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

A letter to our daughter

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 555 posts

Re: A letter to our daughter

#451

Post by saiya-jin »

tjl wrote: post #372
austenallred wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Zuck, from advertising and selling 'your' data IMO that's a really narrow-minded read of what Facebook is. >1B people log into products he founded every day. He lets advertisers target you using data you've provided, as you sit on the platform he helped build, but I'm not convinced that makes him an evil dude.

My problem is him collecting data on people who aren't even using the service. They collect data on any site with a Facebook button. I don't even use the service and he has my data. I'm not getting any value from his product, so what right does he have to my data?

well, I don't think there are many FB users who would like that to be done to them either, I know I am not.

FB might not be some evil company, but they are definitely not nice guys.

Re: A letter to our daughter

#453

Post by joering2 »

austenallred wrote: post #313
equalarrow wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've had the opportunity to rub shoulders with a few billionaires over the past few weeks, and it's remarkable how differently they think about money than the people who don't have it. Yah, I don't necessarily disagree with their mindset. I've crossed a lot of spectrums, including chilling and rubbing shoulders with the rich to scraping by. I definitely do agree with a lot of the lofty 'moon shots' and some of thes…

> Zuck, from advertising and selling 'your' data IMO that's a really narrow-minded read of what Facebook is. >1B people log into products he founded every day. He lets advertisers target you using data you've provided, as you sit on the platform he helped build, but I'm not convinced that makes him an evil dude.

"Dude they just give me their info. Yeah... Dumb suckers!"

Okay perhaps he was young and naive. But is Facebook naive now in Belgium where they want to track people outside of facebook "for their own safety"?

This is EVIL!!

Re: A letter to our daughter

#454

Post by bambax »

sytelus wrote: post #217
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I mean, what else are you going to do with $45 Billion? You are thinking about it the wrong way. You don't spend $45B on stuff for yourself. You spend $45B on changing the way governments and populations live work and how power is balanced. When Bud Fox asked Gordon Gekko "How much is enough" Gekko knew immediately that Fox wasn't in the same league. Money isn't about stuff, it's about power and influence.

I strongly feel this power, influence, giant houses, jets, personal cruise ships etc are old generation stuff - something that grey haired Gekko will personify. The "new rich" is dramatically different and for the better. Today's centi-millionairs wants to stay anonymous, don't want to have butlers, have houses that they can manage without permanent staff and often prefers travelling first class or renting Yatch inst…

> Today's centi-millionairs wants to stay anonymous, don't want to have butlers

Peter Thiel, the godfather of "today's centi-millionaires", has a butler.

— At least he had one in 2007:

http://fortune.com/2007/11/13/paypal-mafia/

Re: A letter to our daughter

#455

Post by drited »

robert_tweed wrote: post #426

Maybe I'm being too cynical, but this seems about as philanthropic as Ron Hubbard starting a religion. Firstly, the donation is stock not cash, so the value of this foundation will be directly linked to the value of Facebook shares. Secondly, it has been stated that one of the things this foundation will do is "participate in policy debates". If the headline was "Mark Zuckerberg to put $45 billion is stock behind lob…

You are being too cynical. He's giving away stock not cash because if he sold the stock first to raise cash to donate, he'd have an enormous capital gains tax liability. By gifting stock, he can gift a far greater amount and the tax-exempt recipient charity can sell the stock itself to raise cash. This is standard in situations like this - e.g. it's what Buffett did when gifting away almost all of his billions.

Also the cause you listed is just one of many that he is gifting to so you're missing the forest for the trees. To help overcome this, list all of the good causes he mentioned (personalized learning, curing disease etc), then list the ones that you don't like. I bet the list of good causes will be far longer than the list of ones you don't like.

Re: A letter to our daughter

#456

Post by lmm »

brbsix wrote: post #175
slg wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Koch brothers are the most influential political backers in the country and they spend somewhere in the neighborhood of $200M per election cycle. They are the closest someone has come to trying to buy an election, but even their donations are still only rounding errors in comparison to their overall fortune. Politics is a relatively cheap game for someone with tens of billions of dollars.

It is a cheap game for someone with millions of dollars even. ROI on these sort of political contributions can be absolutely insane. Apparently corporations on average receive ~$760 for every $1 spent influencing politics. Depending on the industry, ROI is anywhere from 5,000 to 77,000 percent. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-16/words-greatest-inve...

Zerohedge is... rarely aligned with reality. Do you have a reliable source?

Re: A letter to our daughter

#457

Post by Mikushi »

chegra wrote: post #281

Sometimes, I think people on HN probably think they get points for being the most cynical critic. Can't we just say, "Dude we are happy for you, and thanks for the money." And what happened to the rule about not saying stuff you wouldn't say to a person's face. Would you be calling Mark a narcissist to his face? Keep it civil people.

> Would you be calling Mark a narcissist to his face?

I definitely would. I'd call him a cunt too. He is one, and in my country you call a cat a cat. None of that tippy toeing around you english people do, Zuck is a horrible person as the last ten years has shown everyone, Facebook is a despicable company with despicable ethics.

This letter is vomit inducing, and the comment section is rich people stroking each other for "helping the world" after being major actors in destroying it, fuck them all too.

Re: A letter to our daughter

#458

Post by fulafel »

the_economist wrote: post #244
cpursley wrote: post #187

Why are the techno-barons so focused on human health? Not that there's anything wrong with these efforts, but human disease is much less of a threat to our species and planet than an ever-increasing human population. What I'm saying is that humans have little difficulty reproducing; it's a solved problem. What's not a solved problem is our disappearing fisheries[1], rhinos going extinct all over the place[2], farmlan…

Bill Gates has teamed up with Mark Zuckerberg to form multi-billion-dollar clean energy fund: http://www.sciencealert.com/bill-gates-has-teamed-up-with-ma... It sounds like they are doing exactly what you request.

Investing in new energy technologies is not an effective way to address any of the problems he mentioned.

Re: A letter to our daughter

#459

Post by necessity »

ryandrake wrote: post #63

Something's always bugged me about relying on philanthropy as a source of funding the public good, as opposed to the public funding the public good through taxation and the democratic process: In the former case, the public doesn't really have much of a say about where the help goes. We must rely on the judgment (and personal values) of a few rich people and hope they pick charities that maximize the benefit. Would t…

Do you have a say on how government spends your tax dollars? In theory sure, and in theory politicians represent our interests. In practice none of that happens and my tax money isn't spend on anything nearly as constructive as what any NGO (or foundation) is doing. Moreover, I'm obliged to contribute to whatever the fuck they want to do with my money, even if it's war. So yeah, that's better than a rich guy giving money away, right? Society already leaves it to an 'elite' to judge what to do - an elite of politicians and whoever is backing them financially. How can you be so naive?

Re: A letter to our daughter

#460

Post by reddytowns »

bigbugbag wrote: post #286
chc wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we define "power-hungry" so broadly that it encompasses merely wanting to make the world a better place, I'm not sure what use the term is anymore.

I sincerely doubt Zucker wants to make the world a better place, else why would he be doing the opposite while making billions out of it ? Usually a billionaire giving his fortune away does it out of vanity, out of guilt, for the tax breaks, out of conviction that their success in business makes them equally expert in solving the world’s problems or last but not least as “legacy” as explained by John Caudwell: http:/…

What is so awful about Facebook? I mean it's hardly an original idea, and if Facebook never existed, I'm sure that Myspace or Friendster or some hereto unknown company would have taken its place.

It's like hating Ford because they make cars, while ignoring all other automobile companies.

Post reply on HN