
Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever - anshumanf
https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/04/connector-in-chief/
======
pmiller2
Why does this sound like the plot to a dystopian sci fi novel? Facebook's
interests aren't anything close to my interests.

~~~
imgabe
Then don't vote for Zuckerberg? Technically, if he were to be a representative
or other elected government official, he would be obligated to uphold the
interests of his constituents, not the company he owns, just like any other
representative.

Granted, it might be a concern that he would use his position to help his
company, which is why officials usually have to put their assets in a blind
trust.

He would still have to get elected first, though. So if you're basically
expecting that he's going to be corrupt, then don't vote for him and encourage
others not to.

~~~
pera
Americans have this odd tendency to vote for celebrities.

~~~
pweissbrod
other countries dont?

~~~
1ris
Well, some don't. It doesn't imply a more informed electorate, tho.

------
satysin
I was going to post asking what experience Mark has in government but then I
remembered the American population just voted to elect a reality TV 'star' and
rich-from-daddies-money mediocre businessman as President. So yeah I guess
Mark is highly qualified in that he has several times Trump's net worth.

~~~
CptJamesCook
Another way to describe Trump is that he ran a business that created more
value than the S&P 500 (the top 500 businesses on US stock exchanges) over a
30 year period, created a world famous brand associated with quality and
luxury, created a tv show that dominated ratings for a decade, and crushed two
political dynasties that have held power for almost 40 years.

~~~
hyperpape
"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?

~~~
CptJamesCook
[https://dqydj.com/donald-trump-beat-sp-500-index-
funds/](https://dqydj.com/donald-trump-beat-sp-500-index-funds/)

Admittedly questionable source, but I've seen it elsewhere and the
approximation seems fair.

~~~
hyperpape
There's probably a clearer way to phrase that point. I initially thought you
were saying that Donald Trump made more money than the entire S&P 500!

~~~
CptJamesCook
haha. I reread my post and it was a bit gibberishy. Ooops.

------
hyperpape
As someone who shares a lot more political opinions with Zuckerberg than
Trump, having the man who controls Facebook holding political office has just
as much potential for corruption as Trump does, and is almost as scary.

Politicians have a lot of levers to shape media coverage without owning one of
the largest sources of information in the modern world.

~~~
Terr_
I searched for "blind trust" and didn't see it. Is there some legal quirk I'm
missing here where Zuckerberg gets a pass on conflicts of interest, or is it
part of the general lack of ethics the incoming Administration seems to be
planning?

------
jackcosgrove
I'm not sure why people are saying Zuckerberg would be better than a regular
politician. His public statements have been pretty vacuous, which probably
means he is trying to obscure his real positions like any other politician.
I'll reserve final judgement on his competence for office until he starts
being more concrete, or if someone can point me to some position papers. But
for now color me suspicious.

The prospect of a global surveillance apparatus is chilling though, and
Zuckerberg already has one of those - albeit with voluntary participation.
Digital privacy is a major fault line in emerging politics, and Zuckerberg is
one of my bete noires in this area.

------
visakanv
Some fun facts: Zuck's favorite book(s) growing up was the Ender's Game series
[1]. He learned Mandarin and spoke to Chinese audiences [2]. As such, I don't
think he's setting himself up to be POTUS, that seems too small for him. (One
of Zuck's role models is Bill Gates, and Bill clearly believes that folks like
himself can do more for the world outside of Government than inside it.)

IMO, Mark's setting himself up to be Hegemon of Earth:
[http://enderverse.wikia.com/wiki/Hegemony](http://enderverse.wikia.com/wiki/Hegemony)

[1]
[http://favobooks.com/enterpreneurs/90-zuckerberg.html](http://favobooks.com/enterpreneurs/90-zuckerberg.html)

[2] [https://qz.com/532834/mark-zuckerbergs-20-minute-speech-
in-c...](https://qz.com/532834/mark-zuckerbergs-20-minute-speech-in-clumsy-
mandarin-is-his-latest-attempt-to-woo-china/)

------
ape4
Just login to Facebook with your SSN to check your IRS and other government
services...

