36 ms·
A letter to our daughter
- prezjordan 11y ago> We will give 99% of our Facebook shares -- currently about $45 billion -- during our lives to advance this mission. We know this is a small contribution compared to all the resources and talents of those already working on these issues. But we want to do what we can, working alongside many others. Ninety. Nine. Percent.
- anonu 11y agoCrazy. Even crazier when you realize that that 1% is $450 million....
- gordon_freeman 11y agoso Max will still be (half) a billionaire once she grows up.
- fla 11y agoMr. Zuckerberg probably has other assets ;)
- Shengbo 11y agoSo much for the three comma club.
- goatforce5 11y agoAssuming Facebook maintains it's valuation. Empires grow and empires crumble.
- ceejayoz 11y agoChances are at least 1% of their wealth will be put into something stable. Index funds, bonds, treasuries. Hell, cash'd be fine.
- clock_tower 11y agoIndeed. Bill Gates owns a railroad in Wisconsin, for example.
- nandemo 11y agoShe'll be way richer than that. They'll donate 99% of their shares along their lifetimes. In the meantime, they'll get cash in several ways: dividends, salaries, bonuses, etc.
- gordon_freeman 11y agoZuck takes only $1 as salary btw from facebook.
- nsxwolf 11y agoSo she'll be OK. Hope I'll still be able to take care of my kids after Zuckerberg unleashes the flood of H1Bs to lower my salary.
- myth_buster 11y agoNow I don't feel too bad about Fb snubbing Telegram. /s I'm curious how they plan to liquidate that shares as it will have quite some effect on the dynamics of Fb and on this: I will continue to serve as Facebook's CEO for many, many years to come
- hkmurakami 11y agoPledge during lifetime means that they have the flexibility to do the bulk of the liquidation during the latter years of their lives, when perhaps he has assumed only Chairman responsibilities. Also, you can get loans at very low rates by putting shares into collateral. This is how Larry Ellison funds much of his endeavors.
- Cshelton 11y agoKeep in mind that it is of the Facebook shares value, not net worth. Although admirable, it is not apart of the Bill and Melinda Gates pledge that many billionaires (notably, Buffet) have taken of giving away half of their new worth before they die. Anyway though, it's still a lot. And I hope they follow what other billionaires have been doing; not just throwing it at charities, but putting it into research and even funding entirely new projects. Funding startups and research labs that have no economic goal or an economic return to shareholders is something that is very needed. I see much of the funding coming from this.
- nugget 11y agoHow much does he have outside of Facebook shares? A billion or two? So it's still >90% of net worth.
- hkmurakami 11y ago>Anyway though, it's still a lot. And I hope they follow what other billionaires have been doing; not just throwing it at charities, but putting it into research and even funding entirely new projects. You might be interested in reading about Chuck Feeney (the founder of Duty Free Stores), who was the original guy advocating for such hands-on charitable work.
- Arjuna 11y ago"Although admirable, it is not apart of the Bill and Melinda Gates pledge that many billionaires (notably, Buffet) have taken of giving away half of their new worth before they die." Are you referring to The Giving Pledge [1]? Both Mark and Priscilla have signed it [2]: "We salute the Giving Pledge movement, and are proud to be part of its declaration that those who have been fortunate should give back at least half of their wealth during their lifetimes." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giving_Pledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giving_Pledge [2] http://givingpledge.org/pdf/pledge-letters/Zuckerberg_Letter.pdf http://givingpledge.org/pdf/pledge-letters/Zuckerberg_Letter...
- nextos 11y agoI think his point of "We must make long term investments over 25, 50 or even 100 years. The greatest challenges require very long time horizons and cannot be solved by short term thinking." is extremely important. As someone doing research at a top university, I am constantly annoyed by short term vision and optimizing for publication number at all costs. This system is broken. Alfred Sanger got 2 Nobel Prizes, and he spent a lot of time without publishing before each. Clearly something impossible to do these days.
- myth_buster 11y agoAnd on the other hand we have the public companies, lacking strong leadership, forced to look at quarterly returns.
- throwaway999888 11y agoIs _top_ university an important distinction in this context?
- huac 11y agoImplication is competition is paramount - both level and quality of output
- Cookingboy 11y agoIt actually is in my opinion. If the top, elite research institutes show these kind of problem, then we can expect it to be very prevalent in the rest of the field as well. As in, this isn't some no name low tier school run by mediocre people.
- kuschku 11y agoActually, I’d say it’s the opposite. "Top" "Elite" universities are usually optimized for their metric – which is the Shanghai index, which is based on number of publications in english-language magazines. In countries outside of the Anglosphere often research at universities can go a lot slower, as they have no chance in the Shanghai index anyway. The Fraunhofer institute has, in cooperation with Sony, VW and Mercedes, worked on self driving cars since 2002. Sometimes you just have to throw a few million euro and a few decades onto a project to get some results.
- austenallred 11y agoI mean, what else are you going to do with $45 Billion? Build a really big house? I've had the opportunity to rub shoulders with a few billionaires over the past few weeks, and it's remarkable how differently they think about money than the people who don't have it. Sure, they may buy a nice car (or jet), but after a certain level the only thing you can do with that kind of money is plug it back into something meaningful. Hats off to Zuck and the other people who try to turn their success into something even greater than, well, their success.
