this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
716 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

69098 readers
3036 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's damned hard to prove an antitrust case: so often, the prosecution has to prove that the company intended to crush competition, and/or that they raised prices or reduced quality because they knew they didn't have to fear competitors.

It's a lot easier to prove what a corporation did than it is to prove why they did it. What am I, a mind-reader? But imagine for a second that the corporation in the dock is a global multinational. Now, imagine that the majority of the voting shares in that company are held by one man, who has served as the company's CEO since the day he founded it, personally calling every important shot in the company's history.

Now imagine that this founder/CEO, this accused monopolist, was an incorrigible blabbermouth, who communicated with his underlings almost exclusively in writing, and thus did he commit to immortal digital storage a stream – a torrent – of memos in which he explicitly confessed his guilt.

Ladies and gentlepersons, I give you Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Meta (nee Facebook), an accused monopolist who cannot keep his big dumb fucking mouth shut.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cotlovan@lemm.ee 4 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Are you implying that he bribed the previous administrations, as nothing happened until now?

[–] GhostedIC@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago

Well, FOIA requests revealed Facebook was extremely cooperative with both enacting government censorship requests, and keeping them secret, when those same censorship requests would have been utterly illegal if they were an official order, so...

Some deal like "You give us control over information and we leave your monopoly alone", even unspoken, seems to be the gist of it.

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I’m not implying anything. I’m outright saying that the US government is corrupt enough to take kickbacks by corporations for political favors. I’m also saying Zuck didn’t bribe Trump’s admin enough (i.e. donations to his inaugural fund) to get away with their bullshit.

[–] King3d@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

The initial suit was brought in December 2020. These things don’t happen over night.