------
kelvin0
Facebook.gov : The new platform to tie in all branches of the government:
Healthcare, DMV, Criminal Records, Credit ... Bonus if the API endpoints for
each Service uses GraphQL.

------
rokosbasilisk
Politics and tech mixing sounds bad for global shared tech.

Seems like tech or internet balkanization is coming fast.

~~~
dj-wonk
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 illusion that
is fundamentally mostly marketing-driven. (I don't fault a company for being
market-driven; however, such incentives are not structured to properly serve
people and communities).

But I don't know too much about Facebook's social design as compared to Zuck's
goals for possibly serving in government or where he would like Facebook to
go.

~~~
rokosbasilisk
This article explains it well.
[http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/1...](http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/10/internet_balkanization_may_be_a_side_effect_of_the_snowden_surveillance.html)

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

------
redthrowaway
I must have missed something; why are people discussing Zuck serving in
government?

~~~
ithinkinstereo
Recent announcements and actions by Zuck suggest that he's going to run for
office one day.

1) Reveals he is no longer an atheist ([http://nypost.com/2017/01/02/mark-
zuckerberg-reveals-hes-no-...](http://nypost.com/2017/01/02/mark-zuckerberg-
reveals-hes-no-longer-an-atheist/)) 2) 2017 New Years goal to meet people in
every 50 state ([http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-personal-
goal...](http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-personal-goal-
for-2017-meet-people-in-every-us-state-2017-1))

etc.

~~~
chrischen
It suggests he may be Buddhist. You can't really use a religion other than
Christianity if you're pandering to Americans.

~~~
dj-wonk
I, for one, would not put limits on the ability of politicians to pander in
ways that I would find implausible.

But in the case of religion (even Buddhism), I find it plausible. Demographics
and expectations about religion are changing. Religious belief and alignment
does appear to be softening. See: [http://www.pewforum.org/2015/11/03/u-s-
public-becoming-less-...](http://www.pewforum.org/2015/11/03/u-s-public-
becoming-less-religious/)

More broadly, I think the models of cognitive dissonance and tribal behavior
are sometimes more important than arbitrary labels. If enough voters feel
comfortable with a candidate (on their own terms) they can dismiss any number
of externally-imposed labels about their candidate.

~~~
sharkweek
Offering an anecdote with as little commentary as possible, but having gone to
a small religious high school, I have friends who argue they'd "never vote for
anyone who isn't Christian" but managed to do some mental gymnastics in order
to vote for Romney, who during the primaries they seemed to oppose for being
Mormon.

~~~
rhcom2
Now I feel ignorant, Mormonism doesn't count as a sect of Christianity?

~~~
dragonwriter
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 Unitarians, among others groups that describe themselves as Christian. (In
contexts where the definition in question is being used, these and similarly
situated groups may be referred to as "pseudo-Christian cults".)

This definition isn't consistently important outside of academic theological
contexts within the body of mainstream Christianity, though, as lots of
regular believers use either a much broader definition in daily conversation,
or a narrower one that amounts to agreement with the particular religious
beliefs of the individual in question.

Particularly, in US political contexts, political groups organized around
politically conservative policies justified by appeals to Christianity have
very often sought to appeal across traditional theological boundaries to reach
politically-significant populations, and this is absolutely the case with
trying to draw in LDS members; so, in terms of conservative _political_
Christianity, Mormons are usually accepted, even if there is an academic
theological standard which holds them as distinct from Christianity.

~~~
bogomipz
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...](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/12/almost-all-u-s-
presidents-have-been-christians/)

------
Jordrok
_" They 'trust me' ... dumb fucks."_

~~~
kkhire
ahhaahah exactly the quote I was thinking of. Zuck is hilarious.

ZUCK 2020

------
moolcool
Oh please no

------
edblarney
Would be a massive conflict of interest.

Zuck is also setting himself up for President, which is a little egoist. That
said, anyone thinking that is on some level ...

------
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.

