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

Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 92 posts

Re: Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

#81

Post by bogomipz »

fsloth wrote: post #31
bogomipz wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but I think the velocity of Dystopianism since 2001 might be much greater than anything experienced before then.

The massive stockpiling of nuclear weapons that began is kind of on league of it's own. The western electorate has been taken on a ride since national suffrage became a thing (before that they had very little power thus no rides were necessary - ditto for non-democratic states)

Please reread what wrote. I am not stating that it didn't exist much earlier. I was simply saying that the velocity of it has seemed to increase since 2001.

Re: Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

#82

Post by imgabe »

edblarney wrote: post #57
imgabe wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is what blind trusts are for. This isn't a new thing. People who own businesses have been elected to office before. Yes, there can be "conflicts of interest", but it's not like he's going to sneak into office and start making Facebook-friendly laws without anyone realizing he owns Facebook. "Probably illegal" is unhelpful non-information. It's either illegal or not. We do have a process for becoming a candidate…

A 'blind trust' would be for someone who has a portfolio of stocks, bonds etc. wherein the individual would not be able to use their knowledge to gain leverage etc. There's no such thing as a 'blind trust' for a media empire, because everyone in the empire knows exactly who is in charge and who pays their salary. Patronage does not stop because of lack of communication. Do you think that if Trump owned FoxNews, but w…

AFAIK there are no reporters working for Facebook. Theoretically, Facebook could hide stories that are critical of Facebook or Zuckerberg or prevent them from being shared on Facebook, but that would be pretty glaringly obvious and easy to verify.

I realize a lot of people get their news through Facebook, but it's not a news organization, nor was it ever intended to be. Facebook doesn't create any content, it's just a conduit through which people share content. If it stops being useful for that purpose, people will use one of the many other options.

Re: Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

#83

Post by gerby »

Mark should run for President. If either Him or Peter were running, I'd vote for either of them. It'd be very good for innovation, people wouldn't suffocate under Business Regulation, and the US would have Utopian policies (I imagine). If Peter or Mark decide to become President, they should compete with Justin Trudeau, to see who can be more Socially Liberal.

Re: Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

#84

Post by 1ris »

CptJamesCook wrote: post #60
hyperpape wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"a business that created more value than the S&P 500 (the top 500 businesses on US stock exchanges) over a 30 year period" What's this based on?

https://dqydj.com/donald-trump-beat-sp-500-index-funds/ Admittedly questionable source, but I've seen it elsewhere and the approximation seems fair.

I guess approximately half of all shareholders did. It's not really a feat.

Re: Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

#87

Post by edblarney »

imgabe wrote: post #82
edblarney wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 'blind trust' would be for someone who has a portfolio of stocks, bonds etc. wherein the individual would not be able to use their knowledge to gain leverage etc. There's no such thing as a 'blind trust' for a media empire, because everyone in the empire knows exactly who is in charge and who pays their salary. Patronage does not stop because of lack of communication. Do you think that if Trump owned FoxNews, but w…

AFAIK there are no reporters working for Facebook. Theoretically, Facebook could hide stories that are critical of Facebook or Zuckerberg or prevent them from being shared on Facebook, but that would be pretty glaringly obvious and easy to verify. I realize a lot of people get their news through Facebook, but it's not a news organization, nor was it ever intended to be. Facebook doesn't create any content, it's just…

FB and Google each have considerably more influence than any news organization, because they own the algorithms that decide what people see, and what they don't.

The smallest change in those algs could influence election outcomes - remember, election outcomes are often very close.

The 'human' editors FB hired were shown to be heavily biased, not because of an organizational approach, but due to the individual biases of the people they hired. Which is why FB got rid of them.

It's just too easy for bias to introduce itself systematically in these orgs - even if there is no ill will intended.

It's hard enough when there's no over conflict of interest, let alone when there is.

The CEO of Exxon, Rex Tillerson, who is now sec of state, has divested himself of all Exxon shares, as he should.

If Zuck wants to govern, he can divest his FB shares and put his diversified holdings in a 'blind trust' as you say.

Re: Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

#88

Post by rokosbasilisk »

dj-wonk wrote: post #44
rokosbasilisk wrote: post #8

Politics and tech mixing sounds bad for global shared tech. Seems like tech or internet balkanization is coming fast.

Why do you say "balkanization" and what do you mean by it? Why might it be bad? Why might it be good? There are so many factors. For one, I'd rather have someone in government who understands technology. So many parts of government are lacking in basic technical capability. On the other hand, I find Facebook's awareness of the social fabric to be somewhere between inchoate (that's charitable) and a convenient illusio…

This article explains it well. http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/1...

Tech companies controlled directly by us politicians will probably make this existing backlash worse.

Re: Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

#89

Post by rokosbasilisk »

bogomipz wrote: post #80
rokosbasilisk wrote: post #8

Politics and tech mixing sounds bad for global shared tech. Seems like tech or internet balkanization is coming fast.

>"Seems like tech or internet balkanization is coming fast." I don't think you concerns about balkanization are unfounded by I'm curious why you have that concern in the context of this specific story. Can you elaborate?

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/08/mark-zuck...

Basically he wants to retain control of facebook while running for office, I cant imagine this go over well with certain other countries. Especially ones sensitive to nsa leaks, it would just have incredibly poor optics, and just increase the balkanization occuring already.

Re: Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever

#90

Post by bogomipz »

dragonwriter wrote: post #73
rhcom2 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now I feel ignorant, Mormonism doesn't count as a sect of Christianity?

There's a fairly common standard among mainstream Christian groups as to what constitutes the boundary of Christianity formed by adherence to certain understandings of foundational doctrines (basically encapsulated into the common Nicene and Apostle's Creed's.) This is generally held to exclude (as I recall), for different (though overlapping) reasons, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Unitari…

Politicians in the US are mostly either Catholic and Protestant.

Jehovah Witness and Seventh Day Adventists are the same thing. Mormons along with Jehovah Witness are Restorationists so neither Catholic or Protestant.

Mitt Romney who ran against Barack Obama in 2008 was Mormon. There have only been 8 Mormons who have run for President in the history of the US. Mitt and his father were 2 of that only 8.

Bernie Sanders was the first Jewish candidate to win a Presidential Primary.

The US has never had President who wasn't either Catholic or Protestant. This article gives an interesting look:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/12/almost-all-u...

Post reply on HN