
Zuckerberg Gives Public an Indication How He Lives in an Alternative Reality - 6stringmerc
https://medium.com/@6StringMerc/zuckerberg-gives-public-an-indication-how-far-his-head-is-up-his-own-ass-159746cedfda#.opmpigj9r
======
rubidium
The author, despite an intentionally abrasive tone, nails the analysis.
Facebook could literally disappear tomorrow, and the world would keep going.
It's only power is it's network effect. A thousand networks (more local and
more useful) would spring up in it's place if it kicked the bucket.

~~~
3pt14159
The world would keep going, but it would be very damaged. Millions of peoples
memories and photos would disappear and millions of connections between people
would be permanently severed.

That cute girl you hooked up with in Thailand that said she'd message you when
she's visiting SF: gone. The cousin you really get along with that you never
see anymore since her father passed away: no more casual reminders she exists.
No more university friends.

There's such arrogance on HN about Facebook but it makes a bigger difference
to ordinary people's lives than any other website.

There are challenges, but what do you expect Zuckerberg to do? Let fake news
and bullshit, unchecked viral opinions go wild? The smart people are leaving
the small towns for the cities and it's destroying the ability for smaller
communities to make sense of the world. We need a way of protecting fake news
and propaganda from spreading through our social networks.

The Facebook isn't run by some scheming cabal of evildoers.

~~~
fsloth
I stopped using Facebook. I had a lot of people who I've not seen in a long
time there. Frankly, if you asked, I could not remember one personal thing I
got from their stream.

On the other hand, I do have lots of nice memories of actual physical meetings
with people.

My conclusion based on my biased data set is that the value Facebook brings is
ephemeral at best when laid against the skein of real world experiences.

My life is not a stream of posts on third party servers.

~~~
3pt14159
I've had the complete opposite. I deleted Facebook after they outed a gay
friend of mine to his religious parents when they made groups public, but I
came back after 5 years without it and I'm invited to far more events and I
keep in touch with people from other cities way better. I'm not the type to
just randomly text someone I met while visiting a different city, but I'll
like a post or leave a comment. Keeping the relationship alive until I'm there
next.

------
sigi45
The biggest issue with all of this: We as a socity should work together and
decide together.

Zuckerberg became massive rich through 'zeitgeist' being the first at
something obvious.

Now he has so much power which shouldn't be in his hands.

We can only hope that states and countries are using the power to reduce his
power over our socity.

And yeah fb is overrated. Its just another tool. It feels already super stupid
when facebook whishes me a nice birthday or a good morning. Wtf go away...

~~~
dickbasedregex
FB, despite their acquisitions to stay relevant, will follow Friendster,
MySpace, and the others. Something will come along to knock them off their
perch.

I left FB (and social media in general) 4-5 years ago. I haven't missed any of
it. My hope is that people will start swinging away from the frivolous noise
of most social media. It provides a valuable service but the vast majority of
it is garbage.

------
coda_
I had to stop reading, the negativity in the article drove me away. The bad
online communities he references, in my experience, are usually not the ones
that are built on top of real-world communities and relationships. That is not
to say that all of the ones that are online-only are bad... just that
communities online that reflect real-world communities seem to work pretty
well from what I've seen. Anyway, I can't really claim to fully understand the
author's point, since I couldn't bring myself to read the whole thing.

~~~
6stringmerc
Right, because building something online eventually changes the dynamic. Just
pick a big "Community" and do some digging - YouTube Comment Section - Reddit
- 4Chan - Twitter. There's not a single online community that is inherently
positive or constructive without extensive, heavy-handed moderation.

If you get to the end, you'll see that Zuckerberg thinks that Facebook can AI
moderate away shitty behavior. Look closely, that's a fundamental claim. Yet,
at the end of the day, he's running a business, not a Non-Profit Human Welfare
Organization, right?

~~~
mark212
You miss the point. Where's the offline part of the YouTube comment section?
My kid's kindergarten class has an FB page that is very important to how the
class functions day to day. Sure you could code up a replacement but it
wouldn't be nearly as easy to use as jus having everyone on FB. And it's
great. And it really does strengthen and deepen the offline community. Same
for the FB page for my grad school alumni. A massive positive contribution
where people solicit opinions from literally all over the world and have
meaningful discussions.

I don't disagree that YT comments are just a cesspool. But how is that Zuck's
fault?

~~~
AlexandrB
> My kid's kindergarten class has an FB page that is very important to how the
> class functions day to day.

This sends chills down my spine, because we're selling out kids to the same
Surveillance-Industrial complex we sold out to before they even get a choice
in the matter.

~~~
newscracker
>> My kid's kindergarten class has an FB page that is very important to how
the class functions day to day.

> This sends chills down my spine, because we're selling out kids to the same
> Surveillance-Industrial complex we sold out to before they even get a choice
> in the matter.

