The Lemon Fool

With Facebook’s catastrophic outage yesterday (4th) and today’s coruscating testimony by whistle-blower Frances Haugen before US Congress, poor poor Mark Zuckerberg: he must be having a REALLY awful day. I am SO sorry for him. I must send a message of sympathy (via Signal or Telegram).

I wish I was as poor as MZ

AiY

And from the BBC news site-

Mr Zuckerberg himself was thought to have lost an estimated $6bn (£4.4bn) from his personal fortune at one point as Facebook shares plummeted, according to the business website Fortune's tracking software.

less than 5% per cent of what he's worth
HOW is he going to manage

This is undoubtedly why I would never become a millionaire, let alone a billionaire, but once you are as wealthy as the likes of MZ, why do you continue to "work" and make more money? You've already got more moolah than you, your kids, and their kids could ever spend ? (leaving aside the altruistic potential but that could still be run by "somebody else" ) ?

Its more a rhetorical qestion

didds

Ego, power and control. I can imagine the status that comes from being one of the most influential people in the US tech industry (and by extension the world) is a pretty hard thing to give up whatever your bank balance!

The most amusing thing about the whole event is (according to the BBC) it took six hours to fix because the failure took down the office security system too, meaning doors would not open for staff called in to fix the problem. One imagines them having to climb in through windows ,etc...

On reflection this seems a little unlikely. Fire doors could have been opened by staff already in the building, I would have thought...

Mike4 wrote:On reflection this seems a little unlikely. Fire doors could have been opened by staff already in the building, I would have thought...

There are plenty of "dark" data centres, where typically no human presence is required.

Scott.

didds wrote:This is undoubtedly why I would never become a millionaire,

You probably will. Half of that million is your state pension entitlement. If you have a house, a workplace or private pension, or an investment portfolio, you can easily close the gap to that million.

In the 1990s I was paid several million per month. As was everyone else with an income in Italian Lire.

UncleEbenezer wrote:

didds wrote:This is undoubtedly why I would never become a millionaire,

You probably will. Half of that million is your state pension entitlement. If you have a house, a workplace or private pension, or an investment portfolio, you can easily close the gap to that million.

Yes, I would have thought that most Lemons are millionaires, although that term hardly means what it did when Eartha Kitt used to sing about them 60 odd years ago.(*)

But how do you derive the valuation of a typical state pension at half a million? My estimate for age 66 is £9,500 a year. Applying a 25 times multiple to that I come up with less than a quarter of a million. I would certainly sell my entitlement for £300,000 if that were possible.

(*) She sang at least three songs about rich men back then. When she tipped me at Harrods for carrying a piece of furniture to her Roller whilst I was working at Harrods she tipped me £2, which was a lot of money back then.

Lootman wrote:But how do you derive the valuation of a typical state pension at half a million? My estimate for age 66 is £9,500 a year. Applying a 25 times multiple to that I come up with less than a quarter of a million. I would certainly sell my entitlement for £300,000 if that were possible.

It was a finger in the air. I haven't found anyone selling a product that genuinely competes with it.

A quick look at best-buy annuity rates suggests that an RPI-linked annuity (the nearest comparison) starting at the level of the state pension (though excluding perks) would cost £342k.

Compare that to £285k for an annuity rising at a fixed 3% for a year, and we see the market attaches a high premium to taking on long-term risk. The triple-lock and government backing must surely be worth quite a bit more than that £342k vs £285k difference. Then add in the perks such as winter fuel, bus pass, healthcare benefits, and eligibility for various schemes, and you're likely in the ballpark.

stewamax wrote:today’s coruscating testimony

I don't think that means what you think it does. Should it be "excoriating testimony"?

GoSeigen wrote:

stewamax wrote:today’s coruscating testimony

I don't think that means what you think it does. Should it be "excoriating testimony"?

either can mean scathing/critical
- one does also mean sparkly - horses for courses

servodude wrote:

GoSeigen wrote:

stewamax wrote:today’s coruscating testimony

I don't think that means what you think it does. Should it be "excoriating testimony"?

either can mean scathing/critical
- one does also mean sparkly - horses for courses

[OT] I realise that people who don't know better use it with that meaning, but are you suggesting it has now become widely accepted and if so, on whose authority? Did you read it on Facebook?


GS

GoSeigen wrote:

servodude wrote:

GoSeigen wrote:
I don't think that means what you think it does. Should it be "excoriating testimony"?

either can mean scathing/critical
- one does also mean sparkly - horses for courses

[OT] I realise that people who don't know better use it with that meaning, but are you suggesting it has now become widely accepted and if so, on whose authority? Did you read it on Facebook?


GS

I have NEVER looked at "the Facebook" and I resent the implication!

I think the meaning has literally been adopted if you get my drift
- I used to care but these days I just can't be bo...

I meant what I said, in the sense that coruscating means sharp flashes: Ms Haugen’s testimony was sharp, barbed and had frequent kicks in the groin for Mr Zuckerberg. However, to be clearer, I should have said coruscating excoriating testimony or else readers could have construed that the testimony was praising Facebook for their public-spirited social policies at the expense of profit.
Mea maxima culpa.

I gather that coruscating is also sometimes used (wrongly) for excoriating, but my long-dying Latin still reminds me that it comes from coruscare – to glitter as in the Roman soldiers lorica segmentate breastplates that they always wore in my Latin class.

stewamax wrote:I meant what I said, in the sense that coruscating means sharp flashes: Ms Haugen’s testimony was sharp, barbed and had frequent kicks in the groin for Mr Zuckerberg. However, to be clearer, I should have said coruscating excoriating testimony or else readers could have construed that the testimony was praising Facebook for their public-spirited social policies at the expense of profit.
Mea maxima culpa.

I gather that coruscating is also sometimes used (wrongly) for excoriating, but my long-dying Latin still reminds me that it comes from coruscare – to glitter as in the Roman soldiers lorica segmentate breastplates that they always wore in my Latin class.

Ooh, if it was that impressive then maybe I need to watch it....


GS

scotia wrote:And from the BBC news site-

Mr Zuckerberg himself was thought to have lost an estimated $6bn (£4.4bn) from his personal fortune at one point as Facebook shares plummeted, according to the business website Fortune's tracking software.

His personal fortune on paper perhaps but unlikely as much in practice. If he were to sell his shares in FB then likely the sp would plummet: he would have to sell before announcing sale which could result in the regulators fining for breach of disclosure rules.

I would have thought that most Lemons are millionaires

My ambition was to become as respected as was my late father and richer. the first took longer than i expected but was easy. The second has elided; I am not amongst the most. I should or could or might have been were it not for my misspent youth and a tendency to under-charge.

Instead i delight in having helped over the years to make millions for my clients.

GoSeigen wrote:Ooh, if it was that impressive then maybe I need to watch it....

Do; she doesn't pull any punches. Young Zuckerberg (or FB) published some dodging-and-weaving responses but he was clearly on the ropes.
Standard Oil (1911) anyone?