←back to thread

Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

(about.netflix.com)
1741 points meetpateltech | 8 comments | 05 Dec 25 12:21 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
jodrellblank ◴[05 Dec 25 17:50 UTC] No.46164701[source]▶
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

replies(11): >>46164829 #>>46164869 #>>46164972 #>>46164989 #>>46165120 #>>46165634 #>>46165782 #>>46165869 #>>46166138 #>>46167026 #>>46196603 #
georgeecollins ◴[05 Dec 25 19:06 UTC] No.46165782[source]▶
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.
replies(5): >>46166076 #>>46166173 #>>46166244 #>>46166337 #>>46166937 #
eirikbakke ◴[05 Dec 25 19:32 UTC] No.46166173[source]▶
"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

replies(3): >>46166277 #>>46166315 #>>46166971 #
admissionsguy ◴[05 Dec 25 19:45 UTC] No.46166315[source]▶
Sounds like he is a refreshingly honest person
replies(3): >>46166371 #>>46166442 #>>46166982 #
jen729w ◴[05 Dec 25 19:49 UTC] No.46166371[source]▶
Sounds like he’s a twat.
replies(1): >>46166470 #
1. admissionsguy ◴[05 Dec 25 19:58 UTC] No.46166470[source]▶
Isn't falling for virtue signalling charity donations more of a twattery?
replies(3): >>46166526 #>>46166583 #>>46166964 #
2. afavour ◴[05 Dec 25 20:02 UTC] No.46166526[source]▶
If you choose to classify all charity donations as "virtue signaling", yes.

If you reject that absurd false framing, no.

3. slg ◴[05 Dec 25 20:07 UTC] No.46166583[source]▶
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.
replies(1): >>46167007 #
4. array_key_first ◴[05 Dec 25 20:40 UTC] No.46166964[source]▶
It's not virtue signally if you're tangible helping people. Like if I give away food, maybe I have the intent of signalling something, but I'm also giving away food. That actually happened.

The world would be a much better place if rich people virtue signalled much more and thereby donated more.

5. msandford ◴[05 Dec 25 20:42 UTC] No.46167007[source]▶
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.

replies(2): >>46167321 #>>46172582 #
6. slg ◴[05 Dec 25 21:07 UTC] No.46167321{3}[source]▶
This comment feels like it was made outside the context of the existing conversation. The comment I replied to was calling all charity virtue signaling and not just vocal giving.

But either way, I personally don’t think a library is any less valuable to a community just because it has Carnegie’s name above the entrance.

7. bootsmann ◴[06 Dec 25 11:48 UTC] No.46172582{3}[source]▶
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.
replies(1): >>46173636 #
8. Libidinalecon ◴[06 Dec 25 14:31 UTC] No.46173636{4}[source]▶
The real problem comes when you look up what charity actually does with the money.

It is hard to not get the feeling that outside of the local food bank, most charities are a type of money making scam when you dig into what they do with the money.