- AndrewKemendo 11y ago>I mean, what else are you going to do with $45 Billion? You are thinking about it the wrong way. You don't spend $45B on stuff for yourself. You spend $45B on changing the way governments and populations live work and how power is balanced. When Bud Fox asked Gordon Gekko "How much is enough" Gekko knew immediately that Fox wasn't in the same league. Money isn't about stuff, it's about power and influence.
- cwe 11y agoWhich is exactly the type of stuff Zuck is talking about here, although in less power-hungry ways. So you're kind of proving @austenallred's point.
- toomuchtodo 11y agoI think Zuck is still power hungry, he's just more veiled about it. Everyone with enough power (through money) wants to shape the world in their specific ideal.
- AndrewKemendo 11y agoI'd go one better: "Everyone ... wants to shape the world in their specific ideal." Most people give up on this idea in their mid-20s though or never really believe that they can.
- nugget 11y agoI give Mark and Priscilla a lot of credit for this. There's a big difference between 50% and 99%. There's a big difference between leaving your children a few hundred million and many billions. They have certainly exemplified the challenge to ''put your money where your mouth is''. Having said that, the first thing I thought of was the tax implications. If the shares were to eventually be sold (but not donated), the State of California alone would earn roughly 6 billion dollars in tax revenue. And the Federal Government another 13 - 15 billion. Assuming a lot of variables that could push the value up or down, of course, and the fact that they would be unlikely to sell the majority of their shares any time soon. My understanding is that by donating the appreciated stock to a charity, under current laws, there is zero tax due. I wonder if there's a state financial forecaster or analyst in Sacramento having a bad day today.
- marknutter 11y ago> Nonetheless the big winner here is the group of causes they donate to but it comes at the expense of a significant amount of tax revenue Here is the world's smallest fiddle...
- munchbunny 11y agoIn this case it really does just sound like "the tax incentive is working as intended".
- briandear 11y agoGood! Government is far less efficient anyway. How many different agencies and special interest groups does the money now not have to touch to get to where Zuck thinks it's best used? The government would just buy a few more F35s or funnel it to bail out companies like GM. Or squander it on 'investments' such as Solydra or market-distorting Ethanol subsidies. It certainly wouldn't get funneled into meaningful education reform or lowering taxes for the rest of us.
- whatok 11y agoThey didn't announce plans to sell immediately and given the timeframe, I'd imagine that selling/transferring those shares will be done in the most tax-advantaged way possible.
- Fede_V 11y agoChapeau Mr. and Mrs. Zuckerberg.
- suyash 11y agoAt last Zuckerberg realized real problems of the world can't be solved by Facebook or for that matter technology. I am talking about healthcare and medical problems. Personally websites like Facebook are wate of time and barely make ant impact in human potential improvement.They do make us feel worse and sell our personal data to advertisers though.
- narrator 11y agoWith the amount of money Zuk has he should start a non-profit drug maker that produces generic drugs at cost.
- WWKong 11y agoThere hasn't been another other thing that has had as much impact in bringing me closer to my family and friends across the globe. Waste of time for you, positive life changing medium for me. Further, who know what positive impact this have had on my health? Maybe it has prevented the need for medicines in many cases.
- bigbugbag 11y agoExcept for the internet and computers and electricity and a few other things. I hope you understand that your personal experience is anecdotal evidence at best and perception bias for you didn't take into account the downside for the rest of the population. What about this stubborn family member who refuses to have a facebook account because he believes in privacy as a fundamental freedom, how exactly facebook is bringing you closer to him/her?
- WWKong 11y agoAnecdotal? Perception bias? Okay, let's go by hard data. 1.4 Billion active users. Billion of advertising dollar flowing through the platform because users are engaged. How many billions of family pictures shared and enjoyed? You think people are suffering through the experience and being forced to use facebook? Think again. And that stubborn family member with the tin foil hat (edge case), he can surely pick up the phone and give me a call.
- awqrre 11y agoif they break up, it might become 49.5% as this is not a done deal...
- agorabinary 11y agoWill this ~$45 billion go to efficient use? Based on his track record of $100 million to newark and how effective that was, I am skeptical. Good intentions in philanthropy are a dime a dozen, actual results are less common.
- spicyj 11y agoHas it really been so big a failure as the press has led us to believe? https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10102461245925231 https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10102461245925231
- likerofnews 11y agoDid you actually read the results of the $100 million going to Newark instead of blindly believing the media? Probably not... #uninformed.
- sliverstorm 11y agoIf the Newark experiment winds up being a catastrophe, we do still walk away with a postmortem teaching us interesting things about the problems we face, and debunking the notion that all schools need is more money.
- peter303 11y agoImproving schools is HARD for techies and non-techies alike. Education is one of the major iniatives of the Gates Foundation and Mrs Jobs main charity.
- ams6110 11y agoDumping money in to a proven failed approach was not a great idea. He should have founded a separate school system instead.
- bababouy33 11y agoThat would leave him with $450 million left over. Four hundred. And fifty. Million.
- theworstshill 11y agoHe earned it.
- mempko 11y agololz, the army of facebook engineers earned it.
- palmer_eldritch 11y agoNo, they did the work, he earned the money.
- gist 11y ago"During our lives" doesn't specify a time frame such that it will happen in the next 5 years or 50 years. What he appears to be really saying is "our heirs will only inherit 1% of our Facebook shares". Until both Chan and Zuckerberg pass away we don't know how many shares (or wealth) they will have access to.
