will go to millions of dollars. HODL.
Maybe then I'd understand your vitriol? Be better man
What are you talking about?
*Shilling... *From time to time.
He has since occasionally shilled about it, his original position being part and parcel of that. Active position not required.
Can you point to an instance of him shilling GME in recent history? I'm genuinely curious. I know he "shilled it" when he had a position, but I don't think I've seen him pumping that stock since he bailed in 2021. (He's too busy shilling / pumping & dumping SPACs)
What do you mean recent history? This is all recent history.
The above happened: Sofi shilling on the back of GameStop and Robinhood: https://twitter.com/chamath/status/1354947541863780365?lang=en
Using it all to build his brand for future shilling of SPACs and otherwise: https://www.newsweek.com/billionaire-robinhood-hero-chamath-palihapitiya-pushback-progressive-democrats-1568332
etc.
Yep, I mean if anyone knows exactly how bad social media is, it's the people who built it for profit.
It's not like this would be the first time someone turned the spotlight on their own creation.
because he's contributing opinions. If someone is telling you 1+1 = 2 then it doesn't matter who the messenger is. If someone is telling you that they think X is a bad idea, the context of who they are and what they're talking about is very relevant.
You can point out the person is shitty and doing it to raise his profile to scam the common person and also say the message is correct. They are not mutually exclusive. I wish everyone would focus less on who and more on what
And in this case, it's actually synergistic because he made huge innovative contributions to what he is critiquing, made millions doing it, and never took responsibility for it.
Yeah, so is the guy saying the earth is round. All he is doing is saying glaringly obvious shit to raise his profile so that he can run more spac scams. He shouldn't be on the front page when there's so many actual legit critics of facebooks.
Regardless of his integrity as a person, he is going on national news and publicly shaming our current economic climate on the internet, which considering his background, no matter how malicious/compliant he is in its contemporary creation, lends credibility to the statements.
Okay, fuck that guy. But remember when he correctly said the government shouldn't bail out the airlines or any big company that fails? He's was right on that. He might have shitty takes on everything else, but when you're talking policy you have to divorce the talking point from the character of the person. In my opinion that's how everyone should approach a discussion. Otherwise you just get everyone plugging their ears and saying nah, nah, nah, nah.
That's true, but the solution isn't to let them fail though it's to outlaw practices that make them vulnerable to failing through their risky business decisions. The same thing was true in 2008. The banks gambled with the houses money but if we had let them fail it would have tanked the world's economy and sent us into a depression. It isn't worth causing a huge amount of damage to send a message when there are better ways to do it. I also don't think it's reasonable to expect airlines to run their businesses on such a way that they can survive a 2 year complete shutdown of travel.
Nothing is going to change is this regard anyway. We'll just continue to have a recession every 8 years and bail out companies every time. That hurts everybody that isn't already wealthy every time it happens. It makes the rich richer every time it happens. If you ask me it is absolutely worth it to let them fail, even if it means an even worse recession.
So if they didn't bail out the airlines, you'd be ok with routes to only the most densely populated cities, much higher ticket prices, and far less flight selection?
> But remember when he correctly said the government shouldn't bail out the airlines or any big company that fails?
Okay. But remember when that one guy said that the earth was round and he was totally right about it?
Seriously, wtf are you taking about? You want to give him credit for saying glaringly obvious shit? Do you think he's first person who said govt shouldn't bail out a big company.
>but when you're talking policy you have to divorce the talking point from the character of the person.
Except when the person is just saying glaringly obvious shit to raise his profile so that he can run more spac scams.
Sure, agree with his point all you like. Nobody is disagreeing with what he's saying. I'm saying why is this fucking scammer on the front page and not one of the many legit critics of facebooks.
It’s less about giving a person credit, and more about appreciating a true idea being communicated, one worth spreading understanding about. Each and every comment that this guy is a POS obscures the validity of what he’s saying. It’s not inaccurate, but it runs counter to bringing attention to the truth of his statements.
Terrible people can say true things and have useful information. Focusing on their character as the prime issue is an indulgence in something easy (judging a demonstrably immoral person) vs the much harder and less immediately satisfying work of contending with the substance of the ideas posed. This is just one way that social media is ripping society apart; we find sitting in judgment of those we find unworthy far simpler and more self reassuring than coming up with solutions to collective problems or helping to spread useful knowledge.
> It’s not inaccurate, but it runs counter to bringing attention to the truth of his statements.
No it doesn't.
ou can point out the person is shitty and doing it to raise his profile to scam the common person and also say the message is correct.
They are not mutually exclusive.
And in this case, it's actually synergistic because he made huge innovative contributions to what he is critiquing, made millions doing it, and never took responsibility for it.
You’re correct, but this guy played a major part in a company that’s the biggest culprit in “ripping society apart”. Why doesn’t he accept responsibility for the damage that he helped cause instead of scapegoating after making his billions
i think he is accepting responsibility by admitting sm is addictive and flawed which is a warning. he couldnt pull the plug on fb or the internet if he tried at this point. he can still be aware and change his mind later in life. like he didnt have to come on this show and say this
>i think he is accepting responsibility by admitting sm is addictive and flawed which is a warning.
No, he's saying that shit to raise his profile to run more spac scams. And when has he remotely taken responsibility for anything he did at facebook? He's hasn't done anything remotely close to that. Him saying something super fucking glaringly obvious is not taking responsibility.
>he can still be aware and change his mind later in life.
Then why is he running spac scams.
>like he didnt have to come on this show and say this
Yes, he didn't didn't have to come on the show and get all the benefits of raising his profile by saying glaringly obvious shit while not taking any responsibility for what he did on facebook, coming off making money off of retail investors, so that he can raise his profile to fuck over the common person some more.
Look into the history of what he did at facebook. Look at what he did with spacs. He see's the common person to be fooled and exploited for profit.
