[opine-at-random]

Why would it be so conspiratorial?

These people are overwhelmingly responsible for the viciation of our world and societies, and claim the profits from it.

An INT value only goes up to 2B, these people have orders of magnitude more money than that. Knowing our living planet's active course of destruction, this is literally the smartest way they could spend that money. The alternative is for them to have some kind of empathetic awakening, reorient their own existence and the existence of their enterprises, and recognize meaningful ways to spend their money... but if all the resource in the world couldn't give them that perspective, I doubt anything can.

It's crazy, because they could build a world in which there where good ways to spend that money, or spend that money on the multitude of extant causes that could use it. But they would rather hoard wealth and steal the collective future of the planet (including their own, and their offspring), and then delusionally try to seclude themselves away.

Their power only exists in the world they're bent on destroying.

[sweettea]

Zuck is doing a great job of working to improve human life with his money, having promised to give away 99% of it, and making concrete steps to do so:

https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-explains-giv... https://www.statnews.com/2023/10/19/mark-zuckerberg-priscill...

[zer00eyz]

How about zuck spend some of that money to clean up the shit in his own house:

https://time.com/6217730/myanmar-meta-rohingya-facebook/

You can't make a problem in one place, and do some good elsewhere and then call it even. Thats not how being responsible works. Dont sugar coat the man and his nonsense with a scant act of charity.

[SketchySeaBeast]

> having promised to give away 99% of it

That really feels like the emptiest of promises. "Oh, I'm going to give away all my money once I'm done living my life of impossible excess". They don't get points for that. They could give away a massive portion of it RIGHT NOW and be able to live in the exact same excess, but they won't. I won't give them credit for future promises that cost them nothing to make.

[getpokedagain]

This kind of thing just reeks of shortsightedness.

Having one lucky prick who sure maybe worked a little hard maybe not decide what to do for humanity with his money that he won through predatory means is dumb. Garbage in garbage out, anyone who is focused on mind fucking the worlds population in order to get a little richer is not going to give away anything in an effective manner.

When we stop having zuckerbergs, gates buffets and so on we probably will see improvement.

[latentcall]

“I’ll give it all away one day… I promise!”

He could give away 100% of his money and assets right now.

[SketchySeaBeast]

More realistically (because 100% seems like a big ask), he could give away 99% of it right now and he'd still have enough for himself and his descendants to never have to work again.

[Radim]

You're not wrong, but more puzzling is that this is Zuckerberg's bunker.

I mean, it takes a pretty dumb billionaire to not realize that when a real crisis hits, you'll be a sitting duck (mostly for your own guards / security), in your fancy bunker or forest ranch.

That's more of a naive plan for your run-of-the-mill rich guy, the lower echelon of "rich". Mere $100M-1Bs.

I always thought Zuck-level money gives you better options, such as building your own loyal community. At least village-sized and quite diverse. Which is what you really need when the shit hits the fan.

But maybe Zuck's building that too? And the bunker only a red herring, a hedge for minor temporary hiccups.

[Nextgrid]

> I always thought Zuck-level money gives you better options, such as building your own loyal community

Zuck-level money wouldn't matter in a situation where a bunker is needed though. In a post-money situation, Zuck doesn't have anything to offer compared to a random man, so nobody will have any reason to join and partake in his "village" plan.

A really serious (or at least as close to serious as we can get when imagining apocalyptic scenarios) plan would be to stockpile goods/food/a means of production - those things are what's going to be valuable once shit hits the fan and might actually convince more people to join him.

[Radim]

> Zuck-level money wouldn't matter in a situation where a bunker is needed

We're entertaining actions the rich take in preparation for a societal meltdown: build a bunker vs build a community. They take them now (hence the article).

Starting to build a bunker (or a community) in a post-apo world would indeed be a little too late for Mr. Zuckerberg & co.

> A really serious plan would be to stockpile goods/food/a means of production

You need loyal people first and foremost. Leadership and trust. Otherwise disloyal people (historically, your own guards / companions) take whatever you've stockpiled. Yours is that Grade B strategy I was talking about.

Your "goods/food/a means of production" are only useful insofar other powers uphold the overarching social structures & rules. To the extent that premise is fulfilled, I'd call such meltdown only a minor temporary hiccup. Beyond that, your stockpile and remote fortress is not much use. You need loyal people.