Absolutely! I don't understand how people are just letting this happen or even
promoting it. I see Facebook pages, WhatsApp groups and such - all used to
share sensitive information about children - fundamentally making it
impossible for the children to reverse the effects of these actions when
they're adults. I'd rather prefer an email group to these mechanisms. Or they
might as well put everything on Twitter in public view to avoid any pretense
of having private communications. I'm far too focused on privacy to consider
any benefits as outweighing the dangers and damages.

------
galuano1
Zuck has set his eyes on the presidency, this is all going to lead to his
announcement in 2 years.

~~~
itg
Who would vote for him? He's seems like a person that people all over the
political specturm absolutely detest.

~~~
paulpauper
Why does he invoke hated but the late Walt Disney (which Disneyland is just as
memorable) does not.

People will vote for him because he's pragmatic, similar to Gore and Clinton .
The nominee of either side gets at least 45% of the vote , so it comes down to
undecideds

------
newscracker
Author: I don't use Twitter and wouldn't want to share this on Facebook either
(and make it a little bit more money), but I really enjoyed reading this
article! :) I wish I could've written something like this with my deep dislike
of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg and where they're leading humanity to.

> If Zuckerberg shut down Facebook for a month, he’d have a more positive
> impact Building Global Community than any of the high-minded things he wrote
> out.

Actually, if this were to happen (certainly not because Zuckerberg wants it
to), people would suddenly find time to be more productive, to engage in
things they've been putting off and find ways to get in touch with others
through less-noisy channels (with a little more intimacy, perhaps). For all
its merits, Facebook has turned into a place to navel gaze, pat each other in
echo chambers, and shout out things to everyone else to get some reactions
(likes and others).

------
supernumerary
I agree with this and don't use Facebook.

Monitoring my own misgivings however I've noticed that there is a tendency to
throw the baby out with the bathwater ...

So much of our most trenchant criticisms of Facebook stem from how it's an
illusion and that's not rooted in reality. Zuckerberg seems to be trying to
reattach its moorings, talking about these real-world communities that give us
a sense of purpose and meaning and that Facebook complements rather than
replaces or distorts.

Unfortunately his status as a billionaire undermines this argument. We're
intellectually (if not actually) very skeptical of illusions (e.g. Plato's
allegory of the cave) and view his net-worth being directly proportional to
his malign influence in our society, pulling the wool over our eyes with an
addictive illusion while voraciously funneling our private information into
vast data-centers where AI is trained to new heights of persuasiveness...

But I think it is possible to rehabilitate Facebook's illusory component and
get something useful out of it. After all it has been instrumental in some
major movements across the globe, including the election of Trump and
subsequent protests.

I've written about it here:
[https://iainmait.land/posts/20170201-transitional-
object.htm...](https://iainmait.land/posts/20170201-transitional-object.html)

It's a bit like MZ's approach ... while also acknowledging OP's final point,
that Facebook will never willingly optimize for dis-engagement.

------
TwoNineA
And people are surprised by this?

[http://www.businessinsider.com/well-these-new-zuckerberg-
ims...](http://www.businessinsider.com/well-these-new-zuckerberg-ims-wont-
help-facebooks-privacy-problems-2010-5)

Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard

Zuck: Just ask.

Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS

[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?

Zuck: People just submitted it.

Zuck: I don't know why.

Zuck: They "trust me"

Zuck: Dumb fucks.

~~~
dhimes
I trust that Zuck has grown up a bit since then.

~~~
newscracker
> I trust that Zuck has grown up a bit since then.

I used to think this a few years ago and consider that he might have changed
(I wanted to believe this more so after his daughter was born). But I don't
think it's true. He's very much the same person who said those things years
ago, except that he's super rich now and has a lot more control over things.

------
codr4life
There's nothing in there that's remotely relevant these days, all ego
bullshit, marketing and conditioning. Any one who's not forced or numbed has
already fled the sinking ship. Zucker needs to find a new hobby; who knows,
maybe this one will be the one that actually makes a positive difference...

------
rubidium
@dang (or other mods, I think there are some): I admit I don't know exactly
how flagging works here, but this is the first article I've seen that wasn't
flagarent abuse/spam that has been flagged. Can you please provide a reason
for the flagging or unflag?

Thank you.

------
thatwebdude
I feel like Medium doesn't even publish articles unless you use foul language.

I mean, I'm all for it. But it just feels like Medium writers are trying too
hard.

~~~
6stringmerc
Well there are about 20 other articles I've written that have a far lower
amount of cussing, and none of my screenplays have a single swear word in
them, so I guess I'm showing my Gonzo stripe a little hard.

If you aren't instantly put off by the corn syrup tone of Zuckerberg's piece
then you're also missing out on a useful cynicism trigger.

------
param
Oh come on... he's just setting up the chess board to run for the US
presidency in 20 years. Give him space to do it

------
squozzer
>Aww look at the cute little English language acrobatics to call “disgusting”
or “outright stupid” or “garbage” viewpoints “diverse.”

Translation - these are adjectives I use to describe any viewpoint that
differes from my own.

