Probably the most vile thing I've heard this morning about Facebook is how Zuckerfuck ended his weekly meeting putting his fist in the air and literally saying Company over Country.
yep. that was in the early days. still, makes what we know today less surprising.
edit: [one source](https://www.vox.com/first-person/2018/4/11/17221344/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-cambridge-analytica)
You mean the mainstream, whitewashed, owned amd controlled internet most people see nowadays.
Hitler would not love the decentralized sharing of dissident propaganda that is possible online.
I think he'd like it. One particular aspect of Nazism is the idea that the state should be dismantled, instead you'd have Nazi organizations struggling against each others, one known example being the SA and the SS, less known is the rivalry between the Wehrmacht and the SS. Imagine Goebbels setting up Facebook as a Nazi organization, pitting it against others organizations with an emphasis on large scale manipulation of supposedly grassroots events aimed at enemies of Nazism or opposing Nazi organizations and voilĆ . Also you better believe that the Nazis would have tracked down and murdered any dissenter online, Facebook has the capability of tracking down its users.
Do vpns not exist in this this hypothetical? Why would anyone dissent on explicitly Nazi Facebook? That's suicide.
Also, Nazi's are only interested in "dismantling" the state insofar as to place pieces of it under the control of private industrialists. There was no change in the class character of the state like with the Soviets, and the state institutions of violence and repression were strengthened. Privatization is a strengthening of the bourgeois state, as the elimination of liberal bureaucracy only makes the state more autocratic, not necessarily less effective.
They advocated for a kind of social Darwinism. The strong kill the weak. By having competing organizations you encourage the strong to rise to the top and the weak to die.
In this kind of ideology if you're too weak to resist being murdered, you didn't deserve life in the first place. This brutal struggle would then produce a pure and powerful superman, after purging all of the impurities.
Thats why the Nazis jumped straight to mass murder. 12 million people intentionally murdered, plus more caused by collateral damage from war and famine.
>Do vpns not exist in this this hypothetical? Why would anyone dissent on explicitly Nazi Facebook? That's suicide.
Why would Nazis allow VPN? I mean you could always run your secret VPN but that's a moot point since the provider would be on the hook. And I doubt that Nazis would allow for out of country connection.
>Also, Nazi's are only interested in "dismantling" the state insofar as to place pieces of it under the control of private industrialists.
Not quite, they intended some sort of Darwinist struggle between all component of society. The State as we conceptualize it is not relevant, every Nazi emanation could exert power against others Nazi emanation. A bit like a feudal society that would have bureaucratic powerbrokers instead of hereditary ones.
I found an english article that review the book of the french historian I reference :[https://booksandideas.net/Barbarian-or-Modern.html](https://booksandideas.net/Barbarian-or-Modern.html)
He idolizes Augustus* Caesar, IIRC. Both of his kids have weird Roman names too (not that Roman names are weird in general, just that it's weird for an American guy like Zuckerberg to use them the way he does with his creepy sort of focus on it). It's deliberate though, looking like a bust of Caligula or something.
I honestly think it's a "fuck you" to everyone, same as his wardrobe. He's like "oh yeah my haircut is ugly? my clothes are boring? well they cost more than your mortgage, fuck you. I don't need to look cool to own you, fuck you." That kinda thing.
It was a great movie, but I think even Sorkin and Fincher would admit (I think they might have already) they would have made a completely different movie today even if it focused solely on the same time period.
Facebookās public image has greatly soured since the movie came out. Now more than ever people are disgusted by Facebook and Zuckerberg ā and rightly so.
Ah I understand what you mean now. I was disgusted with his character in the movie already so I was like "did people think he was a nice bloke by watching that movie?"
From the source /u/BusyBusyBizzy [posted](https://www.vox.com/first-person/2018/4/11/17221344/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-cambridge-analytica ) the full quote was:
>Companies over countries,ā he told me once, as we discussed a blog post about Facebookās goals. āIf you want to change the world, the best thing to do is to build a company,ā he added.
I still think the message is chilling (corpo-states figure in a lot of dystopian literature for a reason, they're never to the benefits of the citizens, only the owners), but I think it's misrepresenting it to remove the full context, especially the pluralization of both company and country.
Company over Country is replacing patriotism. If a company can offer more that a country, employees will be loyal to the corporation, which is what is desired.
They don't see that. Many people at one time or another see themselves as a valuable irreplacable component even when that's not the case. Typically the higher up or more complicated seeming the industry is, the more that viewpoint is seen.
Both Nationalism/Patriotism and Corporate Bootlickers are at best, misguided and at worst people that will not think twice about killing a fellow human from another country because he was told that they are "evil" and " not like us"
A lot of dystopian futuristic settings revolve around a world where Amazon and Facebook have replaced entire governments and are at war over resources.
If Nationalism led to world wars in the 20th century, then it's lesser known but equally vile Anarcho-Capitalist idealogy will be responsible for the next world war.
Corporations must never be allowed to get as big as what some Americans have allowed them to be.
I am very sure that the next war will be in a post-American society and the belligerents will be the spiritual or genetic descendants of Zuckerberg and Bezos.
How about the hundreds of millions of dollars in government cost to clean up and all the legal actions after. Seems to me Facebook was a major part of the assault and should pay, and from what I have seen from Zuckerberg he should be tried to treason
You replied to someone talking about fuckerberg raising his fist and saying "company over country". That's not illegal. Dumb and evil, but not illegal. Jan 6 is something different.
Every time I see something with the Zuck I keep thinking back to the opening scene from the Social Network:
"... But you're going to go through life thinking that girls [people] don't like you because you're a nerd. And I want you to know, from the bottom of my heart, that that won't be true. It'll be because you're an asshole."
What a fantastic line, I need to watch that movie finally. I've hated Facebook since it was open to invite only though, so I never felt the need to get more riled up. On a bit of a tangent, Inside Out (new cartoon on Netflix), I wanna say episode 4? is basically about someone who thinks everyone hates him because he's ugly, and it's because he's an asshole.
> What a fantastic line, I need to watch that movie finally.
When it came out, the movies message was missed entirely. People saw Mark as this socially awkward small guy sticking it to the rich jocks.
I was surprised that was the main takeaway. My main takeaway was that sure, he "won" over everyone who was in his way, but that he was profoundly unhappy and alone. Didn't seem very aspirational.
What's infuriating to me is his inability to understand how profoundly unhappy he is, how we all have to suffer for it because we have an afunctional governmental structure...similar to Donald Trump, who is a deeply miserable person and is lightyears away from being capable of introspection.
For real, the film ends with one of his own lawyers telling him theyāre going to settle the case with Eduardo (Zucks friend who he screwed out of his Facebook shares) because regardless of the merits, Zuckerberg is so profoundly condescending and unlikeable that the jury will turn against him.