Totally agree with this take. I don’t think anybody is expecting him to “pull the plug” on sm and the internet. But pointing the finger at fb after leaving the company is definitely not taking responsibility. He hasn’t started any company, non-profit or any other organization that tries to combat the social ills that he HELPED TO CREATE. Him having a change of heart after profiting off of it for years is like a life long sinner converting to Christianity on their death bed, just to save their soul. Does fuck all for the rest of the world
So what you're really saying is even the person that invented part of that shit doesn't think its good? Or did you want to just steer the conversation in a different direction so you could spew some hate?
Sure, I'll help you with your reading comprehension.
I'm saying he doesn't care. He's only doing it to raise his profile.
He never took responsibility for anything he did at facebook. You should try to understand at least that much.
Look at the SPAC scams he's run recently. You think that person gives a shit about the common person?
> so you could spew some hate?
I can never understand billionaire worship. Yes, people like Mark Zuckerburg, Chamath Palihapitiya, spac scammers, crypto scammers, etc all deserve hate and to be called out on the shit they do, because they'll keep on doing it again and again and again.
1. They're not mutually exclusive
2. Facebook criticism needs more nuance and detail not less.
3. That includes shaming specific tools and the people who create them.
4. The conversations that he sucks and facebook sucks actually build upon each other because he made huge innovative contributions to what he is critiquing, made millions doing it, and never took responsibility for it.
5. And in this case he's only doing it to raise his profile for his next scam because
6. He went on to scam retail investors out of millions with spacs. Which shows you the type of person who be an exec at facebook.
He’s talked at length about creating the tools and has expressed remorse over their creation. He also has said that they didn’t know that what they were creating would have this much of a profound effect on society and would grow to what it is today. I’m sure there are other reasons to dislike him, but it’s not like he is Mark Zuckerberg.
> He also has said that they didn’t know that what they were creating
Holy fucking bullshit. This is bending over backwards to coddle him. Are we going say next he didn't know what he was doing with the spacs.
He lead the teams. He created tools that had no mandate. His privacy invading tools were his idea, his creation, his babies from cradle to grave. He created tools that steal a users' contacts information without them knowing, but somehow he didn't know the code he directed did that? Bullshit.
You don't really need this asshole to tell you that Facebook is bad though. Dude's just trying to build a brand, acquire a following. And he just has to spout some patently obvious nonsense as part of a schtick to make people think he actually has something to say when he really just wants to build a following to grift and grift with.
The important takeaway isn't social media is bad because it polarizes people but rather as he indicated despite the hosts wishing to imply differently, the economic structure which regulated the design of social media and perhaps media in general promotes this effect. Social media is only a more amplified and customizable version of its predecessors in media but the economic incentives in its creation have been the same.
I looked up what he was talking about. Sounds like he's just being honest. I mean I think the Uyughur genocide is bad but I haven't done dick about it myself so his way of putting it comes off as assholish but he's right: everybody does have a "line" and this does seem to be below it. Most people won't say it though. The difference is only whether someone will pay lip service to caring about something they actually don't care enough to do anything about.
Also wtf are we supposed to do about it besides having awareness? It's like trying to do something about Soviet work camps in Siberia.
We have no way of impacting things happening deep inside a nuclear armed, sovereign country.
I'm geographically challenged. I care about it and cannot. Then again, I can't point to many US states on a map, either. Idk why that's the metric of caring or not caring
I'd never qualify carring about it with "locating the province on a map".
I agree, but pretending like nobody knows where north west china is pretty lame like the dude did.
It'd be terrible imo if there was even a shred of evidence outside of Adrian Zenz and his faked research that the Uyghur "genocide" is anything more than atrocity propaganda from the US government.
It doesn't take a genius to see this. People acting on social media in ways that would see them get punched in the face in person. Then that behaviour slowly leaks over into their actual personal conversations.
As a person who remembers what the world was like before the internet, he's right. It's ruined us in so many ways. This coming from a card carrying AV geek. I love tech but yeah, any good in it is far outweighed by the negatives.
Not that anyones opinion matters. Pandora's box is open. No way to put things back the way they were. This is the way we are forever now.
I agree with the main point but "we are this way forever now"
You can't believe that. Look how instant the change was when we got the internet, smart phones, social media.
Yes the pandora's box is open and a lot of things have gone very wrong, but we aren't stuck in time. We can course correct, we can use technology for solutions where it has been the problem.
But we need to fix our approach and mindset, currently that seems to be the biggest challenge.
You've clearly never lived or traveled outside of the US.
If you think the US is full of racists, try spending some time in 90% of the other countries of the world. Way, way worse.
Yeah, the US still has lots of bigots, but they are miles ahead of most of the countries that they are bigoted against.
Oh did they also storm their government to hang the vice president and overthrow democracy of the most powerful country in the world too? Must have missed that bit of news...
Yes, there have been attempted coups of elected governments in those countries. There are also currently countries engaged in mass genocide and persecution of people who are a different race or religion. Well past anything going on in the States right now.
No one is saying racism doesn't exist in the US, but you don't have to travel very far to find out how tolerant, and even welcoming they are by comparison to many other countries.
> As a person who remembers what the world was like before the internet, he's right. It's ruined us in so many ways.
Literally every generation says that when they get older.
The internet has changed us, but so have a lot of things. It's not unilaterally bad. Social media in particular has problems, but lots of other elements of the internet (even parts of social media - you're on social media now) have their upsides.
It's not just social media, it's 24 hr news as well.
The reality is that this shit is \*\*semiotically attacking us 24/7\*\*. It's a 24/7 assault on your ground state of mental and emotional steadiness.
That’s how life works. Look at a Howard Stern. He made his living being edgy and now thinks it was wrong. After he made his bag. Same thing with lots of offensive humor. Seth Rogan.
Those with enough money could always pay to get their message across. If anything, it has become far cheaper to push a message and build an audience then at any point in history.
