6 ms·

What kind of message does it send? Take two months off when you could afford to retire? If I were in his shoes, I'd sell my shares in that website, take a few

What kind of message does it send? Take two months off when you could afford to retire? If I were in his shoes, I'd sell my shares in that website, take a few years off and then go a little Bill Gates, a little Elon Musk. I guess this is why I'm not a successful businessman.

incepted 11y ago
> If I were in his shoes, I'd sell my shares in that website Probably why you're not.
- nichochar 11y ago
  interesting! I wonder if you're right, or not. I could see both arguments both ways
  - sahaj 11y ago
    There's the proof.
- wobbleblob 11y ago
  Exactly what I said in the last sentence of my post. Thank you for your contribution though.
keerthiko 11y ago
Unlike Microsoft was to Bill Gates, Facebook seems to embody Mark's lifelong ideologies (connecting everyone in the world). He has often said he doesn't see himself doing anything with his life other than building the future of Facebook, just in a different form if Facebook hadn't taken off. On the other hand Gates just hit the lottery on one of the projects he worked on related to a field he was good at, when what he seems to really care about is more grassroots philanthropy work. If he could take two months off he could probably take a few years off, but he would probably just be itching to go back to work on FB the whole time.
- ekianjo 11y ago
  > On the other hand Gates just hit the lottery on one of the projects he worked on related to a field he was good at Won the lottery, not really. Bill Gates was a harsh businessman who relentlessly fought to kill off competition by all means possible - it was not by mistake that Microsoft became what it is. And, I'd dare say that it has very little correlation with how "good" he/they were at all. Most Microsoft software was utter crap till recent history compared to the existing alternatives - the fact that they managed to secure the market and third party developers was much more relevant than anything else.
  - Joeri 11y ago
    Microsoft software was not 'utter crap'. Word won by virtue of being better than WordPerfect. Excel won by being better than lotus. IE 5 was a better browser than Netscape 4, though in that case its superiority was not why it won. Even in the windows vs mac contest windows XP was a much better OS than the contemporary Mac OS, and arguably the best desktop OS of its day. Don't get me wrong. Microsoft software was crap, it's just that the competition was even worse. The quality of modern software is much improved.
    - Bud 11y ago
      I can agree with you about Word and Excel. I personally disagree about Netscape 4 versus IE 5, and I can remember both. You assertion about XP being better than Mac OS X, however, is hilarious. If that's true, why did XP die, and why was Mac OS X so radically more secure than Windows for the last 15 years running? Why was it more stable? Why did it work better? Why did it have a shockingly better UI? XP was crap and we should all be glad it's dead.
      - russgray 11y ago
        XP came out the same year as 10.0, which was rubbish. OS X wasn't really worthwhile until 10.3.
        11y ago
plicense 11y ago
Yeah, if he had waned to make money he had plenty of opportunities before Facebook even went public. He has a vision and he is executing it in all his power, never worrying about how much he earns. This reminds of something Vij Rajarajan(big boss in MSFT) told about - "I have realized almost everything in life is a paradox. If you want to grow in your current role you might think you have to not help out others and worry only about your job but in reality you grow by helping out others". I think this also applies to Mark Zuckeberg - if he had wanted to make money the company would not have grown so much. He focused on the vision and now he has made money.
- marincounty 11y ago
  What? He waited waited until he had enough people hooked, and then, and only then did he go public. He gently pricked our arms with ads. When he didn't get much flack; he went hog wild. This dude is all about the money. Mark didn't want to make a little money--he wanted it all. Hell, he tried to weasel the original founder's fathers money out of FB. Why--because he wanted the money. Oh, the foreign dude didn't were a hoodie, and a tee shirt to the office? Exactly what is Mark's vision? It's money. I thought I got him wrong when I heard Internet.org was going to set up as a California nonprofit, but found out that was just rumor. It's not even a Delaware nonprofit. It's for profit! He'll always have complete control. Personally, I think FB is one of the worst/dictatorial things to happen to the Internet. Will it go away--maybe in certain demographic markets, like the Bay Area. I don't run into people anymore asking me to "FB them.", and when I do go on there a lot of people I know only activate on the weekends. Will the rest of the world ever dislike FB--who knows? They still like disco. I've hero worshiped very few tech founders. Maybe it's just me, but I always seem to see there worst traights? Maybe because I was screwed over once? As to all his philanthropic work--it has tax benefits. People lionionize Bill Gates too. I don't get it? We were forced into buying his operating system. It's our money in that nonprofit him, and his wife play God with.
  - wyclif 11y ago
    I don't care much about Facebook's success, but I'm curious about one thing you said here...the "activate on weekends" part. Is this a type of social behaviour in and of itself for Bay Area tech people? You're not talking about logging out of Facebook, I think you mean deleting your account for one-week periods and reactivating it only on the weekend, right?
peter303 11y ago
Work - life balance also means not going overboard on the slacking side too. Plenty of IPO millionaires "retire" and find themselves bored silly after their world trips.