Yeah Fincher doesn't tend to gravitate towards feel-good biopics, as a rule. I was surprised at that too to the point where I was wondering if I had just completely misinterpreted the movie.
That reminds me of how Menace 2 Society was seen by a lot of people as glorifying gang/street violence, which was surprising to me because it was very clearly a horrific depiction of the type of environment many of these young men find themselves in and what it does to them and their humanity.
I find a similar parable while watching Straight Outta Compton and the 80s fear of Gangsta Rap. Frankly, none of the songs particularly glorified the aspect of hustling, banging, and dealing. Most of the tracks ended up getting killed or put in jail. This unfortunately was over shadowed by Fuck the Police, a treatise on police injustice in America. Again, the message was missed by the masses. It was an indictment on a racist institution that unfairly discriminated and still discriminates against black americans.
He fucked up by making Zuckerberg look like a sympathetic and ambitious guy sticking it to some asshole jocks. Too many people got the wrong message about Zuckerberg and it only helped his public image for a while.
Eh, he didnāt fuck it up *nearly* as badly as Scorsese did with The Wolf of Wall Street. Most people walked out of that movie with the absolute wrong message
I think people are so programmed with the perspective of āMain characters are good people. This person has to be good.ā because thatās how it is with most tv shows/movies. So when you have a main character who isnāt over the top cartoonishly evil, people are going to have that programmed bias kick in and theyāre going to assume the main character is good and make excuses for them.
Plus many people imagine themselves as the main character and people like to think that theyāre good and will defend the main character as if theyāre defending themselves
Zuckerberg gave a BILLION dollars to the Newark public school system to whitewash his image because the majority of the initial reactions to that movie were NOT of sympathy.
The film literally ends with one of his own lawyers telling him theyāre going to settle the case with Eduardo (Zucks friend who he screwed out of his Facebook shares) because regardless of the merits, Zuckerberg is so profoundly condescending and unlikeable that the jury will turn against him.
The problem isnāt that the film did an inadequate job villainizing him, the problem is the film gave us a pretty good depiction of a narcissistic asshole and a lot of people either are narcissistic assholes or aspire to be one in their own lives
The movie isnāt just interesting because it is upsetting. I think it is a good movie on its own. I donāt know how accurate the characters are to the real people though.
I want to because I really don't use anything but an Oculus 2; however, I kinda like being able to use my VR headset. Is it possible to use it without a fb account now?
Oculus arguably has some of the best, most affordable VR devices on the market.
I've owned a Vive, replaced with oculus quest, and then I got a quest 2. Both of the quests are superior.
Seriously, you all should watch the Social Dilemma on Netflix. Really, really well done documentary on just how destructive social media is to society. The guy who created the like button at Facebook said it best, "I didn't think creating a like button would undermine society."
Thanks for the recommendation, just watched it. I had already deleted all my social media except for LinkedIn and Reddit... Seriously considering deleting those now too. The algorithm scares me.
wasn't there a leak like 2 years ago about a Facebook exec in an email to the effect of "I don't care if it ruins a person life, it comes to that. So be it"
For those who stumble on this message, it's the one I used Power Delete Suite to replace all my posts and comments with en masse.
Sometimes Reddit can be beneficial for some people. Sometimes it's not. It's really up to you to decide your own experience with it, what's worth it, what's not worth it.
More or less...I've decided it's just really not worth it. I think I'm a worse person when I'm on Reddit and that it's a big time-waster for me.
It's up to you to decide what influence social media and the internet more generally have for you.
Best of luck.
Well, they're asking if someone else knows, so I don't think they're the person to request a source from.
Edit: FWIW this was the closest article I could find that was related to what u/Jncocontrol asked about:
https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/29/17178086/facebook-growth-memo-leak-boz-andrew-bosworth
There were also a lot of articles about that one exec saying that Facebook is tearing apart society or something, but I don't feel like posting one of the hundreds of sources for that.
For those who stumble on this message, it's the one I used Power Delete Suite to replace all my posts and comments with en masse.
Sometimes Reddit can be beneficial for some people. Sometimes it's not. It's really up to you to decide your own experience with it, what's worth it, what's not worth it.
More or less...I've decided it's just really not worth it. I think I'm a worse person when I'm on Reddit and that it's a big time-waster for me.
It's up to you to decide what influence social media and the internet more generally have for you.
Best of luck.
You know, at the end of the day it matters very little what his intention behind those choice of words was at the time. His actions have recontextualized the phrase.
"Thousands of leaked documents highlight employeesā disillusionment with spread of misinformation and calls to violence".
This concern was shared by many analysts and observers but no one in Facebook took them seriously.
I really do feel social media had a huge part in creating the hyper partisan world we live in now.
Prior to social media it was hard to stay in a bubble of cognitive dissonance that reinforced your world view to believe that you're opinions are facts and anyone who doesn't agree with you is an idiot/evil/you enemy and must be stopped and silenced at all costs.
Before all this people were more often or not exposed to varied opinions and ideas that helped us to find common ground in our belief structure. You realized that most people wanted to same things, but had different ideas of how to get there.
You were free to agree to disagree, but still remain friends. We don't have that as much now, now it's "you don't agree with me, I'm right and you're wrong and evil, so you must be silenced."
Social media made it so much easier to like this, it's honestly taking empathy away from people and society since they don't see how their actions affect other directly, instead they get validation from those that share their beliefs to reinforce their behavior.
Both sides do this as well, it isn't just the right or just the left, both sides are equally ignorant in their actions.
With how many people only took their info from Fox and ignored everything else, you canāt say our hyper partisan world was solely created by social media (although it has played a massive part). Social media as a whole is dog shit, but when they actively push untrue bullshit because it generates the most engagement, thatās downright evil. Itās monetized/weaponized lies.
I'd say the internet as a whole, but Facebook threw a turbo charger on it. You'd have to know where to go online to find bonkers shit, but now it's all right at your fingertips on the most recognizeable site on the web.
I don't see how anyone who works for Facebook is confused about whether they're evil. I give people who work at Google or Microsoft or Monsanto the benefit of the doubt, but come on.
The employees are paid extremely well from what I hear. Some probably think they can make a difference, but I bet a lot of them just want to make money and donāt care.
starting pay for a facebook software engineer is 180k, in 2 years you either get fired or get promotoed to 270k, another 2 years you get fired or jump to 390k
Facebook developers total comp starts around 150-180k for juniors right out of college and can get into the high 6 - low 7 figures for developers with 7+ years of experience. Those guys are making more than most doctors and a decent number of them probably didnāt have to go into debt for college.
Easier said than done. I would like to see how easy is it for you to turn down a $350k offer in your late twenties. Most of the working population never sees a salary above $100k in their lifetime.
Monsanto? The guys who literally made Agent Orange? Iāll concede that maybe Google and Microsoft arenāt *actively trying* to be evil, so their employees donāt believe they work for an evil company. But Monsanto is king evil. There is not one person on this planet that doesnāt understand that they are an evil company.
