Mark Zuckerberg on NYT story: "To suggest we weren't interested in knowing the truth or wanted to hide what we knew or wanted to prevent investigations is simply untrue."
The entire discussion around Facebook\u2019s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when. https://t.co/dSOpKy767l
— Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) November 15, 2018
Why isn\u2019t Sheryl Sandberg on this call?
— Dylan Byers (@DylanByers) November 15, 2018
Zuckerberg: Blah blah. I generally don't talk about specific cases of that in public. Blah blah.
Zuckerberg: I learned about this yesterday. In general, I think you're right. This might be normal in Washington but it's not the kind of thing we want Facebook associated with.
Facebook: ... We are bringing the world closer together.
Zuckerberg: We have made personnel changes. Hey, we just hired a new global policy and comms chief. Let's focus on that.
"I am quite focused on finding ways to get more independence into our systems in other ways."
Zuckerberg: Transparency is one of the bigger areas where we have to continue to do more.
Zuckerberg: "I think someone on our comms team must have hired them."
Comms team, meet the bus that just ran you over.
Worthwhile to read through this whole thread of Stamos replying to our report: https://t.co/0QXNjU0waB
— Sheera Frenkel (@sheeraf) November 15, 2018
Zuckerberg: Sheryl learned about this at the same time that I did. Overall Sheryl is doing great work for the company. She has been a very important partner to me and will continue to be.
Mark Zuckerberg: I have no idea what's happening inside my own company and neither does Sheryl.
Zuckerberg: We are doing the right things to fix the issues. I am fully committed to getting this right.
More from Tech
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
I put it together a long time ago, and it was very helpful! I sliced it apart a thousand times until things started to make sense.
It's TensorFlow and Keras.
If you are starting out, this may be a good puzzle to solve.

The goal of this model is to learn to multiply one-digit
It is a good example of coding, what is the model?
— Freddy Rojas Cama (@freddyrojascama) February 1, 2021
You May Also Like
He has been wrong (or lying) so often that it will be nearly impossible for me to track every grift, lie, deceit, manipulation he has pulled. I will use...

... other sources who have been trying to shine on light on this grifter (as I have tried to do, time and again:
Ivor Cummins BE (Chem) is a former R&D Manager at HP (sourcre: https://t.co/Wbf5scf7gn), turned Content Creator/Podcast Host/YouTube personality. (Call it what you will.)
— Steve (@braidedmanga) November 17, 2020
Example #1: "Still not seeing Sweden signal versus Denmark really"... There it was (Images attached).
19 to 80 is an over 300% difference.
Tweet: https://t.co/36FnYnsRT9

Example #2 - "Yes, I'm comparing the Noridcs / No, you cannot compare the Nordics."
I wonder why...
Tweets: https://t.co/XLfoX4rpck / https://t.co/vjE1ctLU5x

Example #3 - "I'm only looking at what makes the data fit in my favour" a.k.a moving the goalposts.
Tweets: https://t.co/vcDpTu3qyj / https://t.co/CA3N6hC2Lq

Those who exited at 1500 needed money. They can always come back near 969. Those who exited at 230 also needed money. They can come back near 95.
Those who sold L @ 660 can always come back at 360. Those who sold S last week can be back @ 301
Sir, Log yahan.. 13 days patience nhi rakh sakte aur aap 2013 ki baat kar rahe ho. Even Aap Ready made portfolio banakar bhi de do to bhi wo 1 month me hi EXIT kar denge \U0001f602
— BhavinKhengarSuratGujarat (@IntradayWithBRK) September 19, 2021
Neuland 2700 se 1500 & Sequent 330 to 230 kya huwa.. 99% retailers/investors twitter par charcha n EXIT\U0001f602