- Cthulhu_ 11y agoIt's very probable Facebook will get a competitor, and/or make a decision, that makes the company worth a lot less in a very short time, like its predecessors / previous competitors did. Internet companies can be fickle like that. Mind you, it's not likely to happen overnight and it also depends on how much the company's value is based on thin air, but still.
- pcl 11y agoYeah... how's that for burying the lede? I almost didn't get that far through the post.
- ricardobeat 11y agoHe's still left with US$450 million, for living expenses...
- benihana 11y agoWhat point are you making? Are you saying that's a lot or a little? We all read the 99% number. Adding periods between the words puts emphasis on it sure (great job putting in the extra effort to enhance the discussion by the way) but given the nature of this discussion I can't for the life of me figure out what you're actually trying to say.
- sleepyhead 11y agoMark Zuckerburg is now officially the one percent.
- oever 11y agoHe's not giving it all at once. He announced that he plans to give 1-2% of his Facebook wealth per year.
- uptown 11y ago"As you begin the next generation of the Chan Zuckerberg family, we also begin the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative to join people across the world to advance human potential and promote equality for all children in the next generation. Our initial areas of focus will be personalized learning, curing disease, connecting people and building strong communities. We will give 99% of our Facebook shares -- currently about $45 billion -- during our lives to advance this mission. We know this is a small contribution compared to all the resources and talents of those already working on these issues. But we want to do what we can, working alongside many others."
- cup 11y ago"Medicine has only been a real science for less than 100 years, and we've already seen complete cures for some diseases and good progress for others." Thats a bit unfair. Scientists have been painfully working to advance the field of medicine for centuries.
- acchow 11y agoI think "real science" refers to reproducibly, experimentally driven science.
- cup 11y agoArab scientists were performing reproducible and successful removal of cataracts 800 years ago. Surely thats 'real medicine'.
- AndrewKemendo 11y agoUnless you have a very loose sense of the word scientist, that's very much untrue. [1]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2641521/?page=1 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2641521/?page=1
- DasIch 11y agoDoctors have been working to advance the field for centuries certainly but for pretty much all of them science by any reasonable definition wasn't involved in the process. Evidence-based medicine (what else would it be based on?) is actually a thing and an uncomfortably recent one at that.
- rrego 11y agoFirst time I've heard of Facebook Notes, which apparently aren't new at all. The notes that I do see aren't styled the same way as Zuckerberg's letter.
- EA 11y agoAll the notes I have seen lately have this same style.
- Cshelton 11y agoI mean, technically, Facebook has had notes since the early days. I know the format and style has changed, but I remember writing 'notes' on my wall that any friend could read in a dialogue box since around 2005/2006 ish? To that note, very few people I know actually use Facebook notes compared to other blogging platforms.
- austenallred 11y agoFacebook has about 800 million features you would never know existed unless you went digging for them.
- smackfu 11y agoIt's a new redesign: http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/25/9398895/facebook-notes-redesign http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/25/9398895/facebook-notes-red...
- tomasien 11y agoFacebook notes were a huge part of the platform at first, died with expansion of the Newsfeed and the way statuses work now.
- ausjke 11y agoA great read indeed, plus a nice picture. I'm going to print out this and read along with my next generation. I'm thinking about starting to use facebook again, left it a few years ago.
- rrggrr 11y agoI'm not trolling, as much as it will seem the opposite, but I feel compelled to wonder about postnatal mania (mild postpartum psychosis) as I read the letter. I wonder how different (or private) the letter may have been had it come four months from now. I wonder how many really significant acts of charity and kindness by the super wealthy and influential occur in the days following childbirth. Just wondering aloud here.
- littletimmy 11y agoThis leaves a bad taste in my mouth, for some reason. Must one's private life be this public? I get that Zuckerberg doesn't agree with privacy, but surely putting his daughter in the public limelight as soon as she is born is an imposition on her privacy. Maybe I'm just getting old.
- jay_kyburz 11y agoI see you have some downvotes but I came here to say the same thing. Zuck is using the birth of his daughter to advertise a new venture. You want to be generous? Great, do it! Telling us in a letter to your daughter as a hook to attract eyeballs is kind of weird and exploitative. Update: I also thought I should say that this is no big deal, he has some different ideas about what's ok and what's not and I see that every day, I'm not mr perfect either. I guess the reason it's interesting in this case is because he is head of facebook and entrusted with a lot of people's personal information. If his judgment is different to mine then I don't feel comfortable entrusting him with my social life.
- rimantas 11y agoI am in your camp. I cannot even say that our culture is different, plenty of people fillin up FB with photos of their kids, but this just looks so wrong to me. And in this case, some mix of PR and bragging.
- abc_lisper 11y agoWith you littletimmy. I couldn't read it after first few lines.
- SCAQTony 11y agoHe just put his baby into the public eye; now it's paparazzi bait like some Prince's kid in England
- 7cupsoftea 11y agoThis is very admirable. Hats off to Mark Zuckerberg. Very well done!
- djhn 11y agoZuckerberg isn't planning on retiring. He will rival Bill Gates in the magnitude of philanthropic contributions. And in other news Facebook Notes is challenging Medium as the default one-column publishing tool. Note as well, that of all the immaterial goods that have the potential to create immense value to people and humanity, education and health are the ones strongly highlighted. Global equality is there, but to a critic this too will be seen as another factor in building and supporting an ever-growing, and long-living, consumerist middle class. There is very little said about freedom, democracy, privacy, justice or self-determination. Even if this reading is unfair, cynical or simply too demanding of what this text and announcement is. Not to mention detracting from what is otherwise a highly admirable act.