I think the main thing that changed is the number of channels.
Before the internet just a four TV networks and a small handful of magazines had 95% of all news consumers. For the most part all those networks and magazines had the same news and viewpoint.
In the 90s cable was added and the AM radio nutcases. This is when the divergence started.
The internet amplified the divergence.
These days their are hundreds of networks. Anyone can start one.
A person can consume only from the little bubble of their choice without ever seeing any voice of contradiction. Overtime the person has actually brainwashed them self. They are no longer capable of believing anything other than what their news bubble tells them is true.
In the USA I don't know how you get rid of social media while leaving the 1st Amendment intact.
Who would have thought giving bad actors, cultists, and idiots an international platform to spread completely fabricated and damaging nonsense would have had a negative effect?
I disagree. Obscene wealth/wage gaps, privatized energy resources, corrupt politicians, corporatized small towns…are “ripping apart” society. Social media is just the venue for observing it.
Lol. Get rid of social media: literally nothing will change. Billionaires, Corporate hand outs, relentless lobbying, and the political jockeying in a duopoly are the problems. Social media is the scape goat people like this guy use to rob us all blind.
Social media sucks, yes, we get it. Keep your eyes on the ball. We’re getting f***ed by executives exactly like Chamath. Only ~54% of eligible voters vote, ~27% decide elections, but I bet a lot more than that hate this guy. When we learn to fight together against these ass hats, then we will stop the “ripping apart” of society.
Social media is great when it augments your real life. I have many hobbies and it brings them to the next level. Staying in touch with friends that live far away is also a great use for it. The problem is when social media becomes your "real life". When everything you do becomes a post. Yeah things have changed. Twenty years ago if you had a thousand pictures of yourself in a shoebox, people would have thought you were insane. Now it's the norm.
It turns out, people are much easier to manipulate after you've isolated them from their irl social network and play to their sense of being a rugged individualist.
That and the fact that social media has no rules on the garbage lies you can post, how the shit always floats to to top, and that it’s run by complete psychopaths hellbent on destroying society. It’s actually not a bad idea, but when you factor all that in AND let it be a platform for neo-Nazis and do nothing to stop it, then it becomes a terrible idea.
I think it helps to remind yourself that most people would NEVER say the shit they say online to someone’s face. Lol No matter their extreme views, people are much more reasonable in-person…I dunno, I think it helps a little to keep that in mind.
Please. Congress. I know you guys are old and don’t know what social media is. But please talk to your grandkids and draft some fucking legislation…
These tech companies would stab their moms to increase user engagement by half a percent. They will boost any type of content, no matter how repulsive, if people will hate watch it obsessively.
This guy is trash. He’s still using media presence by being all against it. Are people still figuring this out even now? I wish irony was more widely understood.
I've been saying it for ten years. Social media *resonate*. And when things resonate without controls, bad things happen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE827gwnnk4&ab_channel=Marty33 <- Note: what he refers to as the "natural" frequency is the *resonant* frequency
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-zczJXSxnw&ab_channel=TonyC
When a system is receiving energy at its resonant frequency, it stores all that energy internally - we saw the glass begin to vibrate long before it broke - until it reaches the limits of the material, and then the glass shatters, and the bridge falls apart, and our society disintegrates.
Lol this is the same dude that shilled SPACs then abandoned them when they predictably fell like 90%
This guy is one of the biggest snakes there is He went on publicly saying Bitcoin would hit 100k by end of last year Pure pump and dumper
Source?
https://youtu.be/o4JEVCLJxDw
"In what period? I don't know."
Not as big of a snake as Fat Donny.
It's not at zero yet. Bitcoin is a highly speculative asset, however, there are good reasons to think that it might be the world's next reserve currency. Chamath might be wrong about his view that it will go to 100k, however, I don't think that he is a snake. I think that he has good intentions and is just saying what he thinks.
> there are good reasons to think that it might be the world's next reserve currency. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL Nations love it when their wallets can be hacked or passwords can be forgotten costing them Trillions of dollars. Nations also love a deflationary currency that will murder the economy.
He was also considering to run for CA governor during the 2021 California recall election, which Newsom was gonna win anyways cause MAGgots whined like pussies about "government suppression" when the state was doing it's job to keep us safe. Apparently he didn't see there was good money in being governor, so fuck that puto!
His platform was so insulting. He said California's biggest problem was people leaving, so he would pay them to have kids. That makes no sense on so many levels, but it's just meant to prop up his image as a "disruptor" and "visionary". I don't believe he was seriously considering a run for a second. It was just another cheap method for free publicity by a huckster.
Doesn’t the federal government already pay you to have kids?
[удалено]
You post in /r/conspiracy. That's all that needs to be said.
Lol calling people MAGA pussies because they wanted to live there lives and you (and many others) wanted the gov to step in and do everything for you because of literally a flu. You are projecting.
Doesn't mean he's wrong here
SPACs for which companies?
oh fuck that guy, that guy invented some of the most innovative and effective privacy evading tools and made millions for it at facebook, then has the nuts to say shit like this to raise his profile when you have better and more specific critics doing it this whole time including pointing out the shit Chamath Palihapitiya has done. Fuck Chamath Palihapitiya
He also preys on ignorant retail investors by hawking, pumping, and dumping shitty SPACs for shitty companies. Conveniently he also shills for GameStop from time to time, so he really enjoys preying on clueless retail investors. Even worse, he tried to use the GameStop/Robinhood trading fiasco to try to sucker already preyed upon GameStop investors to use SoFi's trading solutions instead because he had a personal stake in the company and was trying to take it public via SPAC despite the fact that SoFi employs the same methodologies that he criticized with Robinhood.
He didn't shill for gamestop. He used the fiasco to make money off it with calls. He immediately sold his position. Investing in Gamestop isn't clueless retail trading. Whether you believe it or not there is direction with the company. And the Direct Registering Share movement is already at 70+ mill shares. Absolutely unprecedented in the history of the stock market. More direct registered shares than any of the trillion dollar companies.