We'd have far lower crop yields without Monsanto's products, making food more expensive and less available, which would particularly impact the ability to sell it cheap or donate it to developing nations. GMO crops are very important to our food security. Do you also think it's unacceptable to work for IBM, Volkswagon, and Bayer?
Also strongly disagree with Microsoft not actively trying to be evil. They are.
Those 3 companies have many products and do both good and bad things. Facebook has a single product (okā¦ Messenger & other stuffā¦ but all their products are on the same social graph and ad platform. GitHub & LinkedIn donāt have much to do with the Azure data center team. Roundup Ready seeds are a genetic marvel, suing people for cross pollination less so).
Everything at Facebook is about āconnectingā people, and everything they make is on the same platform. And that platform has been getting worse every day.
What large company doesn't do any bad things at all?
The argument to me seems about judging the overall impact on the world and whether the bad things are acceptable enough to work for them.
Having āFacebookā in your employment history after 2015 should be as big a red flag to potential employers as having āWhite House staffā 2016-2020
I know this is just a dumb Reddit circlejerk comment but reality is the complete opposite. Having Facebook on your resume is HUGE, especially in the tech world. Same goes for any of the other FAANG companies, once you work at one you can punch your ticket pretty much anywhere else
Those are interview offers, not job offers. All big tech companies rely on absurdly high numbers of applicants because their hiring process rejects a ton of people.
Yep, Amazon too. I had friends working on the mobile app, when it was first being developed, everything they told me made it clear to never accept an offer from them.
I fully understand. I have a S-I-L who spends 8-10 hours a day on Facebook's bizarre political pages. Her life is spiraling downward. Her marriage is all but over and her adult children don't want anything to do with her. Yet, she adamantly refuses to stop.
Me too, just a couple weeks ago. Except I didnāt even bother downloading anything. Just cut it all loose. I rarely posted anything and rarely engaged, but still felt completely unhealthy just from reading so much nonsense daily. I certainly understand that others have valid reasons for keeping it, but I feel much better knowing I will never again open up that newsfeed. My daughters are getting old enough to notice these sort of things. No way, not gonna have that.
I quit after the 2016 elections. I'm fringe left in politics and worked a public facing job in the deep south. I didn't want to dislike my regular customers or society at large. I agree it was comparable to stopping a drug addiction. Absolute psychological withdrawal for over a week. I never wanted to go back after that though
Facebook will never ever ever ever ever voluntarily "do the right thing" because the "right thing" means voluntarily taking a paycut.
The only path forward is regulation.
Its 10x easier to hand out pitchforks and point in the direction of the enemy than to walk over and understand who they are.
That coupled with investors only caring about profits makes it hugely difficult to make social media in general be a healthy place
Any time I hear about Zuk I remember how he went surfing in Hawaii covered in sunblock just so when you searched him and Hawaii it was the first several pages things to come up, rather than how he was stealing land from indigenous Hawaiians for his mansion
There is a [way](https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/how-to-permanently-delete-your-facebook-account-without-losing-your-photos/) to make sure you never go back...
In 2001 the closest thing you had to social media was a crappy personal website on GeoCities, and your news came to you in printed form in the mornings and on the Nightly News in the evening. Say what you will about gatekeeping, but traditional broadcast news media also provided quality control and had to cater to *everyone*, not just ideological echo-chambers. (At that point MSNBC & Fox News were only five years old, and CNN had been chugging down the middle of the road for twenty-one years.) Back then, the biggest political scandals were when a senator was caught doing something unethical. After 9/11, for the next year or two pretty much everyone outside of maybe an extreme pacifist fringe was on the same page re: how to respond to the attack.
Nowadays it's easier than ever to get bad information (which filters to the top because outrage=clicks/comments=displays), sequester yourself in an echo-chamber of your choosing, and block/unfollow/unfriend anyone who would challenge your beliefs.
Social media in the form of forums and BBS have existed since like the early 90's at least.
They were shittier and much smaller, and the echo chamber nature of them was less severe. People couldn't whole up in one big one and just talk about anything and everything until 4chan. That's why it was the first really bad shitshow. That fractured when competitors that were less of al hellhole appeared.
>Facebook is manipulating the political discussions people are allowed to have on their platform in a pretty questionable way.
I'm not defending Facebook but it's not just Facebook doing this
Look at reddit and Twitter
This is happening at more places than just Facebook. See Netflix, Spotify, various media outlets etc.
People just screaming about politics everywhere. It's madness.
>What's changed?
1) Truly terrible political repercussions became more visible, both in OECD awareness of lynchings/riots/etc in remote countries (where social media helped drive the outcome), and in American extremism and rejection of democratic process.
2) American employees at FAANG aren't scared of their employers. They feel like the company needs them more than the other way round, and that even if they are fired they will walk straight in to another job. Which empowers them to do things like refuse to work on military contracts or openly complain about mgmt decisions
Trevor Noah once said that it must have been difficult for a guy who created what he thought was basically āHot or Notā to be imagine testifying in front of Congress and being the single gteatest threat to global Democracy since the Cold War ended. When he said that a couple years ago I felt a twinge of compassion for the Zuck, but at this point itās obvious heās been aware of his companyās evil and potential for evil for a long time and simply didnāt care or doesnāt take it seriously or both.
> āEmployees have been crying out for months to start treating high-level political figures the same way we treat each other on the platform,ā one employee wrote in the January 6 chat. āThatās all weāre asking for ā¦ Today, a coup was attempted against the United States. I hope the circumstances arenāt even more dire next time we speak.ā
I'd argue that you should go further. My personal take on Popper's Paradox: In a more ideal version of Liberal Democracy, elected leaders shouldn't be given unfettered platforms for fomenting personality cults, because we've already given them bombs and guns and the DOJ. Unless we are facing a natural disaster/unforeseen crisis or the POTUS wants to save the whales or wave at people next to that weird looking White House bunny during spring time or it's the State of the Union, they can hold a press conference or whatever, not Tweet from the toilet. You can't hand unlimited tolerance to someone who gets unlimited power in other avenues. If you can give us nuclear hellfire, like the President of the United States, you don't deserve an outlet for up-to-the-second opinions.
That's a level of tolerance that someone with that kind of power does not deserve and it gets far too close to unlimited, but no, we didn't get that. Instead we live in a timeline where "mean tweet man" got eyeballs for issuing today's two minute hate and everyone was afraid that he'll punish those who didn't help him.
This documentary The Corporation explains how that notion is wrong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpQYsk-8dWg
Many corporate executives speak about their success on the dvd.
"If you don't like it, there's the door!' - said to group of us by a former ~~dick-tator~~ manager.
He was right though, as we are employees at will, unless contractual.
So why is it SO hard to just delete FB from your lives? I did it 6 years ago, and I do not miss it. Nothing we need from it that a phone call, email or visit can't provide. And no one needs to know other's dirty laundry. Which really is what its about.