- boxy310 11y agoAccording to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's financial declarations [0], assets as of December 2014 read at a hair under $45 billion. This very much rivals the size, even if it will take some time to build momentum and make as much of a difference as the Gates Foundation has to date. [0] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Who-We-Are/General-Information/Financials http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Who-We-Are/General-Informatio...
- 6stringmerc 11y agoOkay, maybe it's just me, but after reading the introduction and getting through the list of extremely difficult "Can we..." challenges followed by the "We must..." directives, the first quote that popped into my head was a variation of “a poor man is crazy, but a rich man is just ‘eccentric.’” I get the desire to solve the world's ills, of society's shortcomings, of essentially fixing the thousands of years of evolutionary programming to craft a utopia. What sane person would sit down and say "You know, when I die, I want to leave the world a chaotic fireball of pain and suffering" in all seriousness? Maybe I'm significantly jaded, but I hope I'm not the only one who finds such a letter a little bit narcissitic, brought to you by the originator of one of the most narcissitic platforms of the modern era, and hosted on that very platform, naturally. >Our generation grew up in classrooms where we all learned the same things at the same pace regardless of our interests or needs. This isn't true at all. "Our" generation grew up with having to work to acquire knowledge. To spend time in the library. To sit down and read. To think. It took time, effort, opportunity, and personal investment - so much of which is no longer a priority now. >The internet is so important that for every 10 people who gain internet access, about one person is lifted out of poverty and about one new job is created. Citation needed. Like, really.
- rfrank 11y agoI personally can't stand this sort of thing because it conflates something personal/intimate with a press release, and that's just kinda gross to me.
- 6stringmerc 11y agoOh for sure, there's a level of intimacy involved that, in a way, acts as a buffer against criticism. To criticise the lovely sentiment would be like pointing out a child making a half-dozen spelling errors in their letter to Santa Claus.
- rimantas 11y agoExcept in child case you don't doubt their sincerity. In this case I have doubts was this written by parents or by PR department.
- gesman 11y agoAdorable baby girl, welcome to the world. PS: stress and toxicity quite often are the real causes whereby the few diseases Mark mentioned is a consequence.
- zobzu 11y agoWhen I read this stuff (as in the letter) I just think one thing: You guys are so full of yourselves.
- sp332 11y agoThese opinions really are going to have an influence on the entire industry.
- pgodzin 11y agoInteresting how internet connectivity is mentioned without a reference to internet.org after that got a lot of net-neutrality heat. Regardless, great to see so much money being invested in so many great causes.
- aswanson 11y agoI have had some problems with the way his company operates sometimes but I can't find a single thing he said I don't emphatically agree with here. Hat tip, Mark Z.
- rimantas 11y agoI find that I don't agree with the whole thing. It just seems like a PR stunt to me :( Why the fuck are you posting a letter to your daughter across the globe? Why do you have a letter at all, can you just say it to her sometime when she is actually able to understand. I guess for him completely different rules apply, but my wife and I don't even post any pictures of our daughter online nor are we sharing anything about her. She should be able to decide herself, what she wants to put there, when she is able to…
- 77ko 11y agoOne good answer: It totally changed my perception of Facebook. If the guy at the top is trying to save the world, that automatically makes facebook a lot more appealing, not just to me and many other other I know who have historically been quite suspicious of facebook and its overly invasive privacy 'features'.
- pinkrooftop 11y agoI guess we lucked out that our wealth proclaimed leaders are benevolent
- rustynails77 11y agoI will never change my perspective about Facebook. They sell data to the highest bidder and almost certainly use that data to exploit Facebook users. (this contradicts my positive post about respecting Mark for posting the letter). It's similar to Standard Oil. Rockefeller screwed over many businesses and jacked up the price of fuel to great detriment of society (at least in some ways). Then, he donates the money to help society.
- danols 11y ago
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- harryf 11y ago> right now, we don't always collectively direct our resources at the biggest opportunities and problems your generation will face. One of the biggest problems facing kids in the west is digital addiction. Society as a whole is still collectively in denial here as adults gain from it, from parents who get some peace while the kids play with the iPad to game developers pushing out endless FarmVille clones attempting to get kids hooked enough to convince their parents to approve some in-app payments. The problem is already there - just need to look at the amount of Ritalin being subscribed - http://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/may/06/ritalin-adhd-shocks-child-psychologists http://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/may/06/ritalin-adhd-...
- masterponomo 11y agoJust wow. I asked my parents how my birth changed their lives. They said they had to invest in some good ear plugs (for themselves) as a sleep aid, and that they lost a sock drawer until I graduated to the futon. While I did not spark the solving of the world's problems, at least I did have some small impact.
- subdane 11y agoNo pressure or anything. Love, Mom and Dad.
- seansmccullough 11y agoHis daughter is clearly not the intended audience of this post. In fact, the fact he is having a kid has nothing to do with this post.
- kafkaesq 11y agoCan we truly empower everyone -- women, children, underrepresented minorities, immigrants and the unconnected? Yes you can, Mark: Stop requiring people to use real names. And stop caving in requests from authoritarian governments that want to do their dirty work for them.
- chegra 11y agoSometimes, I think people on HN probably think they get points for being the most cynical critic. Can't we just say, "Dude we are happy for you, and thanks for the money." And what happened to the rule about not saying stuff you wouldn't say to a person's face. Would you be calling Mark a narcissist to his face? Keep it civil people.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- dennisnedry 11y agoWhere are you seeing "narcissist" reflected in the comments here? I'm seeing, "ulterior motive". And yes, I think most HN'ers wouldn't hesitate to call Zuck out on that. I know I would.