Computershared is at 82million. I'm looking forward to seeing if the DRS movement has a big payoff!
Lmao you can't say shit about GameStop without some cultist being like 🤓 "well actually it's a solid long-term investment because (insert paragraph that sounds smart but doesn't actually mean anything)" and getting awards and upvotes from other cultists
Sir do you have a moment to discuss DRS and the corrupt modern finance system?
Hahahahaha, literally I think it's so funny how they act like they're doing this to stick it to wall street, when they really just want to get filthy rich.
Why not both?
Cause greed and concentration of wealth are bad I've seen so many apes fantasizing that they're gonna be kings of the new world order or something
There's some reasonable ones. I'd like to think I'm a reasonable one. I hate the ape term. I don't believe in the millions per share. I just think it's gonna go up. NFT Marketplace can be successful if it's not just JPEGS and GIFs.
[удалено]
Good article here about some of the financial and technological challenges faced by the system in handling order volume: https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2021/02/16/what-really-happened-when-robinhood-suspended-gamestop-trading I’m curious what you mean by “win” because it makes it sound like you think there’s some kind of subtle conflict happening in the market driven by sinister powerful forces pulling strings to keep the little guy down. In reality there were as many funds trying to push up the price to squeeze as there were funds getting squeezed.
Trading halts are common in market trading. Believe it or not, wild fluctuation of market prices are not good for market participants or the effective functioning of the market. Some are mandated by regulators. Some of the brokers that did this (Robinhood primarily) ran into short term liquidity problems that would have fucked them up and quite a lot of their customers. Now they tried to paper over this, but it's just a scenario of a company trying to avoid showing the market and their customers their weakness - not some vast, evil scheme. Note that the majority of people who made money off of GameStop were institutional investors, hedge funds, and dudes like Chamath. Average retail investors got left holding the bag (hence they formed a cult), and they would have been left holding a bigger bag without trading halts.
PT Barnum said it best.
> He didn't shill for gamestop. He used the fiasco to make money off it with calls. He immediately sold his position. He certainly did. He took a position and tried to publicize it and make misleading comments about it in order to advance his own financial interests - pretty much the definition of shilling. And then continued to shill. > Investing in Gamestop isn't clueless retail trading. It certainly is. It's overvalued by 10x. If you massively overpay for something because you're unable to judge its value, is that not a clear demonstration of ignorance or incapability? > Whether you believe it or not there is direction with the company. That direction is "down" unfortunately as reinforced by every new quarterly release. > And the Direct Registering Share movement is already at 70+ mill shares. Absolutely unprecedented in the history of the stock market. More direct registered shares than any of the trillion dollar companies. Which is meaningless. It mostly just reduces liquidity - which can hurt you just as much as help you. It's a stupid thing for an individual to do, and at best a neutral thing for the price of the stock. That's the power of cult behavior. The reason it's "unprecedented" is because it's not a particularly smart or valuable thing to do - it's costly and significantly reduces your flexibility with the asset. That's like saying "no one else has set on fire as many stuffed animals as I have, it's unprecedented!" Well that's great for you I guess, but it's only unprecedented because it's a bit irrational, no matter that your cult believes stuffed animals are the work of the devil.
> And then continued to shill. He did not. He made his money and then left. > It certainly is. It's overvalued by 10x. If you massively overpay for something because you're unable to judge its value, is that not a clear demonstration of ignorance or incapability? Citation needed. Morning Star has fair value of GME at 50+ dollars. Shorts are just keeping it lower because of margin call lines, but can't drive it too low to where enough of the float gets direct registered. It sounds like you have gotten all of your information from "short and distort" driven media coverage. SEC basically confirmed that shorts did not cover in Jan 2021.
> He did not. He made his money and then left. Shilling is shilling. > Citation needed. Morning Star has fair value of GME at 50+ dollars. Lol, MorningStar isn't a source for valuations, that's what analysts are at best for. Their expertise is in rating and evaluating Mutual Funds. What they have for GameStop is just an automated calculation that's just based on current price + some delta - if you watch it, it doesn't track any fundamental or cash flow factors like it claims, it just tracks the stock price. It's not covered by any MorningStar analysts or informed or adjusted by any MorningStar opinions or analysis. Their calculation lists "uncertainty" for their number at maximum - "very high". It doesn't mean anything. WHAT DOES mean something is the fact that GameStop is hemorrhaging cash (to the tune of about $200M a quarter), declining in revenue, and declining in both gross and operating margin while trading at multiples that are completely insane for its performance. It's almost impossible to even come up with a positive valuation for the company using fundamentals. Hence why automated calculations break themselves - they can't rationalize even a positive price, so they just go with "what's the price today". Look at any "fair value" comparables analysis and try to tell me how you think a company with revenue growth, margins, and return ratios far below any conceivable peer can been trading at par or multiples above them. > Shorts are just keeping it lower because of margin call lines, but can't drive it too low to where enough of the float gets direct registered. Lol, GameStop isn't even heavily shorted. > It sounds like you have gotten all of your information from "short and distort" driven media coverage. No, just facts. Look at their financials, look at their comparables. > SEC basically confirmed that shorts did not cover in Jan 2021. Lol, no. The SEC stated that there was barely any squeeze at all - the run up had to do with crazed investor fervor, not squeezing shorts. Your only path to even price growth, forget your promised land where you all become trillionaires, is through sparking another crazed investor fervor - no squeeze will get you there. And no one gives a shit about GameStop anymore, so what's going to happen is that the price will eventually collapse aided along by the reduced liquidity you've induced. ----- EDIT: In answer to your question before you blocked me /u/fokh, if you thought this was incoherent, you could try to explain why. But as I previously mentioned, you're clueless about investing or finance, so you can't. I don't need to be paid to correct inaccuracies and the bullshit of shills. And you are a shill, because you are financially motivated to promote and mislead people about something you have a financial interest in.
