2 comments

  • giancarlostoro1 小时前
    Unsurprising, Mark Zuck always seems to have an app ready, remember Threads? Its no secret that he can just throw a few devs money and get something going awfully quickly.

    Cut a few corners its fine, just need to get it out the door.

  • Razengan5 小时前
    Gosh this is disgusting
    • willy_k5 小时前
      What’s “this”?
      • kelseyfrog3 小时前
        It looks as if US is banning foreign apps to aid domestic apps. It shows a bias and paternalism rather than a more laissez-faire/free market approach.
        • JCharante2 小时前
          I like it. “You ban ours and we’ll ban yours” type of approach
          • kelseyfrog2 小时前
            As a parent, this kind of behavior leads to escalation and is indicative of adolescents in grades K-6. Usually people grow out of it before they reach adulthood.

            Our ability to suppress our desire for revenge is what makes society work.

            • cmonreally1231 小时前
              Usually adults both work together and play by the same rules, no? Is China working together in cases outside of this?

              In prisoners dilemma tit for tat is a winning strategy for a reason.

              • lblume41 分钟前
                Tit for tat is not a winning strategy in the game theoretical iterated prisoner's dilemma. It is a winning strategy in a competition between strategies, but the incentives of these competitions do not align with the actual game.

                In fact, the strategy by definition never leads to a win and is weakly dominated by just never cooperating.

              • kelseyfrog43 分钟前
                No, we judge the rules based on merit. If the other person kicks you out, you don't usually follow suit blindly by applying their rules to them. That is following other people's rules rather than your own and lacks integrity.
        • 427728273 小时前
          The US did not ban a foreign app. The US demanded that the app be divested from its ownership by a hostile foreign government.

          The free market has always been secondary to natsec interests.

          • kelseyfrog2 小时前
            I understand the difference. That is why I worded it as "It looks as if".
        • tw041 小时前
          Much like tolerance. You can’t have a free market if all parties don’t agree. The US proposed a free market. China countered with a closed market and we’re finally understanding they were serious.