- Mikushi 11y ago> Would you be calling Mark a narcissist to his face? I definitely would. I'd call him a cunt too. He is one, and in my country you call a cat a cat. None of that tippy toeing around you english people do, Zuck is a horrible person as the last ten years has shown everyone, Facebook is a despicable company with despicable ethics. This letter is vomit inducing, and the comment section is rich people stroking each other for "helping the world" after being major actors in destroying it, fuck them all too.
- sakopov 11y agoOh lovely. This is the same man who called his users dumb fucks in the infancy of his company. Now he's worried about future generations and pushes his corporate agenda innocently using his newborn. Facebook is like a goddamn cult that acts like God's gift to humanity.
- saccrant 11y agoTime to short Facebook stock. Given stock is the best way to motivate executives, when the guy on top is giving all of it away you know where the stock price is going.
- pjscott 11y agoAre you actually shorting their stock, or just blustering? You sound very confident.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- orionblastar 11y agoIt is a lot of promises that are hard to keep. They think they can just throw money at a problem and it will eventually go away given enough time. They think people in communities will give up their bigotry against certain groups without a fight. They think everyone in the future will adopt the same worldview that they have. They think that they can solve poverty by giving everyone an Internet connection on the planet and most people who are poor are illiterate and can't read and write. Like I said a lot of promises. Some problems can't be solved with money, it takes innovation, it takes a new way of thinking, it takes doing things in a way nobody thought of yet. Students who are poor and have family problems have emotional and psychological problems that hinder their learning. No matter how much money you spend on their school, as Gates has learned, their test scores don't go up. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/06/09/how-much-bill-gatess-disappointing-small-schools-effort-really-cost/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/06/... This effort by the Gates Foundation proves that building better schools does not give the students a better education. You see they made the mistake of throwing money at a problem in order to solve it. Five years later and a disappointment in what they had created. Parents of the students get by with low paying jobs, because there is a wealth inequality in our nation. It leads to poverty, family issues, emotional and psychological problems none of which building new schools could address. All of which factor into having a hard time learning and getting better test scores. Why is there a wealth inequality and people have to settle for low paying jobs? Technology has automated most of the good paying jobs so they can be done with computers for free. Microsoft and Facebook for example earn money from technology that does work for others for free and earns money. Websites can operate 24/7 and replace people who take phone calls or work at a desk to fill out forms. Also we used to have factory jobs until we shipped those jobs to China because the labor cost less over there. Getting a good education is only possible if you have a good enough credit rating to get a student loan, if your family is poor and struggles and misses paying bills, you will have a bad credit rating and not be able to get a student loan for college. Not getting good enough grades will lead to a lack of scholarships and other things. People who can't get a college education face a life of hardship working low paying jobs just to get by. Not everyone can become a computer programmer after being a dropout, and then join a startup. Some have to work retail jobs in the service industry and 2 or 3 of those jobs. Not having time to raise their children properly. Not able to help with homework because they work overtime to get enough money to pay the bills. These factors have not been addressed in the future plans for fixing our education system. Sure you can learn a lot on the Internet and even use it to earn money, but most people just use it for entertainment value and communication. So there are distractions to learning on the Internet. But what happens when the freelance market suddenly gets 3 billion more lower wage contractors in it all competing for the limited amount of contracts? I wish I knew how to solve these problems, but I learned from experience that you can't just throw money at them and solve them. You need the government to help out with some sort of basic income program to lift people out of poverty as good paying jobs are scarce because of automation or AI advances. I expect that to get worse in the future. You need better mental health clinics to address the emotional and psychological problems associated with poverty for the students to be able to learn better. You need to find money for tutors to help them with homework when their parents cannot. You need to teach poor students stress management and test anxiety management so that they can o better in tests and learn better study habits and score higher. I've found at least with my son, that the Internet is a distraction for him. Time he could have spent studying for tests, he instead watches Youtube videos and plays video games. I've tried to help him as best as I can, but now he is failing chemistry as a junior in high school but passing his other classes because they are not as hard. We are one of those poor families because I ended up on disability in 2003 and don't earn as much as I used to as a programmer. There is only so much I can help my son, he makes decisions for himself, but I cannot force him to study more or do better on his tests. I feel as if I didn't go on disability we'd be better off and I'd be able to hire a chemistry tutor for him to get his grades up. I forgot as I took chemistry in 1985, and it was so long ago. It is harder to raise a child than you think, esp if you are on a limited income. The school he goes to is a good one with good teachers and modern equipment and they use iPads for ebooks and learning, but it is not enough and still students struggle with their classes. No matter what you do there will still be problems as no system is perfect, and students will still get low mtest grades no matter how good a personalized system you develop. The Dewey System was developed for personalized learning and it failed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey Most of what they are trying to do has already been tried and failed. It is like trying to go against human nature and change the way human beings behave so they can learn better. But human beings cannot be reprogrammed like robots, and almost all of these theories go with the case that human beings can be reprogrammed like robots to create a better community for better learning. It is like trying to solve a social problem using technology thinking, you need to think in terms of society and the way people work, which is not the same way technology works. You need to lead social reforms in communities in a way that makes sense to everybody and not just people on a certain political spectrum that leaves out all others. You will face a resistance to change, as many won't want to change. People will come up with conspiracy theories over the changes, etc. It is a good start to build a different system of education and try to make new communities for education for everyone, but money alone won't solve it, you need the cooperation of everyone in the community to change the way their human nature works and give up on the old ways of doing things. Some won't want to give up on the old ways.
