BC TECH
Saved by @jacobhtml

Mark Zuckerberg on NYT story: "To suggest we weren't interested in knowing the truth or wanted to hide what we knew or wanted to prevent investigations is simply untrue."

 Facebook says it will take a couple of questions on the article but wants to focus on (looks at notes) its transparency report.
Good luck with that folks.
Now Mark Zuckerberg is running through all the tactics it's deploying to clean up the platform (you know like they should have years ago).
What every Facebook user should be reading in the meantime
https://t.co/ohyhUSyxTL
Mark Zuckerberg is vaguely denying allegations in the story and moves quickly to stressing solutions so people will stop talking about the problems. This is the Facebook playbook. Is the company misreading the room this time?
Facebook board statement on Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg: "To suggest that they knew about Russian interference and either tried to ignore it or prevent investigations into what had happened is grossly unfair."
This announcement that Facebook executives are discussing was planned for a long time. But the timing, coming a day after the NYT bombshell, is not coincidental.
https://t.co/dGsHGR99oB
https://t.co/aTsrWblscg
This is the note from Mark Zuckerberg: A Blueprint for Content Governance and Enforcement https://t.co/EtZu9sAHTT
ABC News: Mark, is anyone going to lose their job over this? If not, please explain.
Zuckerberg: Blah blah. I generally don't talk about specific cases of that in public. Blah blah.
Mark Zuckerberg: I have tremendous respect for George Soros even though we disagree. As soon as I learned about this in the NYT, I talked to our team and we are no longer working with this firm.
Wired: Why did you think opposition research was a winning strategy?
Zuckerberg: I learned about this yesterday. In general, I think you're right. This might be normal in Washington but it's not the kind of thing we want Facebook associated with.
Cheap seats: How does the CEO not know this? And why isn't the executive who clearly did know on this call?
Recode: Did you consider taking Facebook offline in Myanmar to prevent violence?
Facebook: ... We are bringing the world closer together.
Mark Zuckerberg: We have considered taking the service down when we were worried about a privacy or security issue. But he does not address Myanmar.
WSJ: Have you fired anyone?
Zuckerberg: We have made personnel changes. Hey, we just hired a new global policy and comms chief. Let's focus on that.
Lots of long pauses as executives confer on how to respond to media questions.
Asked whether he would step down as board chairman, Mark Zuckerberg says no.
"I am quite focused on finding ways to get more independence into our systems in other ways."
Bloomberg: After revelations in NYT article, how are things going to change in Facebook's relationships with critics, lawmakers and media?
Zuckerberg: Transparency is one of the bigger areas where we have to continue to do more.
The buck stops with Mark Zuckerberg, true. But no excuse for Sheryl Sandberg not being on this call if Facebook has found this new religion called transparency.
Also, if you are CEO of a major company and you learn really bad stuff about your company by reading it in the newspaper, you have a serious problem.
So, who did know on your team about Definers?
Zuckerberg: "I think someone on our comms team must have hired them."
Comms team, meet the bus that just ran you over.
Pressed again on who's responsible and who will get fired, Zuckerberg gets his back up: I feel like I have answered this question a bunch of times. I am not going to get into personnel decisions on this call.
Mark Zuckerberg just extended the call to answer more questions from the media.
https://t.co/Vp6KKvHGJ5
We are now one hour into this press call.
Finally someone asks directly about Sheryl Sandberg.
Zuckerberg: Sheryl learned about this at the same time that I did. Overall Sheryl is doing great work for the company. She has been a very important partner to me and will continue to be.
Facebook board: Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg are doing great.
Mark Zuckerberg: I have no idea what's happening inside my own company and neither does Sheryl.
Why do you believe you are the right person to lead Facebook?
Zuckerberg: We are doing the right things to fix the issues. I am fully committed to getting this right.
Asked about the review of lobbyists and whether Sheryl Sandberg will oversee it in light of the allegations in the NYT article, Mark Zuckerberg says new global policy and comms chief Nick Clegg will oversee the review and he reports to Sandberg.
Zuckerberg says the reality is he is not going to know every single thing going on. He also says he has confidence in his team who does know these things. 🤷‍♀️
Facebook has now ended the press call.
Thanks for spending the last hour and 22 minutes with me.
--30--

More from Tech

Zen Black
Zen Black
@z3nblack
1/ Thread: "A Silicon Valley Ponzi Scheme"

Thanks to @chamath for laying this out in Social Capital's 2018 annual letter.

