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

I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 267 posts

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#221

Post by eloff »

pitaj wrote: post #158
eloff wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the analogy is strained. But Facebook wields absolute coercion power inside their platform. Banning posts, pages, accounts, and apps without due process or recourse. My parents run a business on Facebook and they have so many horror stories about the times Facebook has completely held their livelihood hostage. Or cut their revenue 10x with a single algorithm update.

Facebook wields absolute power over the platform, true. They do not coerce anyone by exercising that power, though. Everyone on Facebook is on there voluntarily. People don't get to choose where they are born. Don't get me wrong. I don't use Facebook, and I don't think anyone else should either. I would love if there were a (decentralized) replacement for it, and I think Facebook is on the way out.

Once you've built an app or business on Facebook's platform, what are you choices really? You're at their mercy.

You can say, well they chose to use Facebook's platform, they can leave if they don't like the rules. But I can also leave my country if I don't like the rules (incidentally, I did this!)

Maybe coercion isn't the right word, but the power is absolute. Greater inside their own platform than the power of the state, because you have no legal recourse with Facebook's exercise of power. At least with the governments in the West you can write your congressman, lobby, sue them, etc.

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#222

Post by gowld »

pitaj wrote: post #122
rememberlenny wrote: post #105

Web platforms are governments. "Facebook is a government. Facebook's users are citizens, and Facebook's applications developers are the private companies that drive much of the economy. Apple. Twitter, Myspace, Craigslist, Foursquare, Tumblr and every other large network of engaged users (including some services of Google) plays a similar role. We have always tacitly acknowledged this. We talk about these networks as…

Whether or not they are governments is a question of definition. Definitions are important, and social networks don't fit very well into it. They are fundamentally different from modern governments as they do not have a monopoly on coercion. If social media are governments, then every corporation - no, every association of people - on Earth is a government.

Nation-state governments don't have a monopoly on coercion. In the US at least, there are multiple political governments (state and Federal, not to mention HOA). Governments apply coercion across borders, and also residents can leave (most) nation-states.

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#223

Post by throwaway2048 »

eloff wrote: post #221
pitaj wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook wields absolute power over the platform, true. They do not coerce anyone by exercising that power, though. Everyone on Facebook is on there voluntarily. People don't get to choose where they are born. Don't get me wrong. I don't use Facebook, and I don't think anyone else should either. I would love if there were a (decentralized) replacement for it, and I think Facebook is on the way out.

Once you've built an app or business on Facebook's platform, what are you choices really? You're at their mercy. You can say, well they chose to use Facebook's platform, they can leave if they don't like the rules. But I can also leave my country if I don't like the rules (incidentally, I did this!) Maybe coercion isn't the right word, but the power is absolute. Greater inside their own platform than the power of the…

coercion is absolutely the right word, don't let its definition get twisted.

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#224

Post by cies »

rememberlenny wrote: post #105

Web platforms are governments. "Facebook is a government. Facebook's users are citizens, and Facebook's applications developers are the private companies that drive much of the economy. Apple. Twitter, Myspace, Craigslist, Foursquare, Tumblr and every other large network of engaged users (including some services of Google) plays a similar role. We have always tacitly acknowledged this. We talk about these networks as…

Facebook is a "gov't" for its user-citizens, the same way dairy farmers are a "gov't" for their cows.

In other words, FB is not a gov't, it's a company that sells the product it creates from interaction with its users and sells to it's customers (other companies that want to advertise and/or analyze data).

Main difference with dairy farmers is that cows are property of of the farm, they're forcefully made pregnant, have their babies taken short after birth, and get killed, all at the whims of the farmer. FB has less control over it's, much more vocal users.

That's why FB's farmer, Mark, needs help writing speeches and and dealing with the "real gov't" (which to some extend represents the people, a.k.a. FB users). Full circle.

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#225

Post by throwaway84742 »

bertil wrote: post #129
craftyguy wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think it is a gift to mankind?

It allows me to keep in contact with many of my close friends and my family who live on three continent and more countries than I can count on a daily basis, has helped me find work a dozen times, has provided several companies who I worked for with credible identity, spectacular growth via targeted advertising. I can use Uber, AirBnB and so many more and not fear that the people with whom I share a car or a flat wit…

These encyclopedia-sized replies perfectly illustrate my original point.

