Daffy Mc DucK 🌐

@rubenxela @EvilCrustacean @rvleroux @BrivaelFr Passion régulation

@EvilCrustacean @rvleroux @BrivaelFr ce qui m'intéresse le + n'est pas tant quel nv model IA va sortir, mais où, quand comment on va pvr réguler, normaliser et créer de manière ethique, en prenant en compte les coûts sociaux, écologiques ... le pbm n'est pas tant la tech que la manière dont on va absorber ces coûts

Moi j’adore son IA, on dirait un incel du 18-25 qui découvre la vie. Le mec comprend rien à ce que son compte tweete, j’adore. Je crois qu’il se place du côté des scientifiques, c’est bizarre d’être autant hors sujet.

@BillAckman @X Agree of course.

I am reaching out to the @X community for advice with the likely risk of sharing TMI. I have been sufficiently upset about the whole matter that I have lost sleep thinking about it and I am hoping that this post will enable me to get this matter off my chest. By way of background, I started a family office called TABLE about 15 years ago and hired a friend who had previously managed a family office, and years earlier, had been my personal accountant. She is someone that I trusted implicitly and consider to be a good person. The office started small, but over the last decade, the number of personnel and the cost of the office grew massively. The growth was entirely on the operational side as the investment team has remained tiny. While my investment portfolio grew substantially, the investments I had made were almost entirely passive and TABLE simply needed to account for them and meet capital calls as they came in. While TABLE purchased additional software and other systems that were supposed to improve productivity, the team kept increasing in size at a rapid rate, and the expenses continued to grow even faster. While I would periodically question the growing expenses and high staff turnover, I stayed uninvolved with the office other than a once-a-year meeting when I briefly reviewed the operations and the financials and determined bonus compensation for the President and the CFO. I spent no time with any of the other employees or the operations. The whole idea behind TABLE was that it would handle everything other than my day job so that I would have more time for my job and my family. Over the last six years, expenses ballooned even further, employee turnover accelerated, and I became concerned that all was not well at TABLE. It was time for me to take a look at what was going on. Nearly four years ago, I recruited my nephew who had recently graduated from Harvard and put him to work at Bremont, a British watchmaker, one of my only active personal investments to figure out the issues at the company and ultimately assist in executing a turnaround. He did a superb job. When he returned from the UK late last year after a few years at Bremont, I asked him to help me figure out what was going on with TABLE. When I explained to TABLE’s president what he would be doing, she became incredibly defensive, which naturally made me more concerned. My nephew went to work by first meeting with each employee to understand their roles at the company and to learn from them what ideas they had on how things could be improved. He got an earful. Our first step in helping to turn around TABLE was a reduction in force including the president and about a third of the team, retaining excellent talent that had been desperate for new leadership. Now here is where I need your advice. All but one of the employees who were terminated acted professionally and were gracious on the way out (excluding the president who had a notice period in her contract, is currently still being paid, and with whom I have not yet had a discussion). The highest compensated terminated employee other than the president, an in-house lawyer (let’s call her Ronda), told us that three months of severance was not enough and demanded two years’ severance despite having worked at the company for only two and one half years. When I learned of Ronda's request for severance, I offered to speak with her to understand what she was thinking, but she refused to do so. A few days ago, we received a threatening letter from a Silicon Valley law firm. In the letter, Ronda’s counsel suggests that her termination is part of longstanding issues of ‘harassment and gender discrimination’ – an interesting claim in light of the fact that Ronda was in charge of workplace compliance – and that her termination was due to: “unlawful, retaliatory, and harmful conduct directed towards her. Both [Ronda] and I [Ronda’s lawyer] have spoken with you about [Ronda’s] view of what a reasonable resolution would include given the circumstances. Thus far, TABLE has refused to provide any substantive response. This letter provides the last opportunity to reach a satisfactory agreement. If we cannot do so, [Ronda] will seek all appropriate relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.” The letter goes on to explain the basis for the “unsafe work environment” claim at TABLE: “In early 2026, Pershing Square’s founder Bill Ackman installed his nephew in an unidentified role at TABLE, Ackman’s family office. [His nephew]—whose only work experience had been for TABLE where he was seconded abroad for the last four years to a UK watch company held by Ackman—began appearing at TABLE’s offices and conducting interviews of employees without a clear explanation of his role or the purposes of these interviews. During this period, he made a series of inappropriate and genderbased [sic] comments to multiple employees that created an unsafe work environment. Among other things, [his nephew] made remarks about female employees’ ages (“Tell me you are nowhere near 40”), physical appearance (“Your body does not look like you have kids”), as well as intrusive questions about family planning and sexual orientation (“Who carried your son? Who will carry your next child?”). These incidents were reported to senior leadership at TABLE and Pershing Square. Rather than being addressed appropriately, the response from senior management reflected, at best, willful blindness to the inappropriateness of [his nephew]’s remarks and, at worst, tacit endorsement.” The above allegations about my nephew had previously been brought to my attention by TABLE’s president when they occurred. When I learned of them, I told the president that I would speak to him directly and encouraged her to arrange for him to get workplace sensitivity training. The president assured me that she would do so. When I spoke to my nephew, he explained what he actually had said and how his actual remarks had been received, not at all as alleged in the legal letter from Ronda’s counsel. I have also spoken to others at the lunch table who confirmed his description of the facts. In any case, he meant no harm, was simply trying to build rapport with other employees, and no one, as far as I understand, was offended. Ironically, Ronda claims in her legal letter that TABLE didn’t take HR compliance seriously, yet Ronda was in charge of HR compliance at TABLE and the person who gave my nephew his workplace sensitivity training after the alleged incidents. In any case, Ronda, as head of compliance, should have kept a record or raised an alarm if indeed there was pervasive harassment or other such problems at the company, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. So