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

Leaked Zuckerberg audio: 'You go to the mat and you fight'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–66 of 66 posts

Re: Leaked Zuckerberg audio: 'You go to the mat and you fight'

#61

Post by rollingdeep »

cjhopman wrote: post #51
PavlovsCat wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the whole thing, but thanks. And if you misrepresent my position without even asking for clarification, you not understanding it hardly comes as a surprise. > other than that the "existential threat" is "to break up the companies" The government derives its legitimacy from the people, and running a corporation is a privilege granted by said government. If it wants to split companies up because they became too…

Sure, and if you believe that the ACLU and edward snowden are fighting against democracy, then I'll admit that your position is quite possibly logically consistent.

This comment doesn’t make any sense.

Re: Leaked Zuckerberg audio: 'You go to the mat and you fight'

#62

Post by rollingdeep »

sekasi wrote: post #19

I have to say, as someone who's been somewhat critical of Facebook's dealings for the past years, I read the entire thing and I can't pick up on anything that doesn't seem like a reasonable thing to say to your team. Is anyone able to educate me on why there seem to be some air of hawks swooping on Zuckerberg because of this?

Because Zuckerberg already testified that election influence and interference was not a serious threat, it is newsworthy that he turns around here and says the opposite, that companies would not be able to control interference threats in the face of a breakup.

Also newsworthy is the existential nature of the legal battle he openly talks about, whether or not there is legitimate reason to be broken up as regulations do have a purpose. Especially since in the same audio he admits there are election influence threats to worry about, it seems to pit facebook directly opposed to the democratic system and regulations meant to uphold democracies. Saying we will use our deep pockets which are deeper than the U.S. regulators—to fight any regulatory action (which seems reasonable now) is like saying we will fight against democracy and being fairly regulated because we have more money and power than the people and government do in any legal battle. The rules, it seems, will not apply to FB or any company of similar size and power.

Re: Leaked Zuckerberg audio: 'You go to the mat and you fight'

#63

Post by rollingdeep »

rollingdeep wrote: post #58
dang wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was flagged by users—correctly so, because this seems like just back-and-forth political ephemera, of the sort that the HN guidelines explain is off topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . The test on HN for whether a new development in an ongoing story counts as on topic is whether the new article adds significant new information: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... .…

Dang, that is not a stringent test any of kind. It is highly arbitrary. It is a list of your previous decisions on whether a post is new information—most of which are simply declarations of your decision and provide no stringent rules to test. It also doesn’t explain why the previous topic was locked and deleted. This new information had just been broken and not posted here before with the specific story coverage on…

update

>dang: I'm sorry it feels arbitrary. I think we're looking at this from different perspectives and continuing to argue about it will likely only be repetitive.

One thing's for sure: if antitrust action against Facebook or other big tech cos does go ahead, it will get thoroughly and repeatedly discussed on HN. So our positions will converge in the long run.

I just don't think "candidate says X" is substantive enough to meet the bar—keep in mind that front page space is the scarcest resource on HN, so every important story gets insufficient attention, and whatever story you care most about, it's always going to feel like it's starved for coverage. (I'm sure even Rust hackers feel the same way.) I appreciate your passion on the topic and the fact that you care enough about HN to take time to make a case about it.

Daniel

>rollingdeep: The only way this has been repetitive is that I have repeated my simple request for you to directly address the specific concerns instead of a general dismissal on your part. If you cared to directly engage the content, this would not be repetitive. Alas, I don’t believe you care about such news even if it is legitimately significant which you have failed demonstrate otherwise. Per my reasonable requests, you haven’t even attempted to directly engage the content and substance, but you have generally dismissed it.

I’m afraid because you have no interest in the significance of this kind of news, that the spread of such information is hampered. Do you realize that you are effectively influencing the spread of information, and this news is highly relevant to that and you? Just as Facebook has the power to influence the spread of information, so does HN. I see no reason to hamper/suppress this discussion as you are allowing, except perhaps the suppression of this information/discussion is preferable to you and Y Combinator.

On some level there is no guarantee of actual regulatory action without public education and public support of those issues and regulatory actions. Your decisions seem to support obstructing the spread of that information and letting the facts bubble to the surface of public consciousness.

Thus I completely disagree with your decisions on a factual basis.

Re: Leaked Zuckerberg audio: 'You go to the mat and you fight'

#64

Post by roland00 »

dmurray wrote: post #11
roland00 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bigger thing is a mismatch between the employees of facebook and the management. These weekly meetings happen all the time, what is different is now the employees are recording them and releasing them to the press. This means at least one employee no longer thinks the interest of upper management and the workers align and she or he spent forethought in order to record the conversation and then spent time afterwar…

The big news is that one of Facebook's 40,000 employees is disgruntled, idealistic or just likes to feel important?

This is big news when the Facebook employees we are referring to starting salary is 120k a year and the median employee is 240k a year. [Note many people who work for facebook are some form of contract employees and thus do not make this, but it was also not a contract employee who recorded this conversation for they do not get to sit down with Mark in these weekly meetings.]

Even if you are not happy with everything about Facebook that income level often prevents this type of behavior for the incentives of company and worker align generally. And it is a big deal for this was a new thing, not a thing that never happens, but also not a thing that happens often that it becomes the new normal.

Re: Leaked Zuckerberg audio: 'You go to the mat and you fight'

#65

Post by sekasi »

mrtksn wrote: post #40
sekasi wrote: post #19

I have to say, as someone who's been somewhat critical of Facebook's dealings for the past years, I read the entire thing and I can't pick up on anything that doesn't seem like a reasonable thing to say to your team. Is anyone able to educate me on why there seem to be some air of hawks swooping on Zuckerberg because of this?

I think it plays into "corporations control the government, there's no democracy" narrative. Essentially means, it doesn't matter what's your position on immigration or gun laws or healthcare, what will determine the administration is the candidate's relationship with Facebook. I think it feeds from the distrust towards the political system more than the distrust towards Zuckerberg. If you think about it, the concern…

Correct or incorrect, good answer. Appreciate you taking time writing it!

Re: Leaked Zuckerberg audio: 'You go to the mat and you fight'

#66

Post by dbtqgoat »

sekasi wrote: post #19

I have to say, as someone who's been somewhat critical of Facebook's dealings for the past years, I read the entire thing and I can't pick up on anything that doesn't seem like a reasonable thing to say to your team. Is anyone able to educate me on why there seem to be some air of hawks swooping on Zuckerberg because of this?

Because there isn’t

>There's no bombshell revelation in this leak but we get some good insights into Mark Zuckerberg's major preoccupations - regulation and new competitors.

It’s just a unique opportunity to be a fly on the wall in a high profile meeting.

Post reply on HN