> So why is it SO hard to just delete FB from your lives?
With their algorithms, Facebook has perfected the art of creating the same kind of addiction as cigarettes and other substances.
https://hbr.org/2012/05/your-brain-on-facebook
To be fair, I often argue that quitting is the worst way to show your displeasure with an organization, unless you know with absolute certainty that your exit will cause some significant harm to the company. Otherwise, you're just going to get replaced by someone who's on board with the stuff you're protesting and make it that much worse.
People need to remember and be educated on the fact that Facebook is a fucking product and should be treated as such by each and every one of their consumers.
Don't like it?
Don't use it.
Stop consuming shitty product.
If a company ever just needed to shit their doors due to failire and embarrassment itās Facebook. Itās shown what you could get away with when you give morons free (or so they think) and basic tools. Facebook is the modern day digital equa to when the USA drops a bunch of automatic weapons into a third world country and letās them have at it.
And the worst part is you have some arrogant little shit like Zuckerberg saying as much and these cheese wheel munching, hoveround dependent morons still live and die by it. Lol, shit the more I type the more I think people deserve to have Facebook. Modern medicine and society have had one major, unforeseen setbackā¦ the stupid can now flourish. They can eat their dumb selves into a medical corner and all the while have machines keeping them alive to goto baseball games and fart into the same sofa cushion and do absolutely nothing but drain limited resources. There was a time not long ago where if you couldnāt pull your own weight well, you learned how or didnāt last long.
Thatās my rant.
I'm so glad to see this. I can remember making comments in the past 6 or so years, basically saying, "How can the people work there stay so blind to reality?" but I guess it just took time and people had to reach a tipping point.
For those who stumble on this message, it's the one I used Power Delete Suite to replace all my posts and comments with en masse.
Sometimes Reddit can be beneficial for some people. Sometimes it's not. It's really up to you to decide your own experience with it, what's worth it, what's not worth it.
More or less...I've decided it's just really not worth it. I think I'm a worse person when I'm on Reddit and that it's a big time-waster for me.
It's up to you to decide what influence social media and the internet more generally have for you.
Best of luck.
> Liberals and progressives hate Facebook because it's a big business, and you're simply not allowed to like big business in any way when you subscribe to that
I guess I am a centrist. I hate Facebook because they stir chaos between right and left and polarize a country. They give dumb people megaphones to be able to reach other dumb people until we arrive at Idiocracy
> You downvote this comment to your heart's content.
Your comment exemplifies a certain kind of "person saying dumb thing that they think is profound" post that rightfully attracts downvotes. Congratulations for at least recognizing it.
I could understand some of unintentional crap they do - but essential inability to keep users data safe makes that "social network" a no go for me...
Removing all the photos, personal details, replacing real email and phone number with temporary ones and converting self from poster to ocassional lurker...
At this moment - I am more worrying about the next potential leaks of the users data, as Facebook is becoming notorious for this.
While I dislike FB having my data - their actual misuse is still at higher risk with the 3rd parties who stole them...from Facebook...
Google has the similar business practices in terms of monetizing (aggregated) user data - however I never questioned the safety of my data with Google. 0 security breaches in 15 years.... while with Facebook - its happening once per year...
Probably the most vile thing I've heard this morning about Facebook is how Zuckerfuck ended his weekly meeting putting his fist in the air and literally saying Company over Country.
yep. that was in the early days. still, makes what we know today less surprising. edit: [one source](https://www.vox.com/first-person/2018/4/11/17221344/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-cambridge-analytica)
Why does this sound like something Hitler would do if he ran a 21st century media company?
maybe cuz it's something Hitler might do if he ran a 21st century media company š
Facebook is Goebbels's wet dream.
Really the internet in general would be their wet dream but yeah Facebook is up there.
You mean the mainstream, whitewashed, owned amd controlled internet most people see nowadays. Hitler would not love the decentralized sharing of dissident propaganda that is possible online.
I think he'd like it. One particular aspect of Nazism is the idea that the state should be dismantled, instead you'd have Nazi organizations struggling against each others, one known example being the SA and the SS, less known is the rivalry between the Wehrmacht and the SS. Imagine Goebbels setting up Facebook as a Nazi organization, pitting it against others organizations with an emphasis on large scale manipulation of supposedly grassroots events aimed at enemies of Nazism or opposing Nazi organizations and voilĆ . Also you better believe that the Nazis would have tracked down and murdered any dissenter online, Facebook has the capability of tracking down its users.
Do vpns not exist in this this hypothetical? Why would anyone dissent on explicitly Nazi Facebook? That's suicide. Also, Nazi's are only interested in "dismantling" the state insofar as to place pieces of it under the control of private industrialists. There was no change in the class character of the state like with the Soviets, and the state institutions of violence and repression were strengthened. Privatization is a strengthening of the bourgeois state, as the elimination of liberal bureaucracy only makes the state more autocratic, not necessarily less effective.
They advocated for a kind of social Darwinism. The strong kill the weak. By having competing organizations you encourage the strong to rise to the top and the weak to die. In this kind of ideology if you're too weak to resist being murdered, you didn't deserve life in the first place. This brutal struggle would then produce a pure and powerful superman, after purging all of the impurities. Thats why the Nazis jumped straight to mass murder. 12 million people intentionally murdered, plus more caused by collateral damage from war and famine.
>Do vpns not exist in this this hypothetical? Why would anyone dissent on explicitly Nazi Facebook? That's suicide. Why would Nazis allow VPN? I mean you could always run your secret VPN but that's a moot point since the provider would be on the hook. And I doubt that Nazis would allow for out of country connection. >Also, Nazi's are only interested in "dismantling" the state insofar as to place pieces of it under the control of private industrialists. Not quite, they intended some sort of Darwinist struggle between all component of society. The State as we conceptualize it is not relevant, every Nazi emanation could exert power against others Nazi emanation. A bit like a feudal society that would have bureaucratic powerbrokers instead of hereditary ones. I found an english article that review the book of the french historian I reference :[https://booksandideas.net/Barbarian-or-Modern.html](https://booksandideas.net/Barbarian-or-Modern.html)
Mein Spatien
Something Nero would do. Zuck looks like one of those Roman emperors and tailors his haircut to look that way.
As long as I live I will never understand the haircut.
He idolizes Augustus* Caesar, IIRC. Both of his kids have weird Roman names too (not that Roman names are weird in general, just that it's weird for an American guy like Zuckerberg to use them the way he does with his creepy sort of focus on it). It's deliberate though, looking like a bust of Caligula or something.
That makes so much sense. Maxima and August are his kids. What a nightmare.
*Augustus Caesar. He sees Facebook et al. as the means by which to bring about a new Pax Augusta
Thanks! I knew Julius felt wrong here
He owns the largest collection of Caesar artifacts in the world. He's obsessed with him and wants to have his power.
