
Facebook ruins Zuckerberg Xmas - jamesbritt
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/26/mark_zuckerbergs_sister_is_angry_that_a_family_photo_posted_on_facebook_became_public/
======
j79
Wait, isn't this the same Zuckerberg who said something along the lines of
internet anonymity needing to go away??

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/27/randi-zuckerberg-
an...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/27/randi-zuckerberg-anonymity-
online_n_910892.html)

Oh, the irony indeed!

~~~
natrius
What, pray tell, does this have to do with anonymity?

~~~
fitzpasd
I imagine they were pointing out the irony that someone who wanted to see the
end of internet anonymity, which would inherently reduce privacy, is now
complaining of a privacy breech on a site where there is relatively no
anonymity.

~~~
natrius
I imagine that as well, but it's easy to see that these are meaningfully
different kinds of privacy at stake.

------
sakopov
> Zuckerberg’s takeaway was “digital etiquette,” saying: ”always ask
> permission before posting a friend’s photo publicly. It’s not about privacy
> settings, it’s about human decency.”

Apparently "human decency" doesn't apply when Zuckerberg sells your
information to 3rd party advertisers on Facebook and changes the TOS to let
you know you don't own squat on his company's site. The irony is strong here.

~~~
dangrossman
You are quoting Randi Zuckerberg. She does not work at Facebook, so she
certainly doesn't sell your information to advertisers or change the site's
TOS.

~~~
sakopov
I realize that. However she is not a dummy and should know better when she
says her privacy's being violated on Facebook. Especially when her brother
owns the damn company.

------
tiles
I'm disappointed to have to emphasize that this is _Randi_ Zuckerberg
responding to the leaked picture, not Mark Zuckerberg. There's no sweet irony
here about creating a site and being burned by it, just being it's former
chief marketing officer, I suppose.

------
joshuahornby
How can he be angry? Posted a photo on a social network site which he
developed, his security flaw, his mistake. You post a photo, you can't be
angry when your security flaw means it goes global.

~~~
tedunangst
Typically, the pronouns "she" and "her" are used for females.

~~~
tjoff
"Zuckerberg responded, saying, “Not sure where you got this photo. I posted it
only to friends on FB. You reposting it on Twitter is way uncool.”"

Zuckerberg uploaded the photo, his sister "leaked" it.

While Zuckerbergs response resonates well with me I don't really get what he
was thinking taking this so publicly, making full use of the Streisand-effect.

Either way, it is hilarious and he does deserve every bit of it. Even if he
did nothing wrong in this case.

~~~
matthuggins
Did you consider that Mark's sister's last name is also Zuckerberg? The
article is all about Randi Zuckerberg, not Mark Zuckerberg.

~~~
tjoff
I just did :(

My mind inserted Mark, even as a copy-pasted it. Sigh, good night.

------
zemanel
That moment when, what was that line by Mark? "Dont post online if you have
anything to hide" or something? ... gets back at you and bites in the ass ...

------
mblake
What an exaggerated titled. Does the pic show anything compromising/very
intimate? It appears it does not. Then why all the fuss about it? This
could've went swiftly under the radar if she simply would've handled it
privately.

A simple direct message on Twitter: 'hey, that's not supposed to be public,
can you take it down please? and delete your tweet too.'

Simple and I can't imagine she would've been denied the request, for the very
same reason, that she's a Zuckerberg.

------
kstenerud
This from the guy who says privacy is no longer the social norm?

~~~
dangrossman
No, this is not from "the guy", as all the quotes and tweets in the article
are Randi's. Mark is only mentioned as being her brother.

~~~
joering2
Sure but isn't the blood connection here the major reason why we are even
reading about this story?

~~~
dangrossman
I fail to see how that makes it OK to misattribute quotes.

------
norswap
The Streisand effect strikes again.

------
dale386
They're Jewish.

~~~
roopeshv
i think no one got why wrote so above.

they're jewish, they don't celebrate xmas. hence, no zuckerburg xmas was
ruined.

------
aspinner
Pretty hilarious!