I've always appreciated his outspokenness.

2/ The hardest thing for most startups today is the path to market: first finding product-market fit & a way to reach customers, then building a ruthless machine to acquire, monetize & retain them.

3/ Because of this, when the VC industry invests capital into fast growing startups today, the plurality (if not majority) of invested capital will go into user acquisition and ad spending, for better or worse— usually worse.

4/ Todays massive venture-backed advertising, sales, and user acquisition playbook has morphed into one that champions growth at any cost.

This is creating a big bill that will soon come due...

5/ Ad impressions and click-throughs are bid up to outrageous prices by startups flush with venture money, and prospective users demand more and more subsidized products to gain their initial attention.
TECH , STARTUPS , {TEST FOLDER}
s. e. smith
s. e. smith
@sesmith
Oh are we talking about Sheryl Sandberg again? Well, your reminder that disabled feminists, LGBQT feminists, and feminists of color criticised her ‘lean in’ deal from day one. Don’t let anyone retcon that out of existence.

Like, a pretty narrow slice of feminists actually endorse and support corporate feminism, they’re just white, nondisabled, straight, cis, and noisy so their voices have a bigger reach.

So if your impression is that ‘feminism’ gave her a ‘free pass’ maybe you should question your overall impression of feminism rather than continuing to centre a handful of people as ‘thought leaders’ or whatever.

Critics within feminism have been doing this work for a long time and have been getting shat on it for about as long and I'm tired of seeing them erased. But what do I know — I am, after all, not a feminist.

But I WILL say, from my not-a-feminist perspective, that people who aren’t feminists who are criticising feminism should maybe understand the movement more deeply beyond a handful of high profile celebrity feminists.
TECH , SOCIETY
Advertisement
Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
Most software founders, particularly in B2B, need to get radically better at sales. @Steli , who is the best person for explaining the scrappy stages in the beginning and then building out a team with scripts and processes, wrote a guide to:

For technical founders it is irrationally, obscenely hard to reverse years of programming (ba dum bum) that sales is a value-destroying activity. Sales is CLEARLY a value-creating activity, contingent on you have a value-creating product.

The world will not drop what they are doing to adopt your work. This is particularly true in B2B, where simply building a better mousetrap won't overcome the activation energy required to get people with additional non-mice problems to prioritize changing mousetraps today.

This is very non-obvious for founders because founders are not often people who *want* to be sold to. We often come from a background where trying out tools is a bit of a fun hobby. We like looking at all the options, making charts, and ripping out partially complete tests.

"This week I unsuccessfully trialed four software options for automating that thing that has been killing us. Our actual production process remains the same as last week. Don't worry; this was a great use of time." is not a thing you want to write in a progress report to manager.
TECH
The Captain
The Captain
@TheCaptain182
What an amazing presentation! Loved how @ravidharamshi77 brilliantly started off with global macros & capital markets, and then gradually migrated to Indian equities, summing up his thesis for a bull market case!

@MadhusudanKela @VQIndia @sameervq

My key learnings: ⬇️⬇️⬇️


First, the BEAR case:

1. Bitcoin has surpassed all the bubbles of the last 45 years in extent that includes Gold, Nikkei, dotcom bubble.

2. Cyclically adjusted PE ratio for S&P 500 almost at 1929 (The Great Depression) peaks, at highest levels except the dotcom crisis in 2000.

3. World market cap to GDP ratio presently at 124% vs last 5 years average of 92% & last 10 years average of 85%.
US market cap to GDP nearing 200%.

4. Bitcoin (as an asset class) has moved to the 3rd place in terms of price gains in preceding 3 years before peak (900%); 1st was Tulip bubble in 17th century (rising 2200%).
TECH
Robert M. Lee
Robert M. Lee
@RobertMLee
A quick thread on intelligence analysis in the context of cyber threat intelligence. I see a number of CTI analysts get into near analysis paralysis phases for over thinking their assessments or over obsessing about if they might be wrong. (1/x)

Consider this scenario. A CTI analyst identifies new intrusions and based on the collection available and their expertise note that the victims are all banks. Their consumer wants to know when threats specifically target banks (not just that banks are victims).