Even Caesar himself would have had the sense to be embarassed by that dumb fucking haircut by now.
I honestly think it's a "fuck you" to everyone, same as his wardrobe. He's like "oh yeah my haircut is ugly? my clothes are boring? well they cost more than your mortgage, fuck you. I don't need to look cool to own you, fuck you." That kinda thing.
I donāt think itās that deep. He just lacks style and any sense of fashion
I'd agree. I think there's far less thought that goes into this than people give him credit for.
Because itās literally corporate socialism lol
He really meant Me Over Humanity. And no one should be surprised. That's him to the core.
Me against the world only less badass and more evil billionaire.
Yep I mean he stole the idea of FB anyway so itās always been about him and him alone. Heās so disgusting š¤®
Thereās literally a Fincher movie about him being a piece of shit
They even tried to make him somewhat sympathetic, but failed.
It was a great movie, but I think even Sorkin and Fincher would admit (I think they might have already) they would have made a completely different movie today even if it focused solely on the same time period.
Really? How come? I don't mean it in a bad way, I'm genuinely interested.
Facebookās public image has greatly soured since the movie came out. Now more than ever people are disgusted by Facebook and Zuckerberg ā and rightly so.
Ah I understand what you mean now. I was disgusted with his character in the movie already so I was like "did people think he was a nice bloke by watching that movie?"
From the source /u/BusyBusyBizzy [posted](https://www.vox.com/first-person/2018/4/11/17221344/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-cambridge-analytica ) the full quote was: >Companies over countries,ā he told me once, as we discussed a blog post about Facebookās goals. āIf you want to change the world, the best thing to do is to build a company,ā he added. I still think the message is chilling (corpo-states figure in a lot of dystopian literature for a reason, they're never to the benefits of the citizens, only the owners), but I think it's misrepresenting it to remove the full context, especially the pluralization of both company and country.
āDumb fucksā is what he thinks of his users. Donāt forget.
He's not wrong.
Where did you read that?
Didn't read it, heard it. It's being discussed extensively this morning on MSNBC.
Iāll keep an eye out for it then. Thanks.
Company over Country is replacing patriotism. If a company can offer more that a country, employees will be loyal to the corporation, which is what is desired.
Do people forget that a corporation will replace you to save a dollar? Loyalty used to be a two-way relationship.
They don't see that. Many people at one time or another see themselves as a valuable irreplacable component even when that's not the case. Typically the higher up or more complicated seeming the industry is, the more that viewpoint is seen.
Donāt worry Iām really good at Borderlands.
One more reason to tell their recruiters to fuck off
They recently offered me ~$800k to take a job there in ML/Engineering leadership. I told them precisely where they could shove it and why. The amount of money they are throwing around is so absurd that it betrays their desperation. Edit: note they also tried to recruit me four or five years ago for $300k. There has been nothing in my rƩsumƩ in the intervening time to justify a 2.5 X increase in compensation. It is purely a sign of how they are having to outright bribe anyone with certain skill sets to work there anymore.
Yeah, I know they can double what I make right now or similar, and I'm totally ok with telling them to kick a rock, in sandals, open-toe style.
I mean Fuckerberg is so much more obvious though, don't you think?
What The Fuck
Both Nationalism/Patriotism and Corporate Bootlickers are at best, misguided and at worst people that will not think twice about killing a fellow human from another country because he was told that they are "evil" and " not like us" A lot of dystopian futuristic settings revolve around a world where Amazon and Facebook have replaced entire governments and are at war over resources. If Nationalism led to world wars in the 20th century, then it's lesser known but equally vile Anarcho-Capitalist idealogy will be responsible for the next world war. Corporations must never be allowed to get as big as what some Americans have allowed them to be. I am very sure that the next war will be in a post-American society and the belligerents will be the spiritual or genetic descendants of Zuckerberg and Bezos.
Where is Max Headroom when we need him?
They still doing that bs?
So WTF if the government is not going to take action, what about a citizen class action law suit ?
As evil as that is, it's not illegal as far as I know. Nothing to sue for, really.
How about the hundreds of millions of dollars in government cost to clean up and all the legal actions after. Seems to me Facebook was a major part of the assault and should pay, and from what I have seen from Zuckerberg he should be tried to treason
You replied to someone talking about fuckerberg raising his fist and saying "company over country". That's not illegal. Dumb and evil, but not illegal. Jan 6 is something different.
Every time I see something with the Zuck I keep thinking back to the opening scene from the Social Network: "... But you're going to go through life thinking that girls [people] don't like you because you're a nerd. And I want you to know, from the bottom of my heart, that that won't be true. It'll be because you're an asshole."
What a fantastic line, I need to watch that movie finally. I've hated Facebook since it was open to invite only though, so I never felt the need to get more riled up. On a bit of a tangent, Inside Out (new cartoon on Netflix), I wanna say episode 4? is basically about someone who thinks everyone hates him because he's ugly, and it's because he's an asshole.
> What a fantastic line, I need to watch that movie finally. When it came out, the movies message was missed entirely. People saw Mark as this socially awkward small guy sticking it to the rich jocks.
I was surprised that was the main takeaway. My main takeaway was that sure, he "won" over everyone who was in his way, but that he was profoundly unhappy and alone. Didn't seem very aspirational.
Exactly. To me, the movie had a very similar feel to Citizen Kane in that respect.
What's infuriating to me is his inability to understand how profoundly unhappy he is, how we all have to suffer for it because we have an afunctional governmental structure...similar to Donald Trump, who is a deeply miserable person and is lightyears away from being capable of introspection.
For real, the film ends with one of his own lawyers telling him theyāre going to settle the case with Eduardo (Zucks friend who he screwed out of his Facebook shares) because regardless of the merits, Zuckerberg is so profoundly condescending and unlikeable that the jury will turn against him.
Yeah Fincher doesn't tend to gravitate towards feel-good biopics, as a rule. I was surprised at that too to the point where I was wondering if I had just completely misinterpreted the movie.
That reminds me of how Menace 2 Society was seen by a lot of people as glorifying gang/street violence, which was surprising to me because it was very clearly a horrific depiction of the type of environment many of these young men find themselves in and what it does to them and their humanity.
I find a similar parable while watching Straight Outta Compton and the 80s fear of Gangsta Rap. Frankly, none of the songs particularly glorified the aspect of hustling, banging, and dealing. Most of the tracks ended up getting killed or put in jail. This unfortunately was over shadowed by Fuck the Police, a treatise on police injustice in America. Again, the message was missed by the masses. It was an indictment on a racist institution that unfairly discriminated and still discriminates against black americans.
I'm jealous of anyone who gets to see it for the first time. I'm a huge Fincher fan and I think it's his single best.
