31–37 of 37 posts
If someone is interested in the original Facebook post (also viewable without an account): https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10103109918599991
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"bad" is relative. The CEO's of the tobacco companies had a history of knowingly killing people. Microsoft was aggressively anti-competitive, Facebook was (and still is) very much opposed to privacy on the Internet. A company is many cogs. The fact that Bill Gates was anti-competitive doesn't make him, the individual, a bad person. That's very clear from the work he's doing now. So assuming that all decisions stem fr…
I am paraphrasing, but the quote goes something like "Yesterday's robber-baron is today's philanthropist."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do people think that because someone is a shareholder/CEO in a company, all their deeds from that point on are purely self-interest? Depends on the CEO and company. The behavior of a company reflects the behavior of its CEO. Microsoft and Facebook both have a a history of bad behavior.
"bad" is relative. The CEO's of the tobacco companies had a history of knowingly killing people. Microsoft was aggressively anti-competitive, Facebook was (and still is) very much opposed to privacy on the Internet. A company is many cogs. The fact that Bill Gates was anti-competitive doesn't make him, the individual, a bad person. That's very clear from the work he's doing now. So assuming that all decisions stem fr…
For the rest of us, the relevant point is predicting their behavior, and in that context, the phrase certainly applies. As long as he's CEO and the largest shareholder, Facebook's actions are Zuckerberg's decision and responsibility.
Maybe I'm too much of a pessimist/cynic, but while I certainly love that Zuck is doing things like this, I hope he's not just trying to butter Nigeria up to the free basics anti-open-internet bullshit that he tried to pull on India. Nigeria and Africa are definitely the next big frontiers for the internet, and I honestly doubt that whatever facebook's got planned is mutually beneficial enough. Though if FB decides to…
Does Mark's motivation matter to this kid? Probably not. He will likely make at least thousands of dollars, and perhaps much more, because of this mention. Internet.org, the service you referred to as "bullshit," was attempting to give hundreds of millions of impoverished people a way to communicate with the world that they don't currently have. Neither Mark Zuckerberg nor Facebook owe you, the people of Nigeria and…
Even something given with no ulterior motive can have destructive effects on the recipient society, since it eliminates potential competition, while often not providing a better good or service. How many future ISPs offering cheap open internet access will not even appear?
On the subject, though not directly about Facebook, I suggest this interview with the creator of Poverty, Inc.: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2015/11/michael_matheso.htm...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you're overly pessimistic in this at all. Facebook does what's good for Facebook. So does Mark Zuckerberg.
I can't stand this mentality. Why do people think that because someone is a shareholder/CEO in a company, all their deeds from that point on are purely self-interest? Same shit happened when he pledged 99% of his stock charitable causes. Everyone was up in arms about how the organization was an LLC instead of a charity, claiming he did it purely for the tax benefits, despite that being bullshit. I guess at the end of…
The fact is, getting what I want and giving others what they want are usually not mutually exclusive. And anytime there is a conflict, there is usually an acceptable compromise.
Why are posts like these trending/upvoted?