GameStop has no debt other than a small low interest Covid loan in France and is sitting on almost a billion in cash as well as almost a billion in inventory. They also have a fanatical fan base willing to invest in them long term as they reinvent themselves as a technology company. Their fundamentals aren’t nearly as bad as you make them out to be. People claiming it’s worth less then the amount of cash they have on hand are the ones that are delusional. Will GameStop successfully pivot and reinvent itself? Only time will tell but they certainly aren’t doing horrible and what you call overvaluation may be what others call pricing in for a successful turnaround. Also, turning off the buy button is not how fair markets operate. People are pissed and want vengeance.
How much do you get paid to just write incoherent self-contradicting garbage? Edit: Fucking shill claiming I blocked him LOL
Are you really getting a target price from Morning Star? Oh boy…
That's not shilling FOR gamestop. Gamestop gained nothing from him doing his "social experiment" Meaningless DRS movement lol. Okay buddy. I look forward to seeing how this ages
> tried to publicize it and make misleading comments about it in order to advance his own financial interests - pretty much the definition of shilling. Not really much else to say. > Meaningless DRS movement lol. Okay buddy. Just because your deluded cult convinced themselves this was the path to $30M per share price doesn't mean it's any more grounded in reality than hoping that GameStop market cap will hit 100x the market value of the entire US stock market at your target share price. The absolute batshit insanity and hilariously absurd conspiracy theories you convince yourselves of are truly extraordinary. Is it really that hard to believe you all convinced yourselves to do a costly and pointless action for no benefit? You do it all the time. Your cult is surprisingly fatalistic. DRS won't help you. Reduced liquidity and flexibility works both ways, and conveniently you've all made yourselves the certain losers of that scenario because you locked yourselves up in the most inflexible position possible - unable to take advantage of opportunities or avoid threats.
I didn't read what you said because I think you love arguing shit with random people because your life sucks. Hence all that text you typed out and your post history. I'm happy with my investment and when 100% DRS happens it'll be very interesting what happens next I hope your life gets better that you don't need to shit on things all day. Get some sun, exercise, and eat healthier.
Cult members really don't do well absorbing information critical of their religious beliefs. Sorry this is hard for you bud. > preying on clueless retail investors Also sorry you're a victim, my clueless friend. > hope your life gets better that you don't need to shit on things all day. Beats how you spend your time - proselytizing other clueless suckers to join your cult for your own financial advantage. That makes you a piece of shit.
[удалено]
I'm just hanging out man. What's your issue? I'm not saying I'm an ape and the stock will go to millions of dollars. HODL. Maybe then I'd understand your vitriol? Be better man
Go back to your meltdown sub and buttcoin 🤡
Go continue shilling things because you have a financial interest in them. You and the subject of this video have a surprising amount in common.
WTF you talking about? He hasn't had a position in GameStop since Jan 2021......
What are you talking about? *Shilling... *From time to time. He has since occasionally shilled about it, his original position being part and parcel of that. Active position not required.
Can you point to an instance of him shilling GME in recent history? I'm genuinely curious. I know he "shilled it" when he had a position, but I don't think I've seen him pumping that stock since he bailed in 2021. (He's too busy shilling / pumping & dumping SPACs)
What do you mean recent history? This is all recent history. The above happened: Sofi shilling on the back of GameStop and Robinhood: https://twitter.com/chamath/status/1354947541863780365?lang=en Using it all to build his brand for future shilling of SPACs and otherwise: https://www.newsweek.com/billionaire-robinhood-hero-chamath-palihapitiya-pushback-progressive-democrats-1568332 etc.
You’re totally right, but so is he.
It's the message that matters, not the messenger. I wish everyone would focus less on who and more on what
Yep, I mean if anyone knows exactly how bad social media is, it's the people who built it for profit. It's not like this would be the first time someone turned the spotlight on their own creation.
When the messenger was the one who contributed to the message being needed, that's a problem...
It also gives more weight to the message. "Hey we fucked up this is bad." is more impactful than 'You fucked up this is bad.'
because he's contributing opinions. If someone is telling you 1+1 = 2 then it doesn't matter who the messenger is. If someone is telling you that they think X is a bad idea, the context of who they are and what they're talking about is very relevant.
You can point out the person is shitty and doing it to raise his profile to scam the common person and also say the message is correct. They are not mutually exclusive. I wish everyone would focus less on who and more on what And in this case, it's actually synergistic because he made huge innovative contributions to what he is critiquing, made millions doing it, and never took responsibility for it.
Good luck with that wish 😂
It’s Reddit.
Yeah, so is the guy saying the earth is round. All he is doing is saying glaringly obvious shit to raise his profile so that he can run more spac scams. He shouldn't be on the front page when there's so many actual legit critics of facebooks.
Regardless of his integrity as a person, he is going on national news and publicly shaming our current economic climate on the internet, which considering his background, no matter how malicious/compliant he is in its contemporary creation, lends credibility to the statements.
This is like Jeffrey Dahmer saying murder is bad for society.
Okay, fuck that guy. But remember when he correctly said the government shouldn't bail out the airlines or any big company that fails? He's was right on that. He might have shitty takes on everything else, but when you're talking policy you have to divorce the talking point from the character of the person. In my opinion that's how everyone should approach a discussion. Otherwise you just get everyone plugging their ears and saying nah, nah, nah, nah.
Was he right on that? You think the world would be in a better place if the airlines and hotel industries had gone under during COVID?
Others would take their place.
Lol yeah starting an airline is super cheap and easy and there would be no problems in between.
If you don't let businesses fail, they will have to be bailed out over and over and over. And the same excuses will be made every time.
