zlacker

[return to "Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros"]
1. afavou+Jd[view] [source] 2025-12-05 13:44:09
>>meetpa+(OP)
Any consolidation like this seems like a negative for consumers. But at least it wasn’t bought by Larry Ellison, as was considered very likely (assuming this merger gets approved, in the current administration you never know).

From a Hacker News perspective, I wonder what this means for engineers working on HBO Max. Netflix says they’re keeping the company separate but surely you’d be looking to move them to Netflix backend infrastructure at the very least.

◧◩
2. jodrel+K81[view] [source] 2025-12-05 17:50:30
>>afavou+Jd
Off topic, but I am boggled that Larry Ellison came back to “richest man in the world” this year.

For all the enormous Reach of Facebook adverts, Apple, Microsoft breadth of products, Tesla and SpaceX and Twitter, Amazon’s massive cloud dominance, the AI boom for nVidia…

Oracle?!

On September 10, 2025, Ellison was briefly the wealthiest person in the world, with an estimated net worth of US$393 billion.

In June 2020, Ellison was reported to be the seventh-wealthiest person in the world, with a net worth of $66.8 billion

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Ellison

◧◩◪
3. george+bq1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 19:06:11
>>jodrel+K81
He also really doesn't do much (almost any?) charity so far in his life. And he never had to split assets in a divorce. So he's like a dung beetle of money.
◧◩◪◨
4. eirikb+uw1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 19:32:58
>>george+bq1
"Larry Ellison has been involved with two philanthropic organizations. First he made a $300M donation to Stanford, in exchange for not admitting wrongdoing in an options backdating scandal. All other philanthropic work is to the Larry Ellison institute for prolonging of life--namely his." -- Bryan Cantrill

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. admiss+My1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 19:45:04
>>eirikb+uw1
Sounds like he is a refreshingly honest person
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. jen729+Gz1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 19:49:30
>>admiss+My1
Sounds like he’s a twat.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. admiss+hB1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 19:58:09
>>jen729+Gz1
Isn't falling for virtue signalling charity donations more of a twattery?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. slg+6D1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 20:07:55
>>admiss+hB1
It is always enlightening when people criticizing "virtue signaling" accidentally reveal that the problem they have is not the signaling, it's the having virtue.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. msandf+WJ1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 20:42:55
>>slg+6D1
There was a time when one of the virtues was not to brag about how virtuous you were. I think that's why a lot of folks have a problem with virtue signalling. In their minds if you're signalling by doing something publicly it karmically negates what you're doing and almost alchemically turns it into something resembling vice.

I'm merely trying to explain how it is that people can have a problem with virtue signalling and to them it doesn't really contradict what is to them true virtue where you do something good and stay quiet about it.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. bootsm+Rb3[view] [source] 2025-12-06 11:48:03
>>msandf+WJ1
Society providing incentives for rich people to give money to charitable causes is good actually. An evil person doing good things for selfish reasons is still doing good things.
[go to top]