Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth • Hacker News Board

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#31

Post by bachbach » Mon, Aug 13, 2018, 6:52 PM UTC

mizay7 wrote: post #28

gfodor wrote: post #24

You can loathe the actions of these companies and also think it would be hilariously worse if typical 'leadership' were tasked with solving these very obviously novel, unprecedented, and truly challenging problems. A good first step would be to get rid of the perverse incentives these companies have to manipulate and surveil their users due to their business models. I don't think these problems can be solved as long…

Agree in principle. But in practice, what is the alternative business model you propose? Also, changing the business model away from surveillance capitalism, in my eyes, is not a first step but a massive and complicated (though perhaps very necessary) end goal.

I propose a betting market or a prediction market in my other post here.

I'm also a fan of paying for services. I pay for Fastmail instead of Gmail - am happy with that. $10 per year.

What is the profit made per real user of Google?

I'd pay about $50 per year for a search engine that was entirely aligned with myself. I suspect that is higher than what is made by surveillance.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#32

Post by stantaylor » Mon, Aug 13, 2018, 7:10 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #20

While I agree Zuckerberg is out of his depth, I think there is some magical thinking in this article that there are just a cadre of imminently well qualified people waiting in the wings who could save the day if only given the chance. These people, by and large, don't exist. I may think Zuckerberg has some issues, but I don't think there is some hidden group of folks who could do much better of a job than he could.

That was my thought, too. The problems aren't personal, they're structural and regulatory.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#33

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 13, 2018, 7:39 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #21

smhost wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This thread is very defensive. Being angry at the hubris of zuckerberg and other tech bros is completely appropriate and justified. When rich nerds try to solve large complex problems from within the algorithmic confines of their solipsism, they inevitably run into the endless irregularities of the real world until the only option they have left is to destroy every irrelgularity with force or implode because they can…

Referring to any successful male technologist as "tech bros" is just condescending on the face of it and really weakens your argument. People (rightfully) don't go around referring to Sheryl Sandberg and Meg Whitman as "tech broads".

[deleted]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#34

Post by happytoexplain » Mon, Aug 13, 2018, 8:05 PM UTC

oppositelock wrote: post #6

That article reeks of bitterness, hatred, and wealth envy. Really, it's not worth reading. The content is irrelevant, it's an incoherent rant against rich nerds.

Dismissing criticism of the wealthy as "envy" has disturbing elements in common with dismissing criticism of politicians - i.e. both groups have a kind of power over the public that means they deserve and can withstand hard critique (an attitude I consider to be one of the best parts of whatever can be called American culture). Therefore, I think we should allow a little more leeway when considering what might look at first glance like just anger, or just a rant.

*Edited to accurately quote your comment

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#35

Post by watwut » Mon, Aug 13, 2018, 8:19 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #8

oppositelock wrote: post #6

That article reeks of bitterness, hatred, and wealth envy. Really, it's not worth reading. The content is irrelevant, it's an incoherent rant against rich nerds.

What exactly makes Zuckerberg nerd? It is just my pet peeve. Businessman with ability to do people things and being good in business being considered nerds for no real reason.

This is getting downvoted, but seriously. The man build large company which definitely suggests strong business and social/political skill. You can talk about priviledge and yes he has some. Nevertheless, even equally or more advantageous people fail at growing companies, so it is absolutely achievement and proof of political and busines skill.

Nothing whatsoever to suggest anything nerdy through, unless everyone who ever touched tech counts as nerd.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#36

Post by threatofrain » Mon, Aug 13, 2018, 8:43 PM UTC

smhost wrote: post #18

oppositelock wrote: post #6

That article reeks of bitterness, hatred, and wealth envy. Really, it's not worth reading. The content is irrelevant, it's an incoherent rant against rich nerds.

This thread is very defensive. Being angry at the hubris of zuckerberg and other tech bros is completely appropriate and justified. When rich nerds try to solve large complex problems from within the algorithmic confines of their solipsism, they inevitably run into the endless irregularities of the real world until the only option they have left is to destroy every irrelgularity with force or implode because they can…

Is Mark Zuckerburg a rich nerd? Is that a good summary of him? Does that imply that if you've experienced nerds, then you can glean insight into Mark's head? If we understand nerds, can we understand Mark Zuckerburg? Or Bill Gates?

I feel so dubious at this label which is meant to provide psychological insight into a person.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#37

Post by mdekkers » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 7:25 AM UTC

Looking past these "issues" with Zuckerberg & Facebook, Jack whatever & Twitter, and the whole "social media" space in general, I find it totally hilarious (in a deeply tragic sense) that we as the "enlightened west" have been collectively blowing our trumpets about "free speech" ever since the start of the Cold War - free speech always having been rolled out as one of the arguments of our social and moral superiority over the "enemy".

That was all great for exactly as long as the People in Power had the direct and indirect means to control this "free speech". Now we have the technical means to allow anybody anywhere to exercise their free speech in a manner that is actually meaningful, we are all freaking out and looking for ways to shut them the fuck up, as soon as fucking possible.

Appears to me that free speech is fine, as long as you are sticking to the rules about what is acceptable speech, which is deeply hypocritical, if you ask me.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#38

Post by dvfjsdhgfv » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 7:42 AM UTC

> Ask someone smarter and more educated, thoughtful, and civic-minded to decide on the future of your companies.

This would basically mean admitting failure. I can't imagine any of the guys mentioned in the article to be ready for that. They are looking for answers and solutions, but they want to be the ones solving the problem, and won't hand their power over to anyone else.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#39

Post by jacobjacob » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 1:28 PM UTC

elorant wrote: post #19

I'm sorry but I just don't buy it. There is no indication that Zuckerberg wants to change anything about how Facebook operates or that he has regrets for how things have turned out. On the contrary it seems he has no respect for human rights and doesn't give two shits about privacy, except his own of course. I can understand that running a multibillion corporation turns you into an unsocial prick but the problem with…

He said during the Congressional hearing that he would take measures substantially impacting FB's profitability, and a few months later profitability fell (in a very surprising manner). If this is not evidence that has prosocial motivations -- what is?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is Totally Out of His Depth

#40

Post by sjg007 » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 2:10 PM UTC

mdekkers wrote: post #37

Looking past these "issues" with Zuckerberg & Facebook, Jack whatever & Twitter, and the whole "social media" space in general, I find it totally hilarious (in a deeply tragic sense) that we as the "enlightened west" have been collectively blowing our trumpets about "free speech" ever since the start of the Cold War - free speech always having been rolled out as one of the arguments of our social and moral superiorit…

I guess it is a slippery slope on a path towards someone yelling "fire" in a theater when no such threat exists and as a society we determined that that is not acceptable. It would have something to do with intent to mislead, harm or knowingly distort some truth. We see "truthiness" and its damaging negative effects on society. Also "free speech" in the constitutional sense is to protect you from government prosecution but it has limits. It is not a license to say anything you want in any context anywhere. Society imposes editorial control through law and order. And by order I mean through organized groups of individuals.