- bikamonki 11y agoDear Max, you are filthy rich. I accidentally created a very successful social network. People mostly use it to post cat pics, drowned babies, whine about everything and the best possible selfies they can take, or you know, post stuff that is addictive to humans. We then sell ads and well, make tons of cash. I say accidentally created because there where already social nets out there but mine was just out at the right time and had the right funding and coaching we needed. Well, honestly, I also had to screw a couple of guys to get here. Anyway, Maxy, all this is ancient and boring stuff. The deal is that since I have tons of cash and success people think I am smart, I think am smart too, so I ought to know a thing or two about how to solve real world problems. I mean it can't be that hard: it is just a matter of developing tech. Billy is throwing 2B to energy research, I can do just the same, see daddy will be a hero too! Anyway dear, this posting personal stuff on Facebook fever just got me and I love you and it is so cool Shakira just likes this post. Also, the post generated a billion views, we sold them ads at premium: your first day on Earth Maxy and you are one million dollars richer! Ok, thats it. Love. Dad.
- keane 11y agoDisappointed once again in the immediate cynicism here but by now I should know not to be surprised by it in any community where nothing is sacred.
- ionised 11y agoWhat should be considered sacred?
- uhtred 11y agoI'm so glad I'm not on Facebook.
- msoad 11y agoThis is really cool. I kind of missed notes in Facebook. How do you create one?
- scott_karana 11y agoThe "Notes" app in the sidebar.
- ryandrake 11y agoSomething's always bugged me about relying on philanthropy as a source of funding the public good, as opposed to the public funding the public good through taxation and the democratic process: In the former case, the public doesn't really have much of a say about where the help goes. We must rely on the judgment (and personal values) of a few rich people and hope they pick charities that maximize the benefit. Would the outcome be better or worse if we had, say, a 99% tax bracket at >$N million, and let the public decide the best way to deploy that funding via the ballot box? Would that process better align with the values of a democratic society? Or would we just get more corporate welfare, bombers and aircraft carriers? I'm not ragging on philanthropy--it's awesome that some of these billionaires understand the meaning of "enough" and choose to give away their fortunes to worthy causes. But is it best for society to leave it to a few lucky 'elite' to judge what is and isn't a worthy cause?
- dragonwriter 11y ago> Would the outcome be better or worse if we had, say, a 99% tax bracket at >$N million, and let the public decide the best way to deploy that funding via the ballot box? If we had that and still had charitable deductions, I suspect more public goods would be funded by charity rather than public decision-making then is now the case, since the marginal cost of charity giving would be much lower.
- bigbugbag 11y agoYou're suspecting wrong. In the sense that less public goods and services are funded today on a global scale due to facebook tax evasion scheme. Even with a 99% tax on Zucker's fortune, it would still be diverting money from countries around the globe towards the US, in other words the already rich and destroying condition favorable to human life USA would get richer by making the poor poorer. In a world with no countries, it would make sense. In the current world it would be another way for the USA to abuse and exploit the rest of the world.
- 6stringmerc 11y agoHopefully you're not the only one, as I share your reluctance to embrace it as the "go-to" model of social constructiveness. There's a lot of good that comes from people "giving back" in one form or another, be it financial, skilled labor, or just simple time and attention when possible. I think it's admirable to want to change "institutions" like education for the better - I've been an advocate for 'progress' ever since I saw some of the challenges back in my own youth - but I can't help but think of such experiments as pet projects. Those can be productive, sure, but do I believe, deep down, that the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative is going to have the answer to the variety of problems that plague Chicago's South Side, New Orleans, or any number of troubled communities? Sigh, might just be me.
- nbardy 11y agoReading this is impossible to not to think of Bill Gates. Someone who realized the impact his money can have. Many people in this industry have been influenced by the actions of Gates, especially in the tech community. As a 20 something the money I make certainty pales in comparison to that of Gates or Zuckerberg, but even at a low rate for the tech industry it is much above that of my friends, many of who have worked much harder to get to where they are. It is difficult to be in a position to give help and refuse. Perhaps the effect Gates can have on the minds of the wealthy will be even greater than the already vast contributions he has produced.
- throwaway999888 11y ago> Today your mother and I are committing to spend our lives doing our small part to help solve these challenges. I will continue to serve as Facebook's CEO for many, many years to come, but these issues are too important to wait until you or we are older to begin this work. By starting at a young age, we hope to see compounding benefits throughout our lives. In other words, I'm getting in on this philanthropy thing at a much younger age than Bill Gates.
- hvis 11y agohttps://www.facebook.com/chanzuckerberginitiative/ https://www.facebook.com/chanzuckerberginitiative/ "Please log in to continue." Seriously? One might think they would prioritize raising awareness over increasing Facebook userbase.
- supergirl 11y agoEvery rich guy thinks he knows what's good for the world. And why announce this together with the birth? Should the world celebrate this miraculous event that also led to our salvation?
- astaroth360 11y agoWell, I'll say that I appreciate the effort on Zuck's part, but somehow I still can't make myself like the guy :\ Oh well, I guess I don't have to like him to appreciate that kind of cash going into worthy causes.
- colmvp 11y agoI feel only on HN and Reddit can people find reason to criticize a guy who is giving away billions of dollars for humanity. Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.
