I think this in the previous comment undervalue just how many more complicated ways there are for corruption to bubble.

Assume super strict rules. Consider this example to circumvent them: Senator-elect A makes an LLC and invest their money (with some friends) in it (before taking office)

They can’t even talk to the money manager. But the manager can see their actions, and the senator can know their ow investments and work in their favor.

This is pretty intuitive. Its nice not to have to worry about money, but what is the difference between having 1M NW and 100M? If you're a mentally normal person, it just more mental burden.

And also. Up to a certain point is still a correlation. Getting a lot of downvotes by people not knowing what a correlation is.

People are happy when they are secure and unhappy when they are insecure. Who can you name is secure in all of their physical, social, mental, spiritual, etc needs right now?

Their teachers teach them from a very early age how to hold a carton, and how to draw.

Maybe some miraculous humans will reinvent all drawing of growing by themselves in the jungle, most people will not.

Source: I have kids.

I just recently used for image generation to design my balcony.

It was a great way to see design ideas imagined in place and decide what to do.

There are many cases people would hire an artist to illustrate an idea or early prototype. AI generated images make that something you can do by yourself or 10x faster than a few years ago.

Not withstanding a few code violations, it generated some good ideas we were then able to tweak. The main thing was we had no idea of what we wanted to do, but seeing a lot of possibilities overlaid over the existing non-garden got us going. We were then able to extend the theme to other parts of the yard.

It wasn’t bankrolled with billions for the good of society.

Being naive is fun, but being realistic about the species we are is better. And it seems we can leverage that to land on the moon. So it’s working as intended.

Weird to quote that when that's not what the GP said and appears to be a paraphrase that loses quite a bit of specificity and so misses the point:

> We need more “for all of humanity” mindset instead of this “barbaric tribes beat each other over the head for sticky oil”

Being realistic about the species is useful, but let's not be disingenuous for imaginary rhetorical points.

It still is naive no matter the quote though.

It’s also naive to dump down the conflict to being over oil. Oil is being used as leverage. But it is not the cause of it.

Negotiations were clearly Stuck between the sides, forcing the obvious next stage.

This is simplified. But I think touches the core events.

Being indicted for treason and treason like charges sounds worse than the SEC coming after you.

I think it’s unrealistic to expect them to come back from that pit to the top in one year, but I wouldn’t rule them out getting there with more time. That’s a possible future. They have the money and Zuckerberg’s drive at the helm. It can go a long way.

Many super talented developers I know will say “Make it work, then make it good”. I think it’s okay to do this on a bigger scale than just the commit cycle.

Make it work, make it work right, make it work fast. In that order.

What really happens there, if you ignore the author’s spin on it and concentrate on the facts is Sheryl is repeatedly asking her pregnant employee to please come stay in the big bed in the private jet and rest.

Then author has good points, such as Sheryl not taking into account she’s expecting ready deliverables. But she also spins it as if something sexual might happen there, or that Sheryl saying “you should have slept in the bed” in the end of the flight is a mafioso threat - and literally suggesting that Sheryl stopped trusting her because she didn’t take that offer.

(Worked at Meta for many years, not directly with Sheryl, and I am generally a fan of her, I think the book distorts at multiple times the messages she said)

I agree the basic offer was probably sincerely from kindness. What seems creepy is her continued insistence, her inability to relate to the human in front of her.

I suspect she is just not used to anyone acting genuine towards her, let alone contradicting her. She always gets what she wants, even when it’s a whim.

Yes, it's possible that it came from a place of wanting to help.

And, after the offer was spurned, the kindness was immediately replaced with wrath, at "how dare she turn me down?"

So, both can be true: she can be kind and helpful, but also petty and vindictive, and unable to see other people's perspective. Being permanently surrounded by sycophants and yes-men/women will probably distort most people like that.

Go on, which culture is that? Most "cultures" in Europe I know of it would be a breach of many stated and unstated rules and norms (Germany, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Poland, and Belgium).

Example Germany. Which law would be broken? Internal compliance rules, yes, that would be often the case.

Example of a very different behavior than the claim above?

> Which law would be broken?

What is that supposed to mean? e.g. eating dogs or cats would be an even more significant taboo and its not even explicitly illegal in quite a few countries

I would examine why your acquaintances are normalizing such creepy behaviour.

In one case there was just that one room available stranded in the middle of nowhere.

In other cases it was due to lack of financial resources.