Gift to mankind, I’m tellin ya. People just couldn’t have friends before FB, and Zuck deserves our eternal gratitude (and all of our private data).

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#226

Post by Bucephalus355 »

poof131 wrote: post #56
ashleyn wrote: post #4

The rise of nationalist populism, although something I still disagree quite contentiously with, really begins making more sense when opinions like this start leaking out.

The problem is how those words have been coopted. While “nationalism” can be associated with nation state horrors of the twentieth century, the true alternative hasn’t really been been examined. The ideal is a global community, but the reality is much more a drift back into tribalism (i.e. company over country, or I and my Brother against my Cousin [1]). Tribalism is apparent in the growing intensity of intra-nation…

Nationalism and Populism are words that are constantly reinvented and reused.

One example is that “Populism” means quite different things in US vs Latin America vs EU. In US it’s always had this agrarian, rights of the farmers, Jeffersonian element to it that distrusts big business. In Latin America, it’s about taking on the permanent plutocracy of the landed rich, and in the EU...it’s often just a euphemism for neo-Fascism-lite.

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#227

Post by Retra »

pitaj wrote: post #122
rememberlenny wrote: post #105

Web platforms are governments. "Facebook is a government. Facebook's users are citizens, and Facebook's applications developers are the private companies that drive much of the economy. Apple. Twitter, Myspace, Craigslist, Foursquare, Tumblr and every other large network of engaged users (including some services of Google) plays a similar role. We have always tacitly acknowledged this. We talk about these networks as…

Whether or not they are governments is a question of definition. Definitions are important, and social networks don't fit very well into it. They are fundamentally different from modern governments as they do not have a monopoly on coercion. If social media are governments, then every corporation - no, every association of people - on Earth is a government.

Governments are organizations that govern. They don't need a monopoly on coercion to do that.

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#228

Post by Retra »

pluto9 wrote: post #155
rememberlenny wrote: post #105

Web platforms are governments. "Facebook is a government. Facebook's users are citizens, and Facebook's applications developers are the private companies that drive much of the economy. Apple. Twitter, Myspace, Craigslist, Foursquare, Tumblr and every other large network of engaged users (including some services of Google) plays a similar role. We have always tacitly acknowledged this. We talk about these networks as…

By that definition, every conceivable grouping of human beings that has any sort of leadership has a government, but that definition is so broad as to be useless. An after-work football club is governed by its rules, organizers, customs, etc, but the idea that it has a government is laughable.

> that definition is so broad as to be useless

How is it useless? That definition includes exactly all of the relevant features to this discussion. Groups of people with leadership. How they relate to each other.

Your objection that the definition 'useless' only makes sense in the context that you didn't bother talking about anything but the definition. Focus on the material of the discussion, and perhaps it will seem less useless a definition.

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#229

Post by Retra »

philwelch wrote: post #218
rememberlenny wrote: post #105

Web platforms are governments. "Facebook is a government. Facebook's users are citizens, and Facebook's applications developers are the private companies that drive much of the economy. Apple. Twitter, Myspace, Craigslist, Foursquare, Tumblr and every other large network of engaged users (including some services of Google) plays a similar role. We have always tacitly acknowledged this. We talk about these networks as…

They have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force?

Whatever meme you learned that phrase from does not deserve the respect you think it does. A government is not synonymous with a monopoly on anything, in any sense.

One can very easily imagine governments that share responsibilities with any number of arbitrary organizations.

Re: I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter

#230

Post by georgebarnett »

bertil wrote: post #129
craftyguy wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think it is a gift to mankind?

It allows me to keep in contact with many of my close friends and my family who live on three continent and more countries than I can count on a daily basis, has helped me find work a dozen times, has provided several companies who I worked for with credible identity, spectacular growth via targeted advertising. I can use Uber, AirBnB and so many more and not fear that the people with whom I share a car or a flat wit…

Most of the features you're talking about existed before FB in some way. FB doesn't hold a monopoly on introductions or communication and we did just fine before it.

Your argument that you couldn't swap numbers with your fiancé doesn't hold water with me. In a world without FB, it wouldn't occur to you that somebody you didn't swap numbers with would be your partner. Instead, you'd be marrying somebody you did swap numbers with and be none the wiser.

Post reply on HN