why does Ronda believe she can get me to pay her nearly $2 million, i.e., two years of severance, nearly one year of severance for each of her years at the company? Well, here is where some more background would be helpful. Over the last two months, I have been consumed with a major family medical issue – one of my older daughters had a massive brain hemorrhage on February 5th and has since been making progress on her recovery – and I am in the midst of a major transaction for my company which I am executing from a hospital room office next to her . While the latter business matter is publicly known, the details of my daughter’s situation are only known to Ronda because of her role at our family office. Now, let’s get back to the subject at hand. Unfortunately, while New York and many other states have employment-at-will, there has emerged an industry of lawyers who make a living from bringing fake gender, race, LGBTQ and other discrimination employment claims in order to extract larger severance payments for terminated employees, and it needs to stop. The fake claim system succeeds because it costs little to have a lawyer send a threatening letter and nearly all of the lawyers in this field work on contingency so there is no or minimal cash cost to bring a claim. And inevitably, nearly 100% of these claims are settled because the public relations and legal costs of defending them exceed the dollar cost of the settlement. The claims are nearly always settled with a confidentiality agreement where the employee who asserts the fake claims remains anonymous and as a result, there is no reputational cost to bringing false claims. The consequences of this sleazy system (let’s call it ‘the System’) are the increased costs of doing business which is a tax on the economy and society. There are other more serious problems due to the System. Unfortunately, the existence of an industry of plaintiff firms and terminated employees willing to make these claims makes it riskier for companies to hire employees from a protected class, i.e., LGBTQ, seniors, women, people of color etc. because it is that much more reputationally damaging and expensive to be accused of racism, sexism, and/or intolerance for sexual diversity than for firing a white male as juries generally have less sympathy for white males. The System therefore increases the risk of discrimination rather than reducing it, and the people bringing these fake claims are thereby causing enormous harm to the other members of these protected classes. So what happened here? Ronda was vastly overpaid and overqualified for the job that she did at TABLE. She was paid $1.05 million plus benefits last year for her work which was largely comprised of filling out subscription agreements and overseeing an outside law firm on closing passive investments in funds and in private and venture stage companies, some compliance work, and managing the office move from one office to another. She had a very good gig as she was highly paid, only had to go into the office three days a week, and could work from anywhere during the summer. Once my nephew showed up and started to investigate what was going on, she likely concluded that there was a reasonable possibility she would be terminated, as her job was in the too-easy-and-to-good-to-be-true category. The problem was that she was not in a protected class due to her race, age or sexual identity so she had to construct the basis for a claim. While she is female and could in theory bring a gender-based discrimination claim, she reported to the president who is female and to whom she is very close, which makes it difficult for her to bring a harassment claim against her former boss. When my nephew complimented a TABLE employee at lunch about how young she looked – in response to saying she was going to her 40-year-old sister’s birthday party, he said ‘she must be your older sister’ – Ronda immediately reported it to our external HR lawyer. She thereby began building her case. The other problem for Ronda bringing a claim is that she was terminated alongside 30% of other TABLE employees as part of a restructuring so it is very difficult for her to say that she was targeted in her termination or was retaliated against. TABLE is now hiring an external fractional general counsel as that is all the company needs to process the relatively limited amount of legal work we do internally. In short, Ronda was eminently qualified and capable and did her job. She was just too much horsepower for what is largely an administrative legal role so she had to come up with something else to bring a claim. Now Ronda knew I was a good target and it was a good time to bring a claim against me. She also knew that I was under a lot of pressure because on March 4th when Ronda was terminated, my daughter had not yet emerged from consciousness, she was not yet breathing on her own, and my daughter and we were fighting for her life. I was and remain deeply engaged in her recovery while at the same time I was working on finishing the closing for the private placement round for my upcoming IPO. Ronda also knew that publicity about supposed gender discrimination and a “hostile and unsafe work environment” are not things that a CEO of a company about to go public wants to have released into the media. And she may have thought that the nearly $2 million she was asking for would be considered small in the context of the reputational damage a lawsuit could cause, regardless of the fact that two years of severance was an absurd amount for an employee who had only worked at TABLE for 30 months. She also likely considered that I wouldn’t want to embarrass my nephew by dragging him into the klieg lights when her claims emerged publicly. So, in summary, game theory would say that I would certainly settle this case, for why would I risk negative publicity at a time when I was preparing our company to go public and also risk embarrassing my nephew. Notably, she hired a Silicon Valley law firm, rather than a typical NY employment firm. This struck me as interesting as her husband works for one of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture firms whose CEO, I am sure, has no tolerance for these kinds of fake claims that sadly many venture-backed companies also have to deal with. I mention this as I suspect her husband likely has been working with her on the strategy for squeezing me as, in addition to being a computer scientist, he is a game theorist. My only advice for him is to understand more about your opponent before you launch your first move. All of the above said, gender, race, LGBTQ and other such discrimination is a real thing. Many people have been harmed and deserve compensation for this discrimination, and these companies and individuals should be punished for engaging in such behavior. Which brings me to the advice I am seeking from the X community. I am not planning to follow the typical path and settle this ‘claim.’ Rather, I am going to fight this nonsense to the end of the earth in the hope that it inspires other CEOs to do the same so we shut down this despicable behavior that is a large tax on society, employment, and the economy and contributes to workplace discrimination rather than reducing it. Do you agree or disagree that this is the right approach?

