And just like they found Facebook they can, and will, find something else. And maybe they learn something about trust in that type of service the next time around.
Maybe they have no interest in finding something else. Maybe they aren't interested in your opinion and don't see you as someone they are want to learn lessons from.
Maybe understanding the problem as outlined is important. Neither of the two sentences you've written make any sense in the context of what I said.
I think what's missing here is elderly. Arguably, that's even more harmful.
The elderly are grown adults who have a lifetime of experience and can be expected to see through the charade and spot what's really going on. Young people are more naive. I'm almost legally a senior citizen and I saw Facebook for what it was a long time ago, and most of the people I know who are my age don't use it, they don't even like social media in general. They use email or text messages, mostly. The people who…
I disagree. They did not grow up with technology in the same way we did. This is all still quite new to them, and I truly believe the ragebait strategy and polarisation is just as damaging as the tricks used to ensnare teenagers.
Executives mostly get jailed when there is large media attention + the executive was foolish enough to leave evidence pointing straight at them. For every case where an executive is jailed, there are 100 other cases where they aren't. And that is just in the overt "breaking the law cases". Even more incredible damage has been in us losing the laws that protect us in the first place. For nigh on 40 years thanks to neo…
This is turning into a gish gallop. What specific laws would cause Mark Zuckerberg to go to jail?
This conversation feels like it really captures Mangione's point of view. It's like I'm listening to an internal dialogue.
So? It works. Their economy is starting to lap the West one. Maybe cutting a little bit off the top works regardless of who exactly is being cut?
It sounds appealing when you imagine that nobody you like would ever be cut, but that's not how the Chinese system works. I would guess that at some point in the past you've laughed at memes making fun of political leaders; in China, this is not allowed, because the authorities believe that posting mean things about the system or its leadership damages the trust in government which is required for a healthy society.
You won't scare me into compassion for people so different than me that they might as well not be carbon based.
> If WhatsApp went down without a long transition process first The transition mechanism is that your contacts are in your phone address book, and you can call or text them or find them on other platforms indexed by phone number. Although, not for username contacts. Would it be disruptive? Yes. Would it be world ending? No.
That is all well and good for individuals chatting with family, friends or small groups. But alot of small businesses all over the world are using WhatsApp for Business with features and data storage that cannot be immediately moved to another platform. If it disappeared tomorrow, you would see business failures and immediate economic impact in developing-world regions that can hardly afford such a hit.
The antidote to that would be for Meta to reveal all their internal communications. But they'll never do that because their own words and actions are likely far more damning than any story the DOJ could weave. The trend I have noticed is anytime the actual truth leaks from these actors and companies, it's so much more evil than I could have imagined. Like the recent tell-all book from someone who worked directly with…
> I mean, it's not like we could just demand to see the code that's governing our lives. What right do we have to poke around in Facebook's private affairs like that? -xkcd 1390
I think if facebook code governs your life, the major part of the fault does not lie with facebook. It is possible to live not being chained to the feed 24x7.
Dissolve the company. Jail the C levels. End of story. If this ends in another fine to put into a ledger book I'll scream. The fine ends up back in their pockets in months in the form of loans and grants and tax avoidances and so on. The world no longer needs Facebook and its leaders. It does not need its technology. It does not need the ideas of the people that are there. If you are still working there, you are comp…
America has a profound problem. It defines companies as legal persons with all the same rights. But it also applies the same restrictions and punishments as people without factoring in the underlying advantages a company has when breaking the law for profit. 1. Perpetual existence means breaking the law is a short term problem that is well worth the long term benefit — companies essentially live for ever and out live…
This all is based on false premise - corporation being a "legal person" does not mean they have same rights as people. You can liquidate a corporation and if is not murder. You can boycott a corporation and it's not illegal discrimination. Corporations can not vote or be elected into office. Etc, etc. It's just a technical term and it doesn't mean what you think it means. Stop perpetuating this nonsense.
> America has a profound problem. It defines companies as legal persons with all the same rights. Corporate personhood does not mean a company have all the same legal rights as a person. Did you notice that companies can’t vote in elections or plead the fifth amendment like a person can? Corporations only get some rights. Corporate personhood is common across the globe. If you thought it was an American idea that’s c…
The inability to personally jail megacorp CEOs who cause untold amounts of societal damage is not common "everywhere" ("many places", maybe). And that is the actual thing the person you're responding to cares about, and rightly so.
You can jail CEO just fine if you prove they personally committed the crime beyond reasonable doubt. Proving that is hard, of course. Sometimes impossible because the CEO delegates a lot of what the corporation does. This is common for any big organization or group - be it corporation, political party, gang, army, state, etc. There's no special law or process singling out or protecting CEOs specifically, and no specific US rules for that.
The countries who jail CEOs who due “societal damage” as a fuzzy cultural concept, as opposed to jailing CEOs according to the law, are not legal systems you want to imitate. The US does jail CEOs who commit crimes. Social media just has a short memory for topics like Worldcom, Enron, Tyco, or even recent topics like Theranos and FTX. You may also have your personal list of “societal damages” that you believe should…
Executives mostly get jailed when there is large media attention + the executive was foolish enough to leave evidence pointing straight at them. For every case where an executive is jailed, there are 100 other cases where they aren't. And that is just in the overt "breaking the law cases". Even more incredible damage has been in us losing the laws that protect us in the first place. For nigh on 40 years thanks to neo…
Thousands of people were jailed in 2008 aftermath - look up operation Malicious Mortgage and Stolen Dreams. Most of them of course low level - because those were the people actually perpetrating the fraud. But some examples: Kareem Serageldin, Lee Farkas, Edward Woodard, etc. Ken Lewis, BoA CEO, faced multiple investigations and civil penalties, but none of those investigarions could find any criminal liability. He lost his post and BoA paid out billions in settlements.
Fascinating story. The author was hopelessly ignorant and guilty of facilitating, but the execs were so devoid of anything approaching ethics or morality. Explains a lot if true.
Unless you've been on the inside at the top levels of huge companies, you don't know about the sheer sociopathy of the people there. It's easy, even normal, to be naive as a regular employee, even one at a fairly high management level.
By this comment I assume you have been one of these executives at a huge company?