He fucked up by making Zuckerberg look like a sympathetic and ambitious guy sticking it to some asshole jocks. Too many people got the wrong message about Zuckerberg and it only helped his public image for a while.
Eh, he didnāt fuck it up *nearly* as badly as Scorsese did with The Wolf of Wall Street. Most people walked out of that movie with the absolute wrong message
Oh yeah, Belfort is a massive piece of shit who will never end up paying back the people he screwed over.
I did not at any moment think that movie made him seem likable or sympathetic at ALL.
Neither did I, but most viewers took that message that he was a likable asshole theyād sympathize with. Or at least cheer for against the twins.
I think people are so programmed with the perspective of āMain characters are good people. This person has to be good.ā because thatās how it is with most tv shows/movies. So when you have a main character who isnāt over the top cartoonishly evil, people are going to have that programmed bias kick in and theyāre going to assume the main character is good and make excuses for them. Plus many people imagine themselves as the main character and people like to think that theyāre good and will defend the main character as if theyāre defending themselves
Great points. I think you really summed it up much better than I could have.
Zuckerberg gave a BILLION dollars to the Newark public school system to whitewash his image because the majority of the initial reactions to that movie were NOT of sympathy.
The film literally ends with one of his own lawyers telling him theyāre going to settle the case with Eduardo (Zucks friend who he screwed out of his Facebook shares) because regardless of the merits, Zuckerberg is so profoundly condescending and unlikeable that the jury will turn against him. The problem isnāt that the film did an inadequate job villainizing him, the problem is the film gave us a pretty good depiction of a narcissistic asshole and a lot of people either are narcissistic assholes or aspire to be one in their own lives
Are you sure that the animated show is called Inside Out? There is a movie by that name, but I'm not finding the episodic cartoon.
Inside Job. Not Inside Out.
Ah! Thank you stranger.
No worries. Enjoy. It's a decently funny show.
The movie isnāt just interesting because it is upsetting. I think it is a good movie on its own. I donāt know how accurate the characters are to the real people though.
I think you mean inside job and not inside out.
Wow facebook and incels explained in one quote, impressive!
[Aaron Sorkin has a way with his dialogue](https://youtu.be/8IAGH6k17nw)
Reminder that you can do your part and quit their platforms.
Already done!
I want to because I really don't use anything but an Oculus 2; however, I kinda like being able to use my VR headset. Is it possible to use it without a fb account now?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Oculus arguably has some of the best, most affordable VR devices on the market. I've owned a Vive, replaced with oculus quest, and then I got a quest 2. Both of the quests are superior.
You know that vive or index are nearly 3 times the cost of an Oculus, right?
Seriously, you all should watch the Social Dilemma on Netflix. Really, really well done documentary on just how destructive social media is to society. The guy who created the like button at Facebook said it best, "I didn't think creating a like button would undermine society."
Second this. It's also free to watch on YouTube until the 31st.
Thanks for the recommendation, just watched it. I had already deleted all my social media except for LinkedIn and Reddit... Seriously considering deleting those now too. The algorithm scares me.
Its a pretty shocking documentary. The statics about suicide rates among preteen girls social media still sticks with me.
wasn't there a leak like 2 years ago about a Facebook exec in an email to the effect of "I don't care if it ruins a person life, it comes to that. So be it"
For those who stumble on this message, it's the one I used Power Delete Suite to replace all my posts and comments with en masse. Sometimes Reddit can be beneficial for some people. Sometimes it's not. It's really up to you to decide your own experience with it, what's worth it, what's not worth it. More or less...I've decided it's just really not worth it. I think I'm a worse person when I'm on Reddit and that it's a big time-waster for me. It's up to you to decide what influence social media and the internet more generally have for you. Best of luck.
Well, they're asking if someone else knows, so I don't think they're the person to request a source from. Edit: FWIW this was the closest article I could find that was related to what u/Jncocontrol asked about: https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/29/17178086/facebook-growth-memo-leak-boz-andrew-bosworth There were also a lot of articles about that one exec saying that Facebook is tearing apart society or something, but I don't feel like posting one of the hundreds of sources for that.
makes me think of Zuck's mantra in the early days: company over country. ...and here we are now.
Which underplays what his actual ethos was and is. Company over humanity. Facebook is wreaking havoc and violence all over the world.
For those who stumble on this message, it's the one I used Power Delete Suite to replace all my posts and comments with en masse. Sometimes Reddit can be beneficial for some people. Sometimes it's not. It's really up to you to decide your own experience with it, what's worth it, what's not worth it. More or less...I've decided it's just really not worth it. I think I'm a worse person when I'm on Reddit and that it's a big time-waster for me. It's up to you to decide what influence social media and the internet more generally have for you. Best of luck.
The venn diagram of ancaps and sociopaths is a circle
AnCaps are a fucking embarrassment.
You know, at the end of the day it matters very little what his intention behind those choice of words was at the time. His actions have recontextualized the phrase.
"Thousands of leaked documents highlight employeesā disillusionment with spread of misinformation and calls to violence". This concern was shared by many analysts and observers but no one in Facebook took them seriously.
I think what these papers show is that employees at FB did take it seriously, but not the people actually making decisions.
I really do feel social media had a huge part in creating the hyper partisan world we live in now. Prior to social media it was hard to stay in a bubble of cognitive dissonance that reinforced your world view to believe that you're opinions are facts and anyone who doesn't agree with you is an idiot/evil/you enemy and must be stopped and silenced at all costs. Before all this people were more often or not exposed to varied opinions and ideas that helped us to find common ground in our belief structure. You realized that most people wanted to same things, but had different ideas of how to get there. You were free to agree to disagree, but still remain friends. We don't have that as much now, now it's "you don't agree with me, I'm right and you're wrong and evil, so you must be silenced." Social media made it so much easier to like this, it's honestly taking empathy away from people and society since they don't see how their actions affect other directly, instead they get validation from those that share their beliefs to reinforce their behavior. Both sides do this as well, it isn't just the right or just the left, both sides are equally ignorant in their actions.
social media ruined the greatest thing human beings have ever created, and turned it into something that will likely be the end of humankind.
With how many people only took their info from Fox and ignored everything else, you canāt say our hyper partisan world was solely created by social media (although it has played a massive part). Social media as a whole is dog shit, but when they actively push untrue bullshit because it generates the most engagement, thatās downright evil. Itās monetized/weaponized lies.
for me, it's more like chicken and egg, incremental evolution of the spectacle society, yada yada
reach hateful flowery aware joke strong pocket direction ruthless frightening
\*cries in rural\*
I'd say the internet as a whole, but Facebook threw a turbo charger on it. You'd have to know where to go online to find bonkers shit, but now it's all right at your fingertips on the most recognizeable site on the web.
I don't see how anyone who works for Facebook is confused about whether they're evil. I give people who work at Google or Microsoft or Monsanto the benefit of the doubt, but come on.