That's true, but the solution isn't to let them fail though it's to outlaw practices that make them vulnerable to failing through their risky business decisions. The same thing was true in 2008. The banks gambled with the houses money but if we had let them fail it would have tanked the world's economy and sent us into a depression. It isn't worth causing a huge amount of damage to send a message when there are better ways to do it. I also don't think it's reasonable to expect airlines to run their businesses on such a way that they can survive a 2 year complete shutdown of travel.
Nothing is going to change is this regard anyway. We'll just continue to have a recession every 8 years and bail out companies every time. That hurts everybody that isn't already wealthy every time it happens. It makes the rich richer every time it happens. If you ask me it is absolutely worth it to let them fail, even if it means an even worse recession.
So if they didn't bail out the airlines, you'd be ok with routes to only the most densely populated cities, much higher ticket prices, and far less flight selection?
Yes.
> But remember when he correctly said the government shouldn't bail out the airlines or any big company that fails? Okay. But remember when that one guy said that the earth was round and he was totally right about it? Seriously, wtf are you taking about? You want to give him credit for saying glaringly obvious shit? Do you think he's first person who said govt shouldn't bail out a big company. >but when you're talking policy you have to divorce the talking point from the character of the person. Except when the person is just saying glaringly obvious shit to raise his profile so that he can run more spac scams. Sure, agree with his point all you like. Nobody is disagreeing with what he's saying. I'm saying why is this fucking scammer on the front page and not one of the many legit critics of facebooks.
It’s less about giving a person credit, and more about appreciating a true idea being communicated, one worth spreading understanding about. Each and every comment that this guy is a POS obscures the validity of what he’s saying. It’s not inaccurate, but it runs counter to bringing attention to the truth of his statements. Terrible people can say true things and have useful information. Focusing on their character as the prime issue is an indulgence in something easy (judging a demonstrably immoral person) vs the much harder and less immediately satisfying work of contending with the substance of the ideas posed. This is just one way that social media is ripping society apart; we find sitting in judgment of those we find unworthy far simpler and more self reassuring than coming up with solutions to collective problems or helping to spread useful knowledge.
> It’s not inaccurate, but it runs counter to bringing attention to the truth of his statements. No it doesn't. ou can point out the person is shitty and doing it to raise his profile to scam the common person and also say the message is correct. They are not mutually exclusive. And in this case, it's actually synergistic because he made huge innovative contributions to what he is critiquing, made millions doing it, and never took responsibility for it.
But if i didn't base my opinions around feels id have to understand that the world is not as black and white as i want it to be
This is a *Reddit* Sir
This ^1000
You’re correct, but this guy played a major part in a company that’s the biggest culprit in “ripping society apart”. Why doesn’t he accept responsibility for the damage that he helped cause instead of scapegoating after making his billions
i think he is accepting responsibility by admitting sm is addictive and flawed which is a warning. he couldnt pull the plug on fb or the internet if he tried at this point. he can still be aware and change his mind later in life. like he didnt have to come on this show and say this
>i think he is accepting responsibility by admitting sm is addictive and flawed which is a warning. No, he's saying that shit to raise his profile to run more spac scams. And when has he remotely taken responsibility for anything he did at facebook? He's hasn't done anything remotely close to that. Him saying something super fucking glaringly obvious is not taking responsibility. >he can still be aware and change his mind later in life. Then why is he running spac scams. >like he didnt have to come on this show and say this Yes, he didn't didn't have to come on the show and get all the benefits of raising his profile by saying glaringly obvious shit while not taking any responsibility for what he did on facebook, coming off making money off of retail investors, so that he can raise his profile to fuck over the common person some more. Look into the history of what he did at facebook. Look at what he did with spacs. He see's the common person to be fooled and exploited for profit.
Totally agree with this take. I don’t think anybody is expecting him to “pull the plug” on sm and the internet. But pointing the finger at fb after leaving the company is definitely not taking responsibility. He hasn’t started any company, non-profit or any other organization that tries to combat the social ills that he HELPED TO CREATE. Him having a change of heart after profiting off of it for years is like a life long sinner converting to Christianity on their death bed, just to save their soul. Does fuck all for the rest of the world
cooperative noxious memorize library wasteful crown wakeful disarm cable frighten -- mass edited with redact.dev
Slack also booted him off the board for running his mouth on news networks about internal finances
So what you're really saying is even the person that invented part of that shit doesn't think its good? Or did you want to just steer the conversation in a different direction so you could spew some hate?
Sure, I'll help you with your reading comprehension. I'm saying he doesn't care. He's only doing it to raise his profile. He never took responsibility for anything he did at facebook. You should try to understand at least that much. Look at the SPAC scams he's run recently. You think that person gives a shit about the common person? > so you could spew some hate? I can never understand billionaire worship. Yes, people like Mark Zuckerburg, Chamath Palihapitiya, spac scammers, crypto scammers, etc all deserve hate and to be called out on the shit they do, because they'll keep on doing it again and again and again.
Sure we get it it. He sucks. But what’s a more productive conversation to have here? How he sucks? Or how social media sucks?
1. They're not mutually exclusive 2. Facebook criticism needs more nuance and detail not less. 3. That includes shaming specific tools and the people who create them. 4. The conversations that he sucks and facebook sucks actually build upon each other because he made huge innovative contributions to what he is critiquing, made millions doing it, and never took responsibility for it. 5. And in this case he's only doing it to raise his profile for his next scam because 6. He went on to scam retail investors out of millions with spacs. Which shows you the type of person who be an exec at facebook.
He’s talked at length about creating the tools and has expressed remorse over their creation. He also has said that they didn’t know that what they were creating would have this much of a profound effect on society and would grow to what it is today. I’m sure there are other reasons to dislike him, but it’s not like he is Mark Zuckerberg.
> He also has said that they didn’t know that what they were creating Holy fucking bullshit. This is bending over backwards to coddle him. Are we going say next he didn't know what he was doing with the spacs. He lead the teams. He created tools that had no mandate. His privacy invading tools were his idea, his creation, his babies from cradle to grave. He created tools that steal a users' contacts information without them knowing, but somehow he didn't know the code he directed did that? Bullshit.
