Live data from Hacker News

As Facebook Struggles, Rivals’ Leaders Stay Mostly Mum

nytimes.com

1–10 of 74 posts

Re: As Facebook Struggles, Rivals’ Leaders Stay Mostly Mum

#4
I've been wondering for a few years now what it would look like if one of these tech behemoths collapsed, mainly in the context of how intertwined and globalized they all are now.

We're also not allowed to talk about how important and integrated these companies are with the defense industry, but they are. Lots of people working on lots of projects that they can't put on their resume. Some of these companies are practically governmental entities, particularly the telecoms.

Maybe too big to fail isn't the correct term, more like too integrated to fail. Market caps can move around but the apparatus must be maintained.

Re: As Facebook Struggles, Rivals’ Leaders Stay Mostly Mum

#7
Speak out against FB, people call you a hypocrite. Speak out in defense... we’ll who would be stupid enough to do that.

I bet their real play is lobbying legislators aggressively to weaken any potential legislation against them.

https://theintercept.com/2018/03/29/the-u-s-government-is-fi...

Re: As Facebook Struggles, Rivals’ Leaders Stay Mostly Mum

#9
post #8
post #5

They stay "Mum"? Boy that sounds odd to a British resident.

Not to this one, mum means to stay silent (mum as in 'mmm', not your mother). Even Shakespeare used it in Henry VI > Seal up your lips and give no words but mum

'mum' meaning silent dates from the 15th century. 'mum' meaning 'mother' (in England) dates from the 17th century.

Various English posters and signs in WWII warned readers to 'be like dad – keep mum'.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/INF3-243...

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/be-like-dad-ke...

Re: As Facebook Struggles, Rivals’ Leaders Stay Mostly Mum

#10
The elephant in the room is not Facebook.

Its the generations of people who have, over the last 10 years, grown up to assume that their personal lives are of interest to others, and wish therefore to capitalize/profit on exposing their life to strangers.

This is going to be a much more difficult precipice to step back from than, say, the rampant piracy of things like Napster, and so on. We'll definitely have to push technology harder and further to establish better ways for these addicts to come down from their highs and return to a more normal level of social interaction - but then again, maybe its too late.

(Upvote me if you agree.)

Seriously though, I believe we have to appeal to one demographic that gets ignored through all of this, thick and thin: parents. Its truly the only way to adjust this cultural liability for future generations - we simply must insist on parental controls over social media from now on.

And, in addition, we have to establish that parents should regulate their kids' use of online/social media tools in such a way that we reduce the devolutionary effect on human interaction that is occurring now.

Perhaps its truly time for a revolutionary new service: FamilyBook. You can only gain access with a birth certificate .. mmm ...

Post reply on HN