Thompson specifically says that he doesn't trust Zuckerberg with that power. Even though Thompson suspects that he and Zuckerberg probably want the same global outcomes, he is inherently suspicious of any centrally controlled entity.
> my discomfort arises from my strong belief that centralized power is both inefficient and dangerous: no one person, or company, can figure out optimal solutions for everyone on their own, and history is riddled with examples of central planners ostensibly acting with the best of intentions — at least in their own minds — resulting in the most horrific of consequences; those consequences sometimes take the form of overt costs, both economic and humanitarian, and sometimes those costs are foregone opportunities and innovations. Usually it’s both.
I think it could also be described as a bait-and-switch.
> You think MZ's vision of replacing democratic institutions with facebook is a bad idea? Me too!
becomes
> Let me point out to you all the ways that MZ's intentions are good. I guess he's really a nice guy and we should trust him to provide a replacement for a failing democracy.
Personally, I can't get behind it, no matter how nuanced the rhetorical strategy used to persuade me.
It's an articulation of the general versus the specific. He's saying the general idea underpinning Zuckerberg's manifesto is concerning. He's just personally okay given it's specifically Zuckerberg manning the helm. (Separately, he says Facebook is in a good economic position. That's a separate train of thought from the manifesto discussion.)
You were, I had no trouble picking up on it at least.
It seems to me that this battle was really lost several years ago when Google unsuccessfully tried to maintain the ability to "export your social graph" from FB. What's your feeling on how things would have played out differently if at that time FB lost its control over people's social graphs?
It seems to me that if you have to legislate a solution here, writing a law that guaranteed you could export your personal data from any company would be a good place to start. What do you think?
Are you the author? I'm not saying you're ok with his goals. I'm saying that you seem to be very concerned with not coming off as "one of those anti-FB people", to the degree that it weakens the momentum of your writing a lot.
No, your essay is not very clear, nor convincing. Wechat is much better positioned to do what Zuck wants to do re: social infrastructure. Given the downwards spiral of the US and European economies, a long short on FB seems more propitious.
1. Facebook is executing a cunning strategy brilliantly; and
2. The power this centralizes in Zuckerberg is concerning; although
3. I'm not as worried as I might otherwise be because I trust him with that power.
It's less hedging than expressing a nuanced point.