The assertion in the PBS article is that marking a video with "Angry" had a 5x multiplier vs just marking it with "Like", therefore Facebook amplified hate.
Even if Zuckerberg himself mandated that the video by U Wirathu be shown to everyone, in the same way I suspect the editors of the Nazi newspapers published their lies about the Jews, it misses my point.
Facebook is not responsible in anyway for what happened in Myanmar, the people who acted in Myanmar are 100% responsible.
Facebook blocking the video would have been no more effective than destroying all the printing press in Nazi Germany.
Censorship is never the answer.

Perhaps, but "at all" is a strong statement, it seems some motives at minimum can be inferred.
I see only one motive in pushing for censorship: power.
The power to control the information that others receive because you think you are smarter than them.

This still describes social pathology and state failure, not platform culpability: Facebook neither authored the threats nor forced anyone to read them. Across history, mass violence and genocide have occurred without modern platforms, driven by nationalism, propaganda, social coercion, and fear. The Rwanda genocide spread through radio and rumor networks; Nazi Germany used newspapers, posters, rallies, and denunciations; and ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia relied on TV, print, and face-to-face intimidation. Long before mass media, Ancient Rome proscriptions, Medieval Europe pogroms, the Salem witch trials, and Athens ostracism all enforced conformity through public shaming and fear alone. The pattern is clear: intimidation and in-group policing are social behaviors; tools change speed and reach, but the engine has always been human norms, fear, and power.

You do not care at all about the people of Myanmar any more than to use the tragedy to obtain power.

After watching Linus Torvalds on Linus tech tips I am more inclined to defend Apple on controlling the RAM. Linus asserted that the Windows Blue Screen of Death is caused by bad hardware and that is why he insists on ECC RAM in his computer. Apple having tighter control over the RAM may help with reliability and in turn user experience by reducing hardware errors. Still would be nice to have a cheaper option and take the risk as a consumer. But as a business I can understand pushing for premium hardware and hopefully reducing support issues later.

Mark Zuckerberg lives rent free in your head, you even gave him a nickname how cute! The only insight here is yours and those who voted you up jealousy. You just wish you had slapped together a popular web site that brings in billions of dollars of revenue and got invited to Jeff's party.

Everyone who goes to facebook.com chooses to use Zuckerberg's products, no one is forced to do so. I chose not to give him my attention or clicks, and would hope to dry up his funding from ad revenue. But over a billion people of the world chose to reward him by using his product; and that is their choice.

This is nonsense. French citizens and anyone else in the world should have the choice if they want to go to facebook.com or not. Zuckerberg has caused no damage to the stability of any country any more than language, roads, or any other utility. People make their own decisions. Anyone trying to use this to bane an IP address is simply interested in grabbing power and making sure they control people.

If you and the French government really cared about the French people you would educate them, not cut them off from anything. You either think the French people are exceptionally stupid, or you want to control them.

The French people are not stupid, no one believed their was a co-op. This is a power grab. The French people actively choose to visit facebook.com or not.

CO2 liquifies at Room Temperature, air does not. CO2 has higher energy density. CO2 has a higher round trip efficiency.

CO2 can be turned into a liquid at roughly 30C (86F) when under pressure (about 70 bar). To turn air into a liquid, you must cool it to extreme cryogenic temperatures (around -196C). Liquid CO2 is roughly 400 times denser than gaseous CO2 at atmospheric pressure. Because it stays liquid at "ambient" (normal) temperatures, it can be stored in standard steel tanks without the need for massive refrigeration systems. CO2 transitions between gas and liquid so easily at moderate pressures, the system loses very little energy during the phase change. In a typical air-based system, much of the energy is lost as "waste heat" during compression. In the CO2 battery, that heat is captured and stored in "thermal bricks" and then used later to turn the liquid CO2 back into gas, making the cycle highly efficient.

I could see an active DisplayPort to HDMI 2.1 dongle with a chip inside that actually converts DisplayPort signals to HDMI 2.1 signals being possible. However I suspect it would be a bit more than $10 today. Worse yet, such a setup would most certainly add latency to an application, gaming, that is sensitive already to any delays. Gaming is what drives the 120Hz and above refresh rates...