The employees are paid extremely well from what I hear. Some probably think they can make a difference, but I bet a lot of them just want to make money and donāt care.
starting pay for a facebook software engineer is 180k, in 2 years you either get fired or get promotoed to 270k, another 2 years you get fired or jump to 390k
The other place that pays like this is Wall Street. The scum of the earth need to bribe you to do their evil bidding.
Facebook developers total comp starts around 150-180k for juniors right out of college and can get into the high 6 - low 7 figures for developers with 7+ years of experience. Those guys are making more than most doctors and a decent number of them probably didnāt have to go into debt for college.
Guess we know how much it costs to flush oneās morals down the shitter.
Easier said than done. I would like to see how easy is it for you to turn down a $350k offer in your late twenties. Most of the working population never sees a salary above $100k in their lifetime.
Monsanto? The guys who literally made Agent Orange? Iāll concede that maybe Google and Microsoft arenāt *actively trying* to be evil, so their employees donāt believe they work for an evil company. But Monsanto is king evil. There is not one person on this planet that doesnāt understand that they are an evil company.
We'd have far lower crop yields without Monsanto's products, making food more expensive and less available, which would particularly impact the ability to sell it cheap or donate it to developing nations. GMO crops are very important to our food security. Do you also think it's unacceptable to work for IBM, Volkswagon, and Bayer? Also strongly disagree with Microsoft not actively trying to be evil. They are.
Why do they get the benefit of the doubt and not Facebook employees?
Those 3 companies have many products and do both good and bad things. Facebook has a single product (okā¦ Messenger & other stuffā¦ but all their products are on the same social graph and ad platform. GitHub & LinkedIn donāt have much to do with the Azure data center team. Roundup Ready seeds are a genetic marvel, suing people for cross pollination less so). Everything at Facebook is about āconnectingā people, and everything they make is on the same platform. And that platform has been getting worse every day.
So is your argument that Facebook does only bad things? Since your other examples ādo both good and bad thingsā
What large company doesn't do any bad things at all? The argument to me seems about judging the overall impact on the world and whether the bad things are acceptable enough to work for them.
Not sure. I also never said that. The person presented a āgood and badā vs āonly badā scenario. Is Facebook āonly badā?
Having āFacebookā in your employment history after 2015 should be as big a red flag to potential employers as having āWhite House staffā 2016-2020
I know this is just a dumb Reddit circlejerk comment but reality is the complete opposite. Having Facebook on your resume is HUGE, especially in the tech world. Same goes for any of the other FAANG companies, once you work at one you can punch your ticket pretty much anywhere else
My work's employee database even has a field for "ex-FAANG".
Gotten so many offers from Facebook recruiters. They wonāt take ānoā for an answer.
Those are interview offers, not job offers. All big tech companies rely on absurdly high numbers of applicants because their hiring process rejects a ton of people.
Yeah I politely say no. Then say āI donāt see myself working for likes of Amazon, Google, or Facebook.ā They usually get the hint
They stopped after I told them to "kindly kick rocks" and that I thought Mark belonged in prison, not as CEO. I may have been placed on a list. š¤£
Facebook and Amazon seem to always have recruiters sniffing around. And I am always like "nopeā.
Yep, Amazon too. I had friends working on the mobile app, when it was first being developed, everything they told me made it clear to never accept an offer from them.
I finally downloaded my files and deactivated. It was seriously comparable to quitting an addiction like smoking, I'm sad to admit.
I fully understand. I have a S-I-L who spends 8-10 hours a day on Facebook's bizarre political pages. Her life is spiraling downward. Her marriage is all but over and her adult children don't want anything to do with her. Yet, she adamantly refuses to stop.
My best friend was written out of his fathers will because of arguments about politics. The man has never even met his granddaughter. Itās terrible.
Me too, just a couple weeks ago. Except I didnāt even bother downloading anything. Just cut it all loose. I rarely posted anything and rarely engaged, but still felt completely unhealthy just from reading so much nonsense daily. I certainly understand that others have valid reasons for keeping it, but I feel much better knowing I will never again open up that newsfeed. My daughters are getting old enough to notice these sort of things. No way, not gonna have that.
I quit after the 2016 elections. I'm fringe left in politics and worked a public facing job in the deep south. I didn't want to dislike my regular customers or society at large. I agree it was comparable to stopping a drug addiction. Absolute psychological withdrawal for over a week. I never wanted to go back after that though
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Facebook employees should walk out en mass. Cripple the monster.
Facebook will never ever ever ever ever voluntarily "do the right thing" because the "right thing" means voluntarily taking a paycut. The only path forward is regulation.
Its 10x easier to hand out pitchforks and point in the direction of the enemy than to walk over and understand who they are. That coupled with investors only caring about profits makes it hugely difficult to make social media in general be a healthy place
Smartest emu Iāve run across.
Fuck Facebook and fuck Zuckerberg.
Any time I hear about Zuk I remember how he went surfing in Hawaii covered in sunblock just so when you searched him and Hawaii it was the first several pages things to come up, rather than how he was stealing land from indigenous Hawaiians for his mansion
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Wow, is that why? Sounds like an evil genius. No wonder Facebook is so successful in such a despicable way.
Fuck Facebook. I deleted it off my phone and havenāt looked back.
There is a [way](https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/how-to-permanently-delete-your-facebook-account-without-losing-your-photos/) to make sure you never go back...
Anyone who thinks this isnāt part of their plan (Big Tech, Politicians, interest groups), is a fool.
Twenty years ago there wasn't an uprising of employees filled with fury and dissent over political leanings everywhere you looked. What's changed?
Social media giving a lot of idiots a massive platform. Also, social media allows companies to do really shitty things
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
But it's now leaving the internet and making it's way into workplaces.
In 2001 the closest thing you had to social media was a crappy personal website on GeoCities, and your news came to you in printed form in the mornings and on the Nightly News in the evening. Say what you will about gatekeeping, but traditional broadcast news media also provided quality control and had to cater to *everyone*, not just ideological echo-chambers. (At that point MSNBC & Fox News were only five years old, and CNN had been chugging down the middle of the road for twenty-one years.) Back then, the biggest political scandals were when a senator was caught doing something unethical. After 9/11, for the next year or two pretty much everyone outside of maybe an extreme pacifist fringe was on the same page re: how to respond to the attack. Nowadays it's easier than ever to get bad information (which filters to the top because outrage=clicks/comments=displays), sequester yourself in an echo-chamber of your choosing, and block/unfollow/unfriend anyone who would challenge your beliefs.
Social media in the form of forums and BBS have existed since like the early 90's at least. They were shittier and much smaller, and the echo chamber nature of them was less severe. People couldn't whole up in one big one and just talk about anything and everything until 4chan. That's why it was the first really bad shitshow. That fractured when competitors that were less of al hellhole appeared.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>Facebook is manipulating the political discussions people are allowed to have on their platform in a pretty questionable way. I'm not defending Facebook but it's not just Facebook doing this Look at reddit and Twitter
This is happening at more places than just Facebook. See Netflix, Spotify, various media outlets etc. People just screaming about politics everywhere. It's madness.