- afterburner 11y agoWho runs the initiative?
- myth_buster 11y agoI think it's a good sign if people don't take words at face value and be critical of it.
- kansface 11y agoTheir public pledge to donate 45 billion dollars to charity within their lifetimes with an eye towards long term solutions deserves criticism? Seriously, WTF?
- peterwwillis 11y agoThe scope of this pledge in combination with the dollar amount would stretch so thin that it would have the net effect of giving every child in the world $20 and saying, here, go improve the quality of your life. So, yeah, if he wants to open himself up to public scrutiny with a tastless "letter to my daughter that i'm actually making for the public because my daughter can't understand this for another 10 years", people are going to criticize. But he has 45 billion freaking dollars, so I doubt he cares.
- myth_buster 11y agoIf I may paraphrase the sentiment here: Firstly, Their public pledge to donate 45 billion dollars That number is based on current valuation of Fb and cannot be equated to someone writing a check for $45B. If Fb goes the MySpace way, how much is that donation worth? Secondly there appears to be a duality between how the company operates and what this post tries to rally for. Finally, using the pretense of writing a letter to their newly born daughter rubs some the wrong way.
- roymurdock 11y agoMark has set some ambitious goals regarding poverty, disease, nutrition, and equality, and connectivity. I hope for all of our sake that he is successful in realigning many of the perverse short-term incentives through his and his Priscilla's generous contributions and efforts. I wish he had spoken more about luck and balance. This is something that Bill & Melinda Gates, as well as Warren Buffet do very well. Understanding luck and balance is the key to empathy, which is also a phrase that is missing from this letter. I also wish he had not marketed this press release as a letter to his daughter. Perhaps he has another, private letter that is actually more relevant and personal, but if I were Max, I probably wouldn't be thrilled to read this 20 years down the road. But I'm sure he had a reason to release this letter as he did, and that he thought for a long, hard time before penning these words. Best of luck to the new father, mother, and daughter.
- rustynails77 11y agoMost of these things can be achieved, but I really don't understand what most people expect from equality. For example, does equality mean that if I sit on my ass and do nothing, I get the same as the person next to me who works their butt off? Or does it mean that I get a fixed amount based on the effort I put in? How is that effort measured? When people talk about equality, I'm not sure if they mean equal opportunity or equity or utopia (knowing that utopia depends on a slave class). Maybe it means something else. The reality is that humanity has empathy and greed (noting they are not opposites). I can not imagine that I will ever see every person equally.
- personomas 11y agoIn this example, equality means that if you act in your best nature, you deserve as much as any other person who acts in their best nature. If sitting on your butt is the best thing, then yes you deserve as much as the next person, likely though sitting on your butt is not the best thing.
- anon4this1 11y agoI'm dismayed by the lack of focus on the environment here. Humans as a species are doing just fine. Health gains just marginally improve that. We need to focus on finding balance with nature that doesn't involve mass extinctions and subjugation.
- intjk 11y agoI suspect he looked at his daughter and saw the faces of billions. Not to say you're incorrect.
- mei0Iesh 11y agoSome thoughts: * Addressing a public press release to your private child's name * Naming the initiative with your family's name * Calling for "change now" as if the world isn't already working very hard every day towards progress * Looks like a move out of a strategic playbook some advisers gave for "how to be President someday" * Looks like they're marketing themselves as the royal family, like Facebook is the new kingdom * Looks like that smug thing that's hip today where people compete to be most charitable * Reminds me of the Melinda and Bill Gates thing, and the Google medical research thing Part of this is the perspective of engineers who believe everything is solvable if you just build something to do it. If it isn't built yet, it must be because we're not working hard and fast enough. That if someone has billions of dollars, and are just willing to fund an initiative, they can take credit for curing all disease. Part of it is the fear that's faced by people who felt invincible when they become old, or have a newborn infant. When you can purchase anything, the new difficulties are things like bacteria, viruses, and entropy. When you are a god in the eyes of the society and economy, yet a worm in the eyes of biology and ecology, there's no longer a clear path towards how to solve your daily concerns. If you're poor and need food, there's simple steps you can follow to acquire what you need. But when you're wealthy, what do you do to get well from illness, to escape the pains of aging? These people, and much of the digital society today, need perspective and psychological understanding beyond what they have. But you won't see an initiative for that.
- bababouy33 11y agoWow, that's a lot of pro-facebook comments for a "Hacker news" site. Shouldn't you people be browsing reddit or better yet, facebook?
- altonzheng 11y agoOkay yeah there might be a lot of flaws or criticisms about this, but at the end of the day, this is a net win for society. Go Mark and Priscilla!
- jordigh 11y ago> Your generation will set goals for what you want to become -- like an engineer, health worker, writer or community leader. Realistically, we can't all avoid being garbage collectors or street sweepers, can we? Or will automation really replace all unsavoury jobs with high-paying professions?
- wityak 11y agoExpensive shot at Bezos and his distate of charity. Well played, Zuck.
- spicyj 11y agoHow is this at all related to Bezos?
- tmsh 11y agoI think this letter and http://givingpledge.org/ http://givingpledge.org/ are good. But we all give away wealth when we die. To someone or another. The pledge is not necessarily one of generosity other than looking past one's family. Which is something, but less impressive along the generosity dimension than giving away more earlier (while that money has a very real opportunity cost to you). That said, if I had billions of dollars, I'd be investing in my own research and not giving it away. But that's just me.