Yeah, they goofed up on the Coke Vitamin D deficiency awareness campaign there. They really should have gone with "Go get some sun, get a tan!" instead.

That video reminds me of my local post office, got to love government run business!

I worried it might be a copy protection, but according to Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., DisplayPort has had HDCP since version 1.1.
However, HDMI had HDCP in 2003, DisplayPort 1.1 did not get it until 2006 and it still was no universal.
In addition audio return (ARC/eARC), remote control via HDMI-CEC, and generally better over longer cable runs give HDMI some advantages in the living room.
Overall it seems HDMI benefit from being first to the living room and carrying that momentum.

Our best hope is that USBC will come for HDMI on the back of the television someday...then we can throw those HDMI cables in the bin with serial, parallel, PS/2, FireWire, proprietary phone chargers, camera connectors...

I fear that most DisplayPort to HDMI 2.1 dongles are not active adapters but instead passive physical connection switches. The HDMI 2.1 electrical signaling is still handled in base computer hardware when the HDMI adapter and a HDMI device is detected. That means that the base computer hardware still needs to know how to do HDMI 2.1 to supply the correct electrical signal. Although to my frustration it has never worked the other way around with a HDMI ports being simply physical convertible to a DisplayPort.

I would really love to see televisions with DisplayPort, but it seems the connector never caught on with consumer devices; the HDMI connector momentum is pretty strong sadly. I wish HDMI would go away all together. Television, GPU, and computer manufacturers just stopped playing with the HDMI Forum. Or maybe at least we will get USBC ports on televisions support DisplayPort as the protocol instead.

Agreed. I know there are people out there who truly need help; whether they got themselves in the situation because of their own bad decisions, misfortune, or some combination of both is something to know. Of course determining if they have need at all is critical so we do no reward grifters.

I am not sure I would even trust a tax return on GoFundMe since it could be forged or altogether someone else. There are good organizations I have worked with like the salvation army who are trained to vet need and provide for those who are truly in need; although I would still be wary of corruption and a middle man. For me I have enjoyed most getting to know the people I am handing money to personally, actually being part of their lives, and them mine. I see them as an investment; maybe one I will not see a monetary return on, but at minimum the community will benefit from them being a positive contributing member.

Okay...SNAP is gone, so now Walmart has to increase wages; otherwise their employees could not work because they are starving.
If they are not starving...well they do not need SNAP and Walmart pays enough.
They cannot work if they are starving; eventually they would die; then Walmart has no employees.
SNAP came first and created the opportunity for Walmart to pay employees less because the government would pick up the slack.
Walmart may be slimy, but the government is to blame as usual.

Yes, always. Tomorrow when Walmart has no meat bag employees, all replaced by robots, Walmart will still be the cheapest place to spend SNAP dollars. Walmart gets SNAP dollars, because those who have the power to spend the SNAP dollars award Walmart for providing the service the prefer.

Walmart pays taxes, the taxes go into SNAP, SNAP goes to Walmart employees, Walmart employees spend SNAP at Walmart...the only mooches are those on SNAP that do not really need it, and the middle men in the government that get a salary for distributing SNAP. The ones who get cheated are the middle class who make enough money to not need SNAP, have their wages stolen as taxes that go into SNAP, then have to pay higher prices at Walmart because they are competing with free SNAP dollars inflating prices.

There indeed could be more people who cannot make their basic needs, but the increase in crowdfunding does not tell us that. It only tells us that there are more crowdfunding request for basic needs In 2025. It does not mean there are actually more people who cannot make their basic needs in 2025. It could be that more people realized crowdfunding might help, or it is a great new grift that people fall for. For instance, in 1929 there were no crowdfunding requests for basic needs on GoFundMe; but I suspect that there were more people in the great depression that could not meet their basic needs then today.

This sounds great to me! Instead of the government bureaucracy as a middle man poorly distributing or, from the latest headlines, out right stealing my tax dollars; I get to keep more of my money and I can help those in my local community directly.

If we are concerned about the oligarchy, where the rich create government policy; well then reducing the government's power would limit what they can influence.