incepted 11y ago

> If I were in his shoes, I'd sell my shares in that website Probably why you're not.

nichochar 11y ago
interesting! I wonder if you're right, or not. I could see both arguments both ways
- sahaj 11y ago
  There's the proof.
wobbleblob 11y ago
Exactly what I said in the last sentence of my post. Thank you for your contribution though.

keerthiko 11y ago

Unlike Microsoft was to Bill Gates, Facebook seems to embody Mark's lifelong ideologies (connecting everyone in the world). He has often said he doesn't see himself doing anything with his life other than building the future of Facebook, just in a different form if Facebook hadn't taken off. On the other hand Gates just hit the lottery on one of the projects he worked on related to a field he was good at, when what he seems to really care about is more grassroots philanthropy work. If he could take two months off he could probably take a few years off, but he would probably just be itching to go back to work on FB the whole time.

ekianjo 11y ago
> On the other hand Gates just hit the lottery on one of the projects he worked on related to a field he was good at Won the lottery, not really. Bill Gates was a harsh businessman who relentlessly fought to kill off competition by all means possible - it was not by mistake that Microsoft became what it is. And, I'd dare say that it has very little correlation with how "good" he/they were at all. Most Microsoft software was utter crap till recent history compared to the existing alternatives - the fact that they managed to secure the market and third party developers was much more relevant than anything else.
- Joeri 11y ago
  Microsoft software was not 'utter crap'. Word won by virtue of being better than WordPerfect. Excel won by being better than lotus. IE 5 was a better browser than Netscape 4, though in that case its superiority was not why it won. Even in the windows vs mac contest windows XP was a much better OS than the contemporary Mac OS, and arguably the best desktop OS of its day. Don't get me wrong. Microsoft software was crap, it's just that the competition was even worse. The quality of modern software is much improved.
  - Bud 11y ago
    I can agree with you about Word and Excel. I personally disagree about Netscape 4 versus IE 5, and I can remember both. You assertion about XP being better than Mac OS X, however, is hilarious. If that's true, why did XP die, and why was Mac OS X so radically more secure than Windows for the last 15 years running? Why was it more stable? Why did it work better? Why did it have a shockingly better UI? XP was crap and we should all be glad it's dead.
    - russgray 11y ago
      XP came out the same year as 10.0, which was rubbish. OS X wasn't really worthwhile until 10.3.
      - 11y ago

plicense 11y ago

Yeah, if he had waned to make money he had plenty of opportunities before Facebook even went public. He has a vision and he is executing it in all his power, never worrying about how much he earns. This reminds of something Vij Rajarajan(big boss in MSFT) told about - "I have realized almost everything in life is a paradox. If you want to grow in your current role you might think you have to not help out others and worry only about your job but in reality you grow by helping out others". I think this also applies to Mark Zuckeberg - if he had wanted to make money the company would not have grown so much. He focused on the vision and now he has made money.

marincounty 11y ago
What? He waited waited until he had enough people hooked, and then, and only then did he go public. He gently pricked our arms with ads. When he didn't get much flack; he went hog wild. This dude is all about the money. Mark didn't want to make a little money--he wanted it all. Hell, he tried to weasel the original founder's fathers money out of FB. Why--because he wanted the money. Oh, the foreign dude didn't were a hoodie, and a tee shirt to the office? Exactly what is Mark's vision? It's money. I thought I got him wrong when I heard Internet.org was going to set up as a California nonprofit, but found out that was just rumor. It's not even a Delaware nonprofit. It's for profit! He'll always have complete control. Personally, I think FB is one of the worst/dictatorial things to happen to the Internet. Will it go away--maybe in certain demographic markets, like the Bay Area. I don't run into people anymore asking me to "FB them.", and when I do go on there a lot of people I know only activate on the weekends. Will the rest of the world ever dislike FB--who knows? They still like disco. I've hero worshiped very few tech founders. Maybe it's just me, but I always seem to see there worst traights? Maybe because I was screwed over once? As to all his philanthropic work--it has tax benefits. People lionionize Bill Gates too. I don't get it? We were forced into buying his operating system. It's our money in that nonprofit him, and his wife play God with.
- wyclif 11y ago
  I don't care much about Facebook's success, but I'm curious about one thing you said here...the "activate on weekends" part. Is this a type of social behaviour in and of itself for Bay Area tech people? You're not talking about logging out of Facebook, I think you mean deleting your account for one-week periods and reactivating it only on the weekend, right?

peter303 11y ago

Work - life balance also means not going overboard on the slacking side too. Plenty of IPO millionaires "retire" and find themselves bored silly after their world trips.