The CTI analyst has, from their collection, at this time, and based on their expertise enough to make an activity group (leveraging the Diamond Model in this example) that meet's the requirement of their consumer. So what's the problem?

The CTI analyst begins to over think it. "What if I had more collection? Would my analysis change? I really don't *know* they aren't also targeting mining companies in Australia as I don't have collection there."

The analyst knows their analysis is going to be shared. Maybe even public. "What if another team or professional intelligence firm has more collection and ends up noting that it isn't banking specific at all. Banks are victims, not targets. Will my consumer distrust me later?"
TECH

You May Also Like

Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
CRYPTO
Justin Jackson
Justin Jackson
@mijustin
A lot of bootstrappers think they have a marketing problem:

"I need to get better at marketing."

But, it's more likely that you have a product problem:

"Do customers really want this? Do they care enough about this to switch to a new solution?"

☝️ this is why most of my book, @marketingdevs, is about:

1. Choosing the right market
2. Building something they want

"If your product is remarkable, getting noticed is a lot easier." – @peldi


I was reminded of this concept again this morning while reading @pjrvs' book (Company of One):

"Sales increase when you honestly evaluate what someone needs and then teach them the value of what you're selling."


To succeed, your product has to offer an outcome that is highly desirable to a large group of customers.

The number of sales your product receives is a multiple of these two variables:

1. How big is the target market?
2. How desirable is the outcome you're offering them?
STARTUPS
Advertisement
Andrew Chen
Andrew Chen
@andrewchen
👇 Thread. New deck getting published this week: "Consumer startups are awesome, and here's what I'm looking to invest in at Andreessen Horowitz." If you want to read it, subscribe to my newsletter here: https://t.co/262t8eh0wf


1/ A lot of new consumer technologies have been introduced to US households in the last 100 years. But it's taken many of them - like the telephone - more than 50 years to get to the majority of the US. Why is that?


2/ We had to literally teach people how to use phone. Which end goes to your mouth, which goes to your ear. Say "hello" when people call. The motivation of consumers to talk to their friends has always been there, but we had to teach the behavior


3/ If you compare phones to the latest technologies, there's been a huge shift. Things are being picked up much faster.


4/ Even while there's been all this innovation recently, physically speaking, we are still the same human beings from 100,000 years ago.
STARTUPS
Professor
Professor
@DillikiBiili
Some ofthe biggest breakouts occur after Volatility Contraction, the analogy is that more a spring is pressed, higher it jumps whenever it gets released.

There is a VCP Scanner on chartink (Not mine). This may also be used to find potential Breakouts.
SCREENERS , TA SCREENERS
Greta Musk
Greta Musk
@GretaMusk
🚔 HUGE #Tesla SERVICE PROBLEMS THREAD🚔

You might remember my 3 prior threads on how
TESLA. TREATS. ITS. CUSTOMERS. LIKE. TRASH.

Here's the 4th installment.
@tomkeinan @jonsey_lisa @jwmooc @tchanpoker @bryanthediamond @EconomicManBlog
$TSLA $TSLAQ 1/22


Welcome to Greta's 4th edition of #Tesla customers getting used and abused. Because that's the Elon Musk way.
@coffeebreakls @KocgibiHarun @omaragha @JayGhahari
$TSLA $TSLAQ 2/22


"The best service is no service." - Elon Musk a.k.a. #SpaceKaren
@briansaziz @FarSha998899 @thinktankfour @Billoday1
#Tesla $TSLA $TSLAQ 3/22


These #Tesla customers represent just the very tip of the iceberg. They are ones who have Twitter, have decided to complain about their #TeslaServiceIssues publicly, and were found by yours truly.
@yanismydj @hajelatweets @AlanHeldman @francislongo5 $TSLA $TSLAQ 4/22


Dear #Tesla customers: In California, if your vehicle has been out of service for >30 days total, it's a lemon. You can get punitive damages and attorney's fees. Don't sit around and take Elon's abuse. @13arm13arm @cecimar12 @richardson_skip @shootinglee $TSLA $TSLAQ 5/22
TECH