@xavierbertrand Vous prenez quand votre carte du PS ?

Notre pays a besoin d’un audiovisuel public. C’est un pilier que nous devons garder. Le pluralisme, ça ne peut pas être comme aux Etats-Unis où des personnes très fortunées possèdent différents médias.

@VaeVix Oui le mec est vraiment un abruti.

Amateur. J'en ai connu qui faisaient faire ça par la bonne (et garer la Mercedes sur un stationnement interdit) pour prouver qu'ils étaient bien en Suisse. (Madame s'emmerdait en Suisse et préférait Paris). Et qui en France (ou pour y aller) payaient tout en cash. Ou avec une carte au nom d'un domestique).

@lospectra_ PSG 2024/25

Ranking the top 15 strongest teams in football history. 1. 🇪🇸 Barcelona 2010/11

@jdl288 @AgnesRunacher 3h37. Je pense que même son mari ne va pas regarder.

Dommage que ce soit Thinkerview @AgnesRunacher . Personne ne vous a prévenu avant ?

@franceinfo @pierremoscovici Honte à vous.

🔴 🗣️ "Ce n'est pas lui qui a tué ce jeune homme, il a pris un temps de pause. Je ne dis pas que c'est normal, mais on ne va pas en faire un fromage non plus" : @pierremoscovici réagit au retour de Raphaël Arnault à l'Assemblée nationale. #ToutEstPolitique #Canal16

@elchicosuaveee Et dans les 4 y en a deux sous Mussolini

Moi j’suis désolé mais 4 CDM ou pas, 3 coupe du monde (dont une a 48) de suite raté, tu n’es plus une grande nation de football.

