Panjam

1986! Is that correct?

Who on earth made the decision to pay prisoners for blood and not test it? I realise it was the early days of HIV, but enough was understood at the time to make that one of the most evil things I've ever heard.

When I visited the US for the first time 3 years ago, I was shocked by the levels of segregation. For reference I grew up in black South Africa.

This is true. It's also 'whataboutery'. Slavery was always abhorrent, and the fact it was and is widely practiced does not excuse its beneficiaries. What is interesting is that I don't think you are deploying this rhetorical trick as a means to persuade others, so much as to make yourself feel better about something: to assuage some sort of cognitive unease. Contrast this with the author of the article: she owns it. That is absolute moral bravery.

This is the most fascinating article I have read this month, if not year. Thanks to the author, if you find your way to these comments. What I found particularly interesting:

1. The insight into Igbo culture and its complexity. We rarely see this in articles published in the West about African culture, in part because many African writers care not to disclose (not just because of existing narratives into which western writers place lazy stories).

2. The nuance in the response to the past: guilt and pride. Many people feel this I suspect. I wonder if knee jerk reactions such as that by the commenter (1996) at the top of the comments is a reaction to that discomfort, rather than the perceived accusations of historical injustice.

3. The way in which traditional belief systems, curses etc, gave rise to such a mature and measured response to the sins of the past. There is a parallel to German acknowledgement of past sins; I'm fairly sure roooted in their traditional Catholic belief systems.

This is an odd response to the article. You've had quite an emotional reaction to a well-written and informative piece. In a quieter moment, you might reflect on all the possibilities for your raised ire.

As a child I had a strong South African accent, although I could not hear it. I remember visiting some relatives in the north of England and being very surprised by their accents - and saying to my mother, "thank goodness we don't have accents!". I now have an American accent and equally don't hear my accent when I talk, and laughed at a recording I recently heard of my childhood accent.

It's really appalling. The correct behaviour is to pull the plug on your shitty promotion and issue a message of condolence. One company, one guy is not representative of an industry, but my experience of 75% of people in the blockchain/crypto space has left me with a sour taste in my mouth.

Matt and substack, do you think privately-owned media platforms could be disintermediated by blockchain type solutions, linking producers to consumers without a middleman?

That was excellent. Thanks for posting. It's a short film, so it's not a criticism, but I hope he explains why this happened in more detail.

Like coffee? Three cups a day mate.

There's one born every minute. In both hemisphere's it would seem!

I get the distinct impression that Zuckerberg has been briefed to say "I'll get back to you on that", on anything that might be controversial. Probably some wisdom in that as it defuses a lot of emotion that could arise if certain information comes out in this setting. But it's also disingenuous, even if it avoids a lynchmob for now.

It's laughable she is called brilliant: anyone with a shred of common sense would guess that a douchebag business model like FB is ultimately going to be a liability.

It's what they call "lawyered responses" in Singapore.

Watch this prat from Facebook get his arse served to him by a Singaporean MP.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ziTfDdffUKs

This is funny in a way, but I think it's also very shocking that the FB spokesman felt sufficiently mandated to talk to a democratic representative in that way. I guess the spokesman might have jut been having a bad day, but I did wonder whether the rudeness was the function of a really toxic - I would even say colonialist - culture at FB.

She's the de facto CEO. She's placed there by investors to manage Zuck and stop him doing anything that might jeopardise all that IPO capital - and after her time at Google, she proved she knew how to manage ASD idealists. I'm rather glad this has happened, someone who built the two biggest douchebag business models the world has ever seen is not fit for public office.

Yes, this. It seems SCL associates have exploited the commercial veil very effectively and we need to look behind that veil to work out what happened. I would also say that SCL has very cleverly exploited the difference between equity and contract payments to subvert spending caps. Invest a business...no spending cap.... I hate these guys. I'm a proud Brit, I do biz globally, and these guys have trashes Brand UK. I'm sometimes close to tears at what these guys have done.

I'm not Italian, but I love the country and have Italian cousins. These things surprised me: 1. The need for licenses to build anything. I seem to recall the figure of 100,000 euros licence to open a small chemist. 2. The need of support from the local big families for your business to thrive, ie you need to be anointed to make it. 3. The cost of housing relative to income. Who the fuck owns all the housing.

I feel sad for Italians, they are some of the best people I know.

For the Americans reading, young Italians have not been dispirited by socialism, but by rampant crony capitalism.

Well done you two. Prison shatters families and communities when a family or community member is sent to jail. Talk about cruel and inhumane, to punish children for their parents transgressions.

Interesting information, thank you. The knives do seem to be out for FB right now, but equally it is the douchiest of douchebag business models, essentially: we'll give you a means to engage with the world, but we're going to watch how you do it, in order to manipulate your preferences. It's like the Stasi but in corporate form. Essentially, it will die because it's the Harvey Weinstein of corporate America - and because all the #metoo victims find their voice, with a little help from the other studio heads which would like to see the monster disappear.