Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

Post by badminton1 » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 2:23 AM UTC

badminton1 wrote: post #264

Some months ago I saw an job search website ad. I clicked "Why are you seeing this ad?", and it said it was targeted towards users between 24 and 37. How is this not enabling age discrimination? Connecting people can be a good thing, but connecting people through discrimination is a completely different thing.

Post by jlgaddis » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 2:23 AM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #90

baalimago wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's so many "I need to get back to you on that".

It's a good strategy, all the media coverage is about his actual testimony today, whereas when he sends an update to the committee next week, it will not make as big of a splash as this one.

Post by theptip » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 2:29 AM UTC

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #298

andromeduck wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't make any sense. If you're receiving questions that weren't published prior to the interview it's perfectly understandable that not all questions can be answered immediately. In fact, I'd be more suspicious if he answered everything without needing to follow up. If however you're the one raising a question, I think it's your responsibility to ensure that you or someone on your team someone does some basic…

> If you're receiving questions that weren't published prior to the interview it's perfectly understandable that not all questions can be answered immediately. In fact, I'd be more suspicious if he answered everything without needing to follow up. Right so I'm not expecting him to answer _every_ question without referring to his staff. There were, however, key controversial questions which he did not answer by claimi…

Post by Pfhreak » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 2:37 AM UTC

EdSharkey wrote: post #309

Pfhreak wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the risk of stepping on a landmine given the thread above, consider using 'transgender' or 'trans' instead of 'transgenedered'. The two are subtly different, but that difference is important to some trans people. Transgendered implies something happened to someone, rather than transgender, which is an attribute someone has. Many trans people consider the transgendered offensive, e.g. "No one/No thing transgendered…

> Many trans people consider the transgendered offensive You are creating insanity everywhere you go with this line. Anyone who takes offense at such a trifle can only be out to pick a fight. And if someone is egging for a fight, shall we engage rather than wilt away? And isn't THAT the landmine you're stepping on here? Are you picking a fight? If so, where do you get off?

Post by justinator » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 2:44 AM UTC

function_seven wrote: post #233

justinator wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scenario is this: say my wife is a first generation Italian and I am the CEO of a really great new car company. If someone says, "This is a great car, I could never say, seeing an ITALIAN making such a car!" I would be embarrassed for the person saying this, as they don't know my family history (maybe I don't look Italian, I look like a viking, if one was to guess - which you shouldn't), and to be perfectly hones…

The senator didn't mention any specific country. Just said, "Only in America..." I think you're reading a bit much into that.

    SULLIVAN:

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Zuckerberg, quite a story, right? 
	Dorm room to the global behemoth that you guys are. Only in America, 
	would you agree with that?
    ZUCKERBERG:

    Senator, mostly in America.
    SULLIVAN:

    You couldn't -- you couldn't do this in China, right? 
	Or, what you did in 10 years.
    ZUCKERBERG:

    Well -- well, Senator, there are -- there are some very 
	strong Chinese internet companies.
    SULLIVAN:

    Right but -- you're supposed to answer 
	"yes" to this question.

    (LAUGHTER)

    OK, come on, I'm trying to help you, right?