Steal from the public not powerful well-connected financial institutions

I dont think they had to lie to Yahoo to do it though. Everyone believed in the froth of dot-com and plenty of dumb money just there for the taking from the likes of Yahoo. Kinda like today with all the AI froth.

> After all is said and done, Charlie Javice will be hanging out at a prison camp—probably down there with Holmes and Maxwell, because it's cushy—and do no more than 4 years

I don't mind that outcome. She did not knowingly sell a product that could harm the public or abuse and traffic children, so it wouldn't be unfair or a travesty of justice like with those other two (especially that last one)

Agreed, hot take, but she defrauded a large corporate bank , big whoop if you ask me.

I'm not sure I like the incentives that creates, though. If this is the precedent, then if you're committing financial fraud already you might as well go as big as possible, since there appears to be a cap on punishment.

I mean from mine, and im sure many other people's view, that is already mostly true. Her biggest mistake to me seems like messing with a big dog, rather than screwing over little guys that don't have millions to throw at the courts or teams of full time lawyers. If JPMorgan defrauded the same amount of money from a bunch of regular joes I doubt anybody would be in jail or even that any potential fees would come anywhere to matching the amount of money defrauded.

Strong anti fraud rules (even for massive banks) are a foundational part of a high functioning society.

That remindes me of all those bank executives we jailed over their role in the 2008 financial crisis.

I'm unconvinced. Banks wield massive political power through their capital, and so get away with highway robbery all the time. 2008 financial crisis comes to mind. It seems to me that the rules are one sided and so it seems this "foundational part" of high functioning society is just guarding the highwaymen with the cityguard, when the swords should be facing the other direction.

Could it be that you're not in a high functioning society, rather than the point being invalid?

The banks at the center of the 2008 crisis are largely international. Is your question about the entire western international finance system and all societies comprising it?

It's generalized to any grouping.

Having written laws means nothing when they are not equally enforced. Which is the norm in the West.

For example: Intentional wage theft.

> Strong anti fraud rules (even for massive banks) are a foundational part of a high functioning society.

Sometimes it seems we're missing most of the "foundational part[s] of a high functioning society" except the ones that serve elites (which then are so sacred *and must never be questioned).

Eventually people stop caring about the elite's protections, even if that breakdown is ultimately harmful. It's like the murder of that United Healthcare CEO. His company ground down the common man's benefits in a way that probably killed thousands (at least), but we're supposed to cry for him. Betray people long enough, and they're no longer interested in holding up their side of the bargain.

If they want a high functioning society, the elites need to work harder at holding up their end of the bargain.

The trick is that you have to do the fraud at institutional scale. E.g. rating junk mortgage bonds as "AAA".

You only get punished if you do it at small scale.

Alternatively, a golden device to the right ruler also works

Have you ever heard of second-order effects?

Im curious about what you're building and what techical challenges you're facing/solving? Does it involve a token, nft, or getting rich quick? If yes my curiosity will probably be very very low since it sounds like 99% of crypto projects.

and they are friends and like minded. Even more impressive when you consider that is close to half the population of Vermont

This will work for a while, before thieves know to check for multiple airtags. Better to not detect any in the first place

> Smart users will see TikTok doesn't really have a good recommendation engine, just good content, bite sized so lots can be produced.

This. Nobody has invented a Recommendation engines that really works, the ones that seem to work just have lots of content they can throw at you. I really think tiktok would be no less succesful with an engine that simply threw a random video at you. Recommendations is a really hard problem and anyone that solves it had essentially solved AGI

Not AI but Ive seen a lot of social startup apps in my time all trying to be the next facebook with a twist. They all end up in the same place. If you have any idea along the lines of "Do/share X with your friends" it has probably been tried a million times before so just don't. Another one is dating apps. Everyone thinks they all suck and everyone thinks they have the new twist that will make it not suck. End result is so many shitty 'ghost town' dating apps that end up looking and functioning like the other 99%. Once in a while a Snapchat or Tindr will break out with a genuinely fresh idea but for every one of those there are a million carcasses of failed startup ideas

I worked in a consultancy/agency 15 years ago for less than a year (it wasn't for me) and in that short span I witnessed 3 "facebook with a twist" projects. Code was delivered, but they naturally failed to gain any critical mass whatsoever. Also having startups getting a consultancy to do their code was already quite strange.

I specifically remember one of them being "facebook for dogs" and another being for restaurant professionals.

Lol, I was thinking this exactly

You're merely reinforcing their point. Its so out of fashion it would be considered a bold or even edgy choice just as dressing casually once would.