Not the least toxic of environments ...
https://www.wired.com/story/inside-facebook-mark-zuckerberg-2-years-of-hell/
https://www.wired.com/story/inside-facebook-mark-zuckerberg-2-years-of-hell/
Good Read on Facebook
- Thread starter Veer_G
- Start date
Yeah, the other side of the "poor little Mark Zuckerberg" story. This morning I was listening to a podcast that had several recordings of him in the Senate yesterday. A senator asked him about all the things that were going wrong with Facebook and he answered each of the questions like the answer was already in Facebooks policy.
I never would open a Facebook account because of exactly this kind of thing. He's no more bulletproof than Soc. Security or DOD (twice) where my information was compromised (all three times).
I never would open a Facebook account because of exactly this kind of thing. He's no more bulletproof than Soc. Security or DOD (twice) where my information was compromised (all three times).
https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/w...pages-illegally-selling-animal-parts-54355258
The difference between Zuckerberg and a whore is that there are some things most whores will not do for money.
The difference between Zuckerberg and a whore is that there are some things most whores will not do for money.
There is only one issue at hand, Trump won. Not one of these babbling grand standers at Zuckerberg's choreographed appearance on Capitol Hill, not Feinstein and especially not Zuckerberg gives two shits about privacy. Had Hillary taken the election Facebook would be again taking a slice of the credit and the world of media and chastising politicians would again promote the idea that the people have spoken through Facebook. That is exactly what happened (ad nauseum) when Facebook helped Obama win. At that time Facebook executives bragged openly about how they used user data for good. Algorithms used to help Obama were described as the blissful coalescence of "a single beating heart". They bragged about the triumph of a psyops insurrection via social media especially loudly during and after the 2012 election. Obama's delivery to the world was hailed as a gift of Facebook's digital birth canal. Facebook's own founders bragged about it at commencement speeches where they implored college grads to go into the world and follow suit. They suddenly shut up then reversed course after Trump won.
"Digital analysts predict this will be the first election cycle in which Facebook could become a dominant political force."
- The Guardian, February 17, 2012
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/17/obama-digital-data-machine-facebook-election
"Obama dominated the social media space because his team got how networks work."
Bullshit. His team was the network.
http://mprcenter.org/blog/2013/01/h...dia-battle-in-the-2012-presidential-campaign/
And in 2008, "Facebook was not unaware of its suddenly powerful role in American electoral politics."
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2008/11/19/barack-obama-and-the-facebook-election
https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/how-obamas-internet-campaign-changed-politics/
How the tune changes:
https://www.investors.com/politics/...nadal-trump-obama-campaign-election-meddling/
There is no defense of what Cambridge Analytica has done and was allowed to do. And by precisely the same reasoning it is indefensible what Facebook did in 2008 and 2012. To have it both ways, as Zuckerberg and CNN,et al, is worse than being mindlessly dogmatic, it is to be without principle at all. The Hill offers a one-sided but illustrative point:
http://thehill.com/opinion/technolo...s-for-obama-is-scandal-when-it-comes-to-trump
Where were congressional committees and Zuckerberg's conscious in 2008, 2012, and at every point in time until November 8, 2016? The same place they are now, existing as a figment of the American media imagination. Zuckerberg will be a public scapegoat unless (more likely until) he helps take the white house back. The only play he has at the moment is insincere self-deprecation while giving an accusatory nod to some Russians. I wonder how many consultants it took to craft his current demeanor.
Either the miraculous appearance of Trump at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave caused a lot of people suddenly sprout values, a virtuous conscious, and a regard for an honest press, or they are just full of shit and always have been. I'm going with the second option.
"Digital analysts predict this will be the first election cycle in which Facebook could become a dominant political force."
- The Guardian, February 17, 2012
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/17/obama-digital-data-machine-facebook-election
"Obama dominated the social media space because his team got how networks work."
Bullshit. His team was the network.
http://mprcenter.org/blog/2013/01/h...dia-battle-in-the-2012-presidential-campaign/
And in 2008, "Facebook was not unaware of its suddenly powerful role in American electoral politics."
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2008/11/19/barack-obama-and-the-facebook-election
https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/how-obamas-internet-campaign-changed-politics/
How the tune changes:
https://www.investors.com/politics/...nadal-trump-obama-campaign-election-meddling/
There is no defense of what Cambridge Analytica has done and was allowed to do. And by precisely the same reasoning it is indefensible what Facebook did in 2008 and 2012. To have it both ways, as Zuckerberg and CNN,et al, is worse than being mindlessly dogmatic, it is to be without principle at all. The Hill offers a one-sided but illustrative point:
http://thehill.com/opinion/technolo...s-for-obama-is-scandal-when-it-comes-to-trump
Where were congressional committees and Zuckerberg's conscious in 2008, 2012, and at every point in time until November 8, 2016? The same place they are now, existing as a figment of the American media imagination. Zuckerberg will be a public scapegoat unless (more likely until) he helps take the white house back. The only play he has at the moment is insincere self-deprecation while giving an accusatory nod to some Russians. I wonder how many consultants it took to craft his current demeanor.
Either the miraculous appearance of Trump at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave caused a lot of people suddenly sprout values, a virtuous conscious, and a regard for an honest press, or they are just full of shit and always have been. I'm going with the second option.
Last edited:
My wife used to have a Harvard grad in her employ. The young (then) early-millenial lady left her job, after a tumultuous time attempting to adjust to corporate life, to go work for her friend's brother's start-up. Her friend? Randi Zuckerberg. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randi_Zuckerberg
It almost shames me to reveal my degree of separation from the monster.
It almost shames me to reveal my degree of separation from the monster.
Why are so many rifle leagues, ranges, matches, etc., etc., all on Facebook? Why are we helping these vile people?
I can't participate in any of it. I do have a facebook account, but it's practically empty. I may go and look, but I never make a keystroke, because I feel like I'm feeding a beast with every one.
I can't participate in any of it. I do have a facebook account, but it's practically empty. I may go and look, but I never make a keystroke, because I feel like I'm feeding a beast with every one.
Similar threads
