Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#31

Post by klochner »

tedunangst wrote: post #26
orblivion wrote: post #24

So I don’t know, one thing that is personally a bit disheartening…. It bums me out that people immediately go to “You must be doing this to make money.” Because that’s just so different from the ethos of the company. It is so different from how we actually think about stuff that you feel so misunderstood. It's pretty sad that people think that someone should or ever would run a huge operation without money being a ma…

Money can be a major concern to a huge operation without being its primary focus. Money is a big deal for the Red Cross, but the Red Cross doesn't exist to make money.

The Red Cross is a non-profit.

facebook has a legal obligation to maximize shareholder value:

   Whereas for-profit organizations exist to earn and
   re-distribute taxable wealth to employees and 
   shareholders, the nonprofit corporation exists solely to
   provide programs and services that are of self-benefit.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#32

Post by celoyd »

klochner wrote: post #31
tedunangst wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money can be a major concern to a huge operation without being its primary focus. Money is a big deal for the Red Cross, but the Red Cross doesn't exist to make money.

The Red Cross is a non-profit. facebook has a legal obligation to maximize shareholder value: Whereas for-profit organizations exist to earn and re-distribute taxable wealth to employees and shareholders, the nonprofit corporation exists solely to provide programs and services that are of self-benefit.

No, it has a legal obligation to do what (the majority of) its shareholders say. If they tell it to dance a jig and give all its assets to the Flat Earth Society, it’s obliged.

Maximizing shareholder value in the way that’s usually meant is a business school doctrine, not a legal doctrine. (Edit: on second thought, it is a legal doctrine, just not the legal doctrine.) See, for example, http://www.virginialawbusrev.org/VLBR3-1pdfs/Stout.pdf :

“Dodge v. Ford is a mistake, a judicial “sport,” a doctrinal oddity largely irrelevant to corporate law and corporate practice. What is more, courts and legislatures alike treat it as irrelevant. […] Only laypersons and (more disturbingly) many law professors continue to rely on Dodge v. Ford.”

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#34

Post by klochner »

celoyd wrote: post #32
klochner wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Red Cross is a non-profit. facebook has a legal obligation to maximize shareholder value: Whereas for-profit organizations exist to earn and re-distribute taxable wealth to employees and shareholders, the nonprofit corporation exists solely to provide programs and services that are of self-benefit.

No, it has a legal obligation to do what (the majority of) its shareholders say. If they tell it to dance a jig and give all its assets to the Flat Earth Society, it’s obliged. Maximizing shareholder value in the way that’s usually meant is a business school doctrine, not a legal doctrine. (Edit: on second thought, it is a legal doctrine, just not the legal doctrine.) See, for example, http://www.virginialawbusrev.or…

If they go public as expected, I'm doubting many equity holders will be interested in a jig.

I stand by my observation that a non-profit is poor evidence for the assertion "Money can be a major concern to a huge operation without being its primary focus"

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#35

Post by tedunangst »

klochner wrote: post #31
tedunangst wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money can be a major concern to a huge operation without being its primary focus. Money is a big deal for the Red Cross, but the Red Cross doesn't exist to make money.

The Red Cross is a non-profit. facebook has a legal obligation to maximize shareholder value: Whereas for-profit organizations exist to earn and re-distribute taxable wealth to employees and shareholders, the nonprofit corporation exists solely to provide programs and services that are of self-benefit.

So it's not legal for a for-profit organization to donate to charity?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#36

Post by klochner »

tedunangst wrote: post #35
klochner wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Red Cross is a non-profit. facebook has a legal obligation to maximize shareholder value: Whereas for-profit organizations exist to earn and re-distribute taxable wealth to employees and shareholders, the nonprofit corporation exists solely to provide programs and services that are of self-benefit.

So it's not legal for a for-profit organization to donate to charity?

Of course it's legal, it could be great PR.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#37

Post by what »

Jun8 wrote: post #5

Reading his responses, he doesn't come off as the money-hungry psychopath that he was claimed to be. Either he knows how to hide his agenda very well, or, well, he's just your usual young founder.

He's probably been coached on what to say, I somehow doubt he just goes to these interviews and wings it.

As for being money-hungry, like qq66 said, he likely would have sold FB if he was just in it for the money. But then he'd be less of a celebrity and no one would remember him?

Also, I think a lot of this anti-FB/Zuckerberg stuff has been blown out of proportion and is exaggerated.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#38

Post by tedunangst »

klochner wrote: post #36
tedunangst wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's not legal for a for-profit organization to donate to charity?

Of course it's legal, it could be great PR.

But the money donated would likely generate better returns if reinvested in the business (or even just regular advertising), so it's not maximizing value.

Lots of companies exist to make money, sure, but it's possible for a company to exist where that's not the raison d'etre.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#39

Post by jimbokun »

silkodyssey wrote: post #18
qq66 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No majorly successful founder-CEO is "in it for the money." If he wanted to just buy Lamborghinis and penthouses, he would have sold the company for $1 billion several years ago. Anyone like Gates, Jobs, Zuckerberg, Ellison, etc. are in it for the power, megalomania, and manifest destiny -- not for the money.

The 11 Companies That Tried To Buy Facebook http://www.businessinsider.com/all-the-companies-that-ever-t...

Why does image 15 of the slide show have a picture of Shaq and Tim Duncan?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: I Donated to Diaspora project

#40

Post by techiferous »

orblivion wrote: post #22
Jun8 wrote: post #5

Reading his responses, he doesn't come off as the money-hungry psychopath that he was claimed to be. Either he knows how to hide his agenda very well, or, well, he's just your usual young founder.

Psychopaths are great at hiding their agenda.

I think we have to be careful labeling people psychopaths.
Post reply on HN