RetroFed Forums
Your home away from modern life.
Behind the Scenes, Meta's Board Is Battling With Mark Zuckerberg Over His Out-of-Control AI Spending
Post Reply
AuthorMessage
MadeInDex 📰🌎 lemmy.world madeindex@lemmy.world
Joined: 2026-03-31
Quote

How about making Marky Mark resign instead?!

94   Original
Cellery quokk.au Cellery@quokk.au
Joined: 2026-09-30
#2 · Quote Reply

This one too. Post once. Not Tence.

6
SpaceNoodle Moderator SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-14
#3 · Quote Reply

Or, y'know, just fire the stupid fucker.

24
loppy fedia.io loppy@fedia.io
Joined: 2024-06-09
#4 · Quote Reply

Is this article slop? They say "As the Wall Street Journal reported..." and then link to the Washington Post.

20
monkeyslikebananas2 lemmy.world monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-18
#5 · Quote Reply

Is this article slop? They say "As the Wall Street Journal reported..." and then link to the Washington Post.

It’s all AI slop.

12
Lanusensei87 lemmy.world Lanusensei87@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-18
#6 · Quote Reply

It’s all AI slop.

🧑‍🚀🔫🧑‍🚀

8
Zerush lemmy.ml Zerush@lemmy.ml
Joined: 2021-04-25
#7 · (edited) Quote Reply

-2
OldChicoAle lemmy.world OldChicoAle@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-10-26
#8 · Quote Reply

Didn't they just help him prepare to pay that one time billionaire tax? Parasites, all of them.

5
annoying_cyclist programming.dev annoying_cyclist@programming.dev
Joined: 2026-08-30
#9 · Quote Reply

It's almost like dual class stock structures that give founders perpetual veto power over their boards might not be the best idea.

8
chonglibloodsport lemmy.world chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-14
#10 · Quote Reply

Or, y'know, just fire the stupid fucker.

They can’t. He owns a controlling stake in the company. He could fire all of them.

11
wildncrazyguy138 fedia.io wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io
Joined: 2024-06-13
#11 · Quote Reply

They can’t. He owns a controlling stake in the company. He could fire all of them.

He could, but then the stockholders would likely throw a costly lawsuit at the company for poor governance.

3
chonglibloodsport lemmy.world chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-14
#12 · Quote Reply

He could, but then the stockholders would likely throw a costly lawsuit at the company for poor governance.

Which is why he won’t unless they try to force his hand. Instead he’ll play politics and maybe fire 1 if he needs to stop a rebellion.

4
thesdev feddit.org thesdev@feddit.org
Joined: 2025-03-01
#13 · Quote Reply

Is this article slop? They say "As the Wall Street Journal reported..." and then link to the Washington Post.

Futurism's reporting is anti-AI to a fault (as in making outlandish headlines out of nothing) so that would surprise me.

6
NotMyOldRedditName lemmy.world NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-08-24
#14 · (edited) Quote Reply

It's almost like dual class stock structures that give founders perpetual veto power over their boards might not be the best idea.

It can go both ways.

Him having the control to do things like this and having the vision for it can allow for big breakthroughs. People might shut something down early rather than persever otherwise.

They can also fail spectacularly when they cant be stopped

2
NotMyOldRedditName lemmy.world NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-08-24
#15 · (edited) Quote Reply

Didn't they just help him prepare to pay that one time billionaire tax? Parasites, all of them.
[deleted]
1
Malica lemmy.zip Malica@lemmy.zip
Joined: 2026-08-27
#16 · Quote Reply

I think he has it set up so they can't replace him

2
ilinamorato lemmy.world ilinamorato@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-09-27
#17 · Quote Reply

It can go both ways. Him having the control to do things like this and having the vision for it can allow for big breakthroughs. People might shut something down early rather than persever otherwise. They can also fail spectacularly when they cant be stopped

Yeah, but that kind of benefit of the doubt has to go out the window when a spectacular failure like Metaverse flops. I understand golden parachutes and such, but Zuck clearly doesn't understand what the market wants anymore; so you have to at least take the magnetic box off of the car so you can hide the keys when he comes home drunk.

1
NotMyOldRedditName lemmy.world NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-08-24
#18 · Quote Reply

Yeah, but that kind of benefit of the doubt has to go out the window when a spectacular failure like Metaverse flops. I understand golden parachutes and such, but Zuck clearly doesn't understand what the market wants anymore; so you have to at least take the magnetic box off of the car so you can hide the keys when he comes home drunk.

Ya, you think after the disaster of the metaverse he'd maybe step back and be more cautious, at least for awhile. Not double down immediately on the next thing.

2
ilinamorato lemmy.world ilinamorato@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-09-27
#19 · Quote Reply

Is this article slop? They say "As the Wall Street Journal reported..." and then link to the Washington Post.

Probably just good old fashioned human error, in this case. The WSJ really did report on this story, including on the contingency agreement; I'd bet that the Futurism article was mostly written using the WaPo article (which is pretty similar to the WSJ article); but at the last minute, the writer decided they liked the WSJ reporting better and switched the credit without realizing they also needed to switch the link.

2
kreskin lemmy.world kreskin@lemmy.world
Joined: 2024-11-03
#20 · (edited) Quote Reply

All Zuckerbergs business ideas have proven to be absolute 100% dumpster fires. Metaverserse, VR glasses, AI. All failed. All expensive. I agree with OP, why keep him around at all? He's an idiot.

5
kreskin lemmy.world kreskin@lemmy.world
Joined: 2024-11-03
#21 · Quote Reply

Is this article slop? They say "As the Wall Street Journal reported..." and then link to the Washington Post.

different newspaper frontends for the same propoganda backend maybe?

2
very_well_lost lemmy.world very_well_lost@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-30
#22 · Quote Reply

Futurism's reporting is anti-AI to a fault (as in making outlandish headlines out of nothing) so that would surprise me.

The kind of engagement bait shit Futurism pumps out is what AI is best at, and considering the volume of their articles I see posted everyday it wouldn't surprise me if they were just an AI content farm.

The point of "publications" like these is to generate clicks and sell ads. They don't care about hypocrisy, just the bottom line.

2
Post Reply
Back to top