@CBeaune @mtwit75 Ce serait pourtant tellement mérité !

@mtwit75 Ne racontez pas n’importe quoi, ça relève de la diffamation. Démenti, évidemment !

Clément Beaune se voit garantir l'investiture PS ou Place publique dans la VIIe circonscription de Paris, pour récupérer aux prochaines législatives le siège de député abandonné par Emmanuel Grégoire, en échange de son soutien au 2ème tour à ce dernier lors de l'élection municipale parisienne (Canard Enchaîné).

Et voilà. Quand tu tires le fil de la logique jusqu'au bout, tu arrives toujours au même endroit. Piketty veut un impôt mondial sur le capital. Mais qu'est-ce qui se passe quand les gens ne veulent pas le payer ? Ils partent. Ils déplacent leur capital. Ils s'installent ailleurs. C'est la liberté fondamentale de circulation. Et c'est exactement le problème pour Piketty et Zucman : leur système ne fonctionne que si les gens ne peuvent pas fuir. Donc Piketty propose d'arrêter les gens aux aéroports. Zucman défend un bouclier anti-exil fiscal, un mur de Berlin français pour empêcher les citoyens de partir avec leur propre argent. Relisez ça lentement. Des intellectuels français, en 2026, proposent sérieusement d'empêcher des citoyens libres de quitter le territoire parce qu'ils n'ont pas assez contribué selon les critères de l'État. C'est pas une caricature, c'est leur programme. Et c'est pas un accident. C'est la conclusion logique et inévitable de leur idéologie. Parce que quand ton système repose sur la confiscation, tu as besoin de l'enfermement. Si tu taxes le capital à 90%, le capital fuit. Si tu veux empêcher la fuite, tu dois contrôler les frontières. Si tu contrôles les frontières pour le capital, tu finis par les contrôler pour les gens. C'est mécanique. C'est une cascade. Chaque mesure coercitive crée un problème qui nécessite une mesure encore plus coercitive pour fonctionner. Et c'est exactement ce qui s'est passé à chaque fois dans l'histoire. L'URSS n'a pas construit le mur de Berlin par hasard. Ils l'ont construit parce que les gens fuyaient. Parce que quand tu crées un système que les gens veulent quitter, tu as deux options : améliorer le système ou enfermer les gens. Le communisme a toujours choisi l'option 2. Cuba empêche ses citoyens de partir. La Corée du Nord tire sur ceux qui essaient. La RDA avait des chiens et des mines antipersonnel à sa frontière. C'est pas des dérives, c'est des conséquences logiques. Et Piketty et Zucman sont exactement sur la même trajectoire intellectuelle. Ils commencent par "taxons les riches". Quand les riches partent, c'est "empêchons-les de partir". Quand d'autres les suivent, ce sera "empêchons tout le monde de partir". C'est un toboggan et il n'y a pas de frein. Ne nous trompons pas sur ce que ces gens proposent. Derrière le langage académique, derrière les équations, derrière les papiers peer-reviewed, il y a une proposition très simple : l'État doit avoir le pouvoir de confisquer ta richesse et de t'empêcher de fuir. C'est la définition du totalitarisme. Habillée en politique fiscale. L'ironie c'est que ces gens se présentent comme les défenseurs du peuple. Mais la liberté de circuler c'est un droit du peuple. La liberté de disposer de son argent c'est un droit du peuple. La liberté de vivre où on veut c'est un droit du peuple. Et ce sont exactement les droits qu'ils veulent supprimer. Pour le bien commun, évidemment. Comme tous les totalitaires de l'histoire. La prochaine fois que quelqu'un vous cite Piketty ou Zucman comme des progressistes, rappelez-leur que leur programme aboutit à empêcher les gens de quitter le pays. Et demandez-leur dans quel camp se trouvent historiquement les gens qui construisent des murs pour empêcher les gens de sortir.