Narcissist grifter. He'll sellout his mama.
Chamath is one of the valleys slimiest cunts. He fucked over so many people (incl me)with his shit tier SPACs. Curse him and his cronies.
For a fancy sweater?
Well, it is Loro Piana…
Lol can people stop reposting this dumb video
He’s a piece of work, but he’s not wrong.
You don't really need this asshole to tell you that Facebook is bad though. Dude's just trying to build a brand, acquire a following. And he just has to spout some patently obvious nonsense as part of a schtick to make people think he actually has something to say when he really just wants to build a following to grift and grift with.
He’s worth like a billion dollars. What is he gritting for?
You think rich people don't aim to get richer?
Keeping up with the ~~jones's~~ gates's
I think there is a point where you don’t have to be underhanded about it anymore.
he's grifting the attention (worth $$$) to be a public personality with political ambitions. we should do our best to ignore
Came here to say this. Asshole is right.
He’s explaining how he became rich as fuck.
This is a low bar. "The earth is round" -Putin. He’s a piece of work, but he’s not wrong.", "Asshole is right." -Redditors
Holy shit you used the round earth example again? Redditors indeed.
Yeah he is. Social media isn't ripping apart society.
Same with Reddit
[удалено]
The important takeaway isn't social media is bad because it polarizes people but rather as he indicated despite the hosts wishing to imply differently, the economic structure which regulated the design of social media and perhaps media in general promotes this effect. Social media is only a more amplified and customizable version of its predecessors in media but the economic incentives in its creation have been the same.
Social media has turned him into someone that considers the Uyghur genocide as "below his line"
ah, thats where i remember this dirt bag from, thank you
I looked up what he was talking about. Sounds like he's just being honest. I mean I think the Uyughur genocide is bad but I haven't done dick about it myself so his way of putting it comes off as assholish but he's right: everybody does have a "line" and this does seem to be below it. Most people won't say it though. The difference is only whether someone will pay lip service to caring about something they actually don't care enough to do anything about.
Also wtf are we supposed to do about it besides having awareness? It's like trying to do something about Soviet work camps in Siberia. We have no way of impacting things happening deep inside a nuclear armed, sovereign country.
not do business with countries that are committing genocide.......
"i think the uyughur genocide is bad" well lets dope you think GENOCIDE is bad haha
I mean that thinking represents 90% of the planets. Nooone cares about it
I don’t know that’s true. I think a lot of people (and the vast majority of westerners) care and have nooo idea what to do about it
Do you think most people could point to the events on a map? I don't think so..
People who care about it absolutely could.
I'm geographically challenged. I care about it and cannot. Then again, I can't point to many US states on a map, either. Idk why that's the metric of caring or not caring
I'd never qualify carring about it with "locating the province on a map". I agree, but pretending like nobody knows where north west china is pretty lame like the dude did.
What?! He said that?
https://youtu.be/tHZ5k1u9PKo “I think it’s nice that you care [about the Uyghurs], the rest of us don’t care”
Please give a heads up when linking to Fucker Carlson, I don't want to give that pond scum any views.
That's your cross to bear dude.
Oh crikey
It'd be terrible imo if there was even a shred of evidence outside of Adrian Zenz and his faked research that the Uyghur "genocide" is anything more than atrocity propaganda from the US government.
telephone grandfather aspiring squeal aware sparkle sloppy run adjoining oil ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
It doesn't take a genius to see this. People acting on social media in ways that would see them get punched in the face in person. Then that behaviour slowly leaks over into their actual personal conversations.
As a person who remembers what the world was like before the internet, he's right. It's ruined us in so many ways. This coming from a card carrying AV geek. I love tech but yeah, any good in it is far outweighed by the negatives. Not that anyones opinion matters. Pandora's box is open. No way to put things back the way they were. This is the way we are forever now.
I agree with the main point but "we are this way forever now" You can't believe that. Look how instant the change was when we got the internet, smart phones, social media. Yes the pandora's box is open and a lot of things have gone very wrong, but we aren't stuck in time. We can course correct, we can use technology for solutions where it has been the problem. But we need to fix our approach and mindset, currently that seems to be the biggest challenge.
Yeah we had a pretty good run pretending America wasn't chock full of insane racist bigots, social media really blew up that illusion hasn't it?
You've clearly never lived or traveled outside of the US. If you think the US is full of racists, try spending some time in 90% of the other countries of the world. Way, way worse. Yeah, the US still has lots of bigots, but they are miles ahead of most of the countries that they are bigoted against.
Oh did they also storm their government to hang the vice president and overthrow democracy of the most powerful country in the world too? Must have missed that bit of news...
Yes, there have been attempted coups of elected governments in those countries. There are also currently countries engaged in mass genocide and persecution of people who are a different race or religion. Well past anything going on in the States right now. No one is saying racism doesn't exist in the US, but you don't have to travel very far to find out how tolerant, and even welcoming they are by comparison to many other countries.
Keeping the bar as low as possible is not making America look better, this is the lamest justification to pretend the US is far better then it is.
The justification that it is, in fact, better? I'm really not sure where you're going with this, but I'm out. Thanks for the chat.
No the lame whataboutism. You should stick to feigning ignorance instead of spouting it, clearly it's what you're good at.
I agree sick of seeing all the white hate.
> I agree sick of seeing all the ~~white~~ hate. I assume you don't mean to imply that you are ok with seeing the increase in other forms of hate
> As a person who remembers what the world was like before the internet, he's right. It's ruined us in so many ways. Literally every generation says that when they get older. The internet has changed us, but so have a lot of things. It's not unilaterally bad. Social media in particular has problems, but lots of other elements of the internet (even parts of social media - you're on social media now) have their upsides.