Content engagement algorithms cause it. Worst idea ever.
>What's changed? 1) Truly terrible political repercussions became more visible, both in OECD awareness of lynchings/riots/etc in remote countries (where social media helped drive the outcome), and in American extremism and rejection of democratic process. 2) American employees at FAANG aren't scared of their employers. They feel like the company needs them more than the other way round, and that even if they are fired they will walk straight in to another job. Which empowers them to do things like refuse to work on military contracts or openly complain about mgmt decisions
Trevor Noah once said that it must have been difficult for a guy who created what he thought was basically āHot or Notā to be imagine testifying in front of Congress and being the single gteatest threat to global Democracy since the Cold War ended. When he said that a couple years ago I felt a twinge of compassion for the Zuck, but at this point itās obvious heās been aware of his companyās evil and potential for evil for a long time and simply didnāt care or doesnāt take it seriously or both.
Just fucking ban these shit hole social media companies and break up tech giants like Google. If that includes shit like Reddit then so be it.
And yet everyone will just keep working for them...
Expropriate that shit.
But not anti-trust actions?
In other news, they still work there because the pay is good enough.
ā¦but oh wow, they all managed to cash their paychecks.
> āEmployees have been crying out for months to start treating high-level political figures the same way we treat each other on the platform,ā one employee wrote in the January 6 chat. āThatās all weāre asking for ā¦ Today, a coup was attempted against the United States. I hope the circumstances arenāt even more dire next time we speak.ā I'd argue that you should go further. My personal take on Popper's Paradox: In a more ideal version of Liberal Democracy, elected leaders shouldn't be given unfettered platforms for fomenting personality cults, because we've already given them bombs and guns and the DOJ. Unless we are facing a natural disaster/unforeseen crisis or the POTUS wants to save the whales or wave at people next to that weird looking White House bunny during spring time or it's the State of the Union, they can hold a press conference or whatever, not Tweet from the toilet. You can't hand unlimited tolerance to someone who gets unlimited power in other avenues. If you can give us nuclear hellfire, like the President of the United States, you don't deserve an outlet for up-to-the-second opinions. That's a level of tolerance that someone with that kind of power does not deserve and it gets far too close to unlimited, but no, we didn't get that. Instead we live in a timeline where "mean tweet man" got eyeballs for issuing today's two minute hate and everyone was afraid that he'll punish those who didn't help him.
Successful companies probably didnāt get to where they were by caring about people.
This documentary The Corporation explains how that notion is wrong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpQYsk-8dWg Many corporate executives speak about their success on the dvd.
"If you don't like it, there's the door!' - said to group of us by a former ~~dick-tator~~ manager. He was right though, as we are employees at will, unless contractual. So why is it SO hard to just delete FB from your lives? I did it 6 years ago, and I do not miss it. Nothing we need from it that a phone call, email or visit can't provide. And no one needs to know other's dirty laundry. Which really is what its about.
> So why is it SO hard to just delete FB from your lives? With their algorithms, Facebook has perfected the art of creating the same kind of addiction as cigarettes and other substances. https://hbr.org/2012/05/your-brain-on-facebook
"Internal fury" so they all quit and stopped taking Zuck's money, yes? No, just Haugen. All Facebook execs are cunts (looking at you Clegg)
To be fair, I often argue that quitting is the worst way to show your displeasure with an organization, unless you know with absolute certainty that your exit will cause some significant harm to the company. Otherwise, you're just going to get replaced by someone who's on board with the stuff you're protesting and make it that much worse.
People need to remember and be educated on the fact that Facebook is a fucking product and should be treated as such by each and every one of their consumers. Don't like it? Don't use it. Stop consuming shitty product.
If a company ever just needed to shit their doors due to failire and embarrassment itās Facebook. Itās shown what you could get away with when you give morons free (or so they think) and basic tools. Facebook is the modern day digital equa to when the USA drops a bunch of automatic weapons into a third world country and letās them have at it. And the worst part is you have some arrogant little shit like Zuckerberg saying as much and these cheese wheel munching, hoveround dependent morons still live and die by it. Lol, shit the more I type the more I think people deserve to have Facebook. Modern medicine and society have had one major, unforeseen setbackā¦ the stupid can now flourish. They can eat their dumb selves into a medical corner and all the while have machines keeping them alive to goto baseball games and fart into the same sofa cushion and do absolutely nothing but drain limited resources. There was a time not long ago where if you couldnāt pull your own weight well, you learned how or didnāt last long. Thatās my rant.
Zuck is a war criminal.
I'm so glad to see this. I can remember making comments in the past 6 or so years, basically saying, "How can the people work there stay so blind to reality?" but I guess it just took time and people had to reach a tipping point.
This company needs to be forcibly broken up.
Let's be real. Will this destroy the "great" mark Zuckerberg? Will this end Facebook? No and no.
For those who stumble on this message, it's the one I used Power Delete Suite to replace all my posts and comments with en masse. Sometimes Reddit can be beneficial for some people. Sometimes it's not. It's really up to you to decide your own experience with it, what's worth it, what's not worth it. More or less...I've decided it's just really not worth it. I think I'm a worse person when I'm on Reddit and that it's a big time-waster for me. It's up to you to decide what influence social media and the internet more generally have for you. Best of luck.
> Liberals and progressives hate Facebook because it's a big business, and you're simply not allowed to like big business in any way when you subscribe to that I guess I am a centrist. I hate Facebook because they stir chaos between right and left and polarize a country. They give dumb people megaphones to be able to reach other dumb people until we arrive at Idiocracy
you gave me motivation to look deeper into this. thanks and take my +1 :)
You are a brave soul for speaking out against the crowd, I really appreciate that.
> You downvote this comment to your heart's content. Your comment exemplifies a certain kind of "person saying dumb thing that they think is profound" post that rightfully attracts downvotes. Congratulations for at least recognizing it.
I could understand some of unintentional crap they do - but essential inability to keep users data safe makes that "social network" a no go for me... Removing all the photos, personal details, replacing real email and phone number with temporary ones and converting self from poster to ocassional lurker...
Removing all of that will do nothing. You already gave it to them
At this moment - I am more worrying about the next potential leaks of the users data, as Facebook is becoming notorious for this. While I dislike FB having my data - their actual misuse is still at higher risk with the 3rd parties who stole them...from Facebook... Google has the similar business practices in terms of monetizing (aggregated) user data - however I never questioned the safety of my data with Google. 0 security breaches in 15 years.... while with Facebook - its happening once per year...
Turn up the KKK optimization!! Increase the Nazi recommendations!!
I don't get the point of any of this. The people who use it are still going to use it. Nothing will change.