@epenser 1. Qu est ce que l argent public si ce n est l argent des impôts ? 2. Pourquoi les autres pays n ont pas ce système et comment les créateurs de contenu arrivent à y émerger sans subventions ?

c'est un peu plus compliqué que ça. Le CNC est "financé" (on devrait plutôt dire "fondé") sur les tickets de cinéma, les chaînes de télé, etc. En gros, oui, l'argent du CNC provient, in fine, du public, mais ce n'est pas "l'argent de nos impôts". Ensuite, le but du CNC n'est PAS

Bon, je vois que ça raconte tout et n'importe quoi au sujet du CNC et en particulier de CNC Talent, alors je fais juste un petit thread histoire de rappeler 2/3 points qui me semblent essentiel. Pour pas mal d'entre vous, je ne vais rien vous apprendre, pas besoin de me dire que

@BenJNissim Ordering such a breakfast should disqualify you from entry.

Been in the EU for less than 15 minutes and I’m already annoyed at the portion sizes

@anatolium @LaPravda99 Je like un post de Juanito 😂

La distribution par le CNC de millions d'euros de subventions à des incapables et des ineptes qui se prétendent journalistes sur les réseaux sociaux est un scandale politique majeur.

@eu_eeas Mais de quoi je me mêle ? Israël est dans l’UE ?

The approval of the Death Penalty Bill by the Israeli Parliament would be a grave step backward. The EU opposes capital punishment in all cases and under all circumstances. We encourage Israel to abide by its previous principled position. Read more: link.europa.eu/FFYKp3

@VraiconAlpin Ces subventions n’ont pas lieu d être. Et l’organisme qui les distribue non plus.

Hop hop hop jolie tentative de damage control mais le problème c'est pas Ultia, c'est l'organisation de la commission qui permet le favoritisme et le conflit d'intérêts. Elle n'est pas exclue pour avoir pratiqué ce favoritisme, elle est exclue pour en avoir parlé.

@objective_golf @shotscope VAT comes to mind

@shotscope As a UK-based company, why are you charging around 30% more in the UK (£199) for this compared to US prices (£150ish)? Very disappointed as a long time customer of yours, kind of expect this from US golf companies but not from British ones too.

Shot Scope LM1 is officially here. Start levelling up your practice today. Get it now 👉 shotscope.com/shop/products/… #ShotScope #LM1

@GeorgesZe16 @moutet @PulpLiberal @Ant1Lal Vu qu ils ont pas été foutus d identifier le scandale des pedos avant le premier tour ça m étonnerait.

@PulpLiberal @Ant1Lal C’est en fait interdit que je sache Si l’équipe Dati a encore deux neurones en service il faudrait qu’ils portent plainte ASAP

Est-ce que quelqu'un a déjà vu un politique français, même très à droite, prendre la parole dans une église après la messe pour sa campagne électorale ? En particulier à Pâques ou Noël ?

@bfmbusiness Mais en quel honneur ?

Retraite : peut-on éviter un passage à 65 ans ? 👴 "Le déficit dépend de la productivité : à 0,7%, il reste contenu ; à 1,4%, il disparaît. Mais la vraie réforme serait de réindexer les pensions sur les salaires plutôt que sur l’inflation" 💬 Éric Heyer, OFCE

@LouisCailliez_ @egregoire @RTLFrance La place de cet ectoplasme est en prison.

@egregoire à l'instant sur @RTLFrance : « 𝑜𝑛 𝑦 𝑎 𝑣𝑢 𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑠𝑖 𝑎̀ 𝑙'𝑒́𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑠 𝑓𝑎𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑒𝑛 𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑒 𝑑'𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑑𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒́𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑒 » : merci pour l'aveu mais quelle est donc cette procédure dont vous vous prévalez ? Mes clients la cherchent toujours ! Et puis « 𝑜𝑛 𝑣𝑎 𝑡𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝑎̀ 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡, 𝑜𝑛 𝑣𝑎 𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑎 𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 » : voilà un beau vœu pieux pour ces familles traumatisées, alors vous êtes interpellés sur ce sujet depuis 10 ans et que le mal innommable est fait. L'enquête administrative ne suffira pas : cette gestion du #périscolaire relève du pénal.

Il est d autant plus difficile de comprendre pourquoi cette affaire ne sort que si tardivement dans la campagne. @datirachida n’aviez vous pas connaissance de tout cela il y a un mois ?