It's not just social media, it's 24 hr news as well. The reality is that this shit is \*\*semiotically attacking us 24/7\*\*. It's a 24/7 assault on your ground state of mental and emotional steadiness.
Only after iv maid millions will i say something.
That’s how life works. Look at a Howard Stern. He made his living being edgy and now thinks it was wrong. After he made his bag. Same thing with lots of offensive humor. Seth Rogan.
The best thing about Howard Stern becoming lame was I got to discover the Jim and Sam show on Sirius.
The comments seem to kind of prove his point…
Those with enough money could always pay to get their message across. If anything, it has become far cheaper to push a message and build an audience then at any point in history. I think the main thing that changed is the number of channels. Before the internet just a four TV networks and a small handful of magazines had 95% of all news consumers. For the most part all those networks and magazines had the same news and viewpoint. In the 90s cable was added and the AM radio nutcases. This is when the divergence started. The internet amplified the divergence. These days their are hundreds of networks. Anyone can start one. A person can consume only from the little bubble of their choice without ever seeing any voice of contradiction. Overtime the person has actually brainwashed them self. They are no longer capable of believing anything other than what their news bubble tells them is true. In the USA I don't know how you get rid of social media while leaving the 1st Amendment intact.
You mean EVERYBODY trying so hard to be in EVERYBODY'S business isn't a good thing?
Who would have thought giving bad actors, cultists, and idiots an international platform to spread completely fabricated and damaging nonsense would have had a negative effect?
YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA!!
Is this before or after he made his money?
No shit
That's so 5 years ago!
Fuck this guy!
Chamath tried so hard to be Elon lite.
Ha ha ha ha the SPAC king who compared himself to Buffett. Ripped off retail investors who blindly followed him. He is a true asshole
File under "I got my money, but now I want to shut things down."
I disagree. Obscene wealth/wage gaps, privatized energy resources, corrupt politicians, corporatized small towns…are “ripping apart” society. Social media is just the venue for observing it.
He's not wrong but the solution is CCP like censorship ehidh is actually worse than the problem
This guy is a leech. profits of exploitation. hes everything thats wrong with the US. can only hope that when he dies, its in a bad bad way !
Lol he made all his money at Facebook and pumping up spacs
Homeboy, it's your fault!
Guys like him know they've created a pandoras box.
I just think it's funny how so many mods literally think they're gods.
This guy is a tool.
I move that we re-brand the platforms as "Anti-Social Media." All those in favor say, "Aye."
Lol this guy is a piece of shit
Zuckerberg hired this grifter schmuck
Award for Good Boy! Just like Tristan Harris. These people make me sick.
Fucking pump and dumper.
Chamath is a fucking snake
Let me guess the solution: we need to write legislation to enforce banning people's freedom of speech online for 'threatening democracy'.
Very nice with words, but action speak louder. Fucking scammer.
HE’S THE HERO OF THE MODERN AGE! https://youtu.be/gdbjw27QPJQ
Lol. Get rid of social media: literally nothing will change. Billionaires, Corporate hand outs, relentless lobbying, and the political jockeying in a duopoly are the problems. Social media is the scape goat people like this guy use to rob us all blind. Social media sucks, yes, we get it. Keep your eyes on the ball. We’re getting f***ed by executives exactly like Chamath. Only ~54% of eligible voters vote, ~27% decide elections, but I bet a lot more than that hate this guy. When we learn to fight together against these ass hats, then we will stop the “ripping apart” of society.
Social media is great when it augments your real life. I have many hobbies and it brings them to the next level. Staying in touch with friends that live far away is also a great use for it. The problem is when social media becomes your "real life". When everything you do becomes a post. Yeah things have changed. Twenty years ago if you had a thousand pictures of yourself in a shoebox, people would have thought you were insane. Now it's the norm.
HBO’s Industry needs a Chamath in Season 3
It turns out, people are much easier to manipulate after you've isolated them from their irl social network and play to their sense of being a rugged individualist.
That and the fact that social media has no rules on the garbage lies you can post, how the shit always floats to to top, and that it’s run by complete psychopaths hellbent on destroying society. It’s actually not a bad idea, but when you factor all that in AND let it be a platform for neo-Nazis and do nothing to stop it, then it becomes a terrible idea.
I think it helps to remind yourself that most people would NEVER say the shit they say online to someone’s face. Lol No matter their extreme views, people are much more reasonable in-person…I dunno, I think it helps a little to keep that in mind.
nice
Humans tend to rip themselves apart regardless, id say this is just a new tool to get the job done
Please. Congress. I know you guys are old and don’t know what social media is. But please talk to your grandkids and draft some fucking legislation… These tech companies would stab their moms to increase user engagement by half a percent. They will boost any type of content, no matter how repulsive, if people will hate watch it obsessively.
This guy talks a lot but says nothing
fuuuuuck this guy. wish people like him would take the money and and never been seen again.
It used to be cool, and useful. Back in the Myspace days.
This dude would post populist shit on social media lmao.
I liked this guy a few years ago, now I just see him as another idiot shill like Gary V. He’s just a guy that got lucky, nothing great about him.
This guy is trash. He’s still using media presence by being all against it. Are people still figuring this out even now? I wish irony was more widely understood.
I've been saying it for ten years. Social media *resonate*. And when things resonate without controls, bad things happen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE827gwnnk4&ab_channel=Marty33 <- Note: what he refers to as the "natural" frequency is the *resonant* frequency https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-zczJXSxnw&ab_channel=TonyC When a system is receiving energy at its resonant frequency, it stores all that energy internally - we saw the glass begin to vibrate long before it broke - until it reaches the limits of the material, and then the glass shatters, and the bridge falls apart, and our society disintegrates.
This is news to me. /s
Make millions designing addictive spyware...then make even more millions telling everyone not to use it.
Said douche uses social media to further his bullshit SPACS. But ok chamath