- queryly 11y agoThis is amazing. Money doesn't make us live longer, but does $45 billion help bring the future sooner? I bet it does. It will widen our horizons on what's possible. Everyone on earth will benefit from it.
- webwanderings 11y agoNever much cared for Zuckerberg but this changes my perspective. Off-topic: can Facebook please go ahead and literally kill the blogging industry by giving the ability for everyone to use these updated Notes section? As is, the majority of the referrer on the Internet is Facebook. They might as well get the blogs out of the way.
- shopkins 11y agoI agree, let's put the entire internet in Facebook. News like this just proves Zuckerberg knows best. /s
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jordigg 11y agoHope many more will follow, my sincere admiration. Here the SEC filling: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000132680115000035/form8kdec2015.htm http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/0001326801150...
- awl130 11y agofrom an evolutionary psychology standpoint, we are all driven to constantly increase our social value (and indirectly that of our offspring). once you hit a certain level of wealth, it is rational for you to shift your attention from making more money. your social value is only increased by wealth up to a certain amount, after which the marginal returns in social capital approach zero for every additional dollar earned. to put it simply, how much more social value do you have with $1 billion versus $2 billion? The world is indifferent. At that point, you are simply a rich person. once you reach such an inflection point of wealth, you must find an alternative means of increasing your social capital. there are two common ways: one is to demonstrate your evolutionary fitness in a field completely unrelated to how you amassed your wealth: many rich get into movie production, novel writing or other creative endeavor. These usually fail. another alternative, the safer alternative, is to expend your remaining time and resources advancing social causes (running for an elected office certainly falls under this category). this is the simplest way for an adult, untrained in anything other than their primary business, to increase their social capital. it's not a coincidence that zuck is still willing $450mm to his offspring--more than enough to hit that inflection point. he knows that any additional dollar beyond that inflection point provides marginal social value to his offspring.
- dhcar 11y agoThis seems more like PR than a genuine letter to a child. Which is fine, but I wish they'd treat it as such. They talk about facebook, donations, improving the world, their beliefs, etc. but very little on how to be a better person or how to enjoy life. Maybe I'm projecting, but what would you want to find in your pillow after moving in for your first day of college? I hope they wrote their daughter a real letter. One directed to her and not something that will be tweeted by hundreds of news organizations.
- soared 11y agoTelling her they're donating $45B seems like a clear message on how to be a better person to me. Selflessness and the desire to improve the world.
- sparkzilla 11y agoIsn't the birth of a child enough of a celebration, without smothering it in a multi-page manifesto?
- DaveWalk 11y agoMy brain hurts just reading through this letter. I'm trying to picture my parents -- or anyone's parents! -- writing: "Your mother and I don't yet have the words to describe the hope you give us for the future... Our hopes for your generation focus on two ideas: advancing human potential and promoting equality... We can do this work only because we have a strong global community behind us. Building Facebook has created resources to improve the world for the next generation. Every member of the Facebook community is playing a part in this work... Love, Mom and Dad" Philanthropy aside, doen's this "letter" read like a scene from the Silicon Valley TV show?
- Mark1999 11y agoThanx Mark. Now that your CIA financed endeavour became a money making machine, you find it is about time to contribute some sort of "philanthropy" to the world. It is no wonder the millions of serfs don't waste any time to congratulate you on this great action of yours. Please, a word from the world to American based institutions: Please, stop saving the world. Really, look at what your government is doing to Syria, etc supporting terrorists through CIA controlled channels. And for God's sake! Read the reports from World Bank before posting this "i will save the world" letter: Poverty and inequality have risen during the last years, not decreased!
- canes2001 11y agoMany wealthy citizens have only used their wealth to enrich themselves and their families. It is nice to see someone that is focused on making the world a better place.
- cpursley 11y agoWhy are the techno-barons so focused on human health? Not that there's anything wrong with these efforts, but human disease is much less of a threat to our species and planet than an ever-increasing human population. What I'm saying is that humans have little difficulty reproducing; it's a solved problem. What's not a solved problem is our disappearing fisheries[1], rhinos going extinct all over the place[2], farmland desertification[3], tropical deforestation[4], ocean acidification[5]... From my back of the envelope math, it seems that longer lives and a larger population will exacerbate our environmental and resource issues. I'd like to see billionaires purchase large tracks of land simply for preservation. Cleaning up industrial waste from rivers. Foot the salaries of anti-poaching efforts. Get clean fusion energy production up and running. That sort of thing. Perhaps we should get our planet's shit together before tackling immortality? [1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/06/03/the-end-of-fish/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/06/03/t... [2] http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/16/africa/kenya-northern-white-rhino/ http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/16/africa/kenya-northern-white-rh... [3] http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-34790661 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-34790661 [4] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/30/indonesia-fires-disaster-21st-century-world-media http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/30/indones... [5] http://fm.kuac.org/post/increasing-ocean-acidity-threatens-marine-food-web-circumpolar-waters http://fm.kuac.org/post/increasing-ocean-acidity-threatens-m...
- bigbugbag 11y agoManoj Bhargava is doing something similar: https://imgur.com/gallery/teGsT https://imgur.com/gallery/teGsT
- msellout 11y agoTed Turner bought a bunch of land.
- erkaes 11y agoI heard that healthy human is the key to sustainable population. Less-healthy human condition tend to make human have more babies since mortality rate on their babies are higher.
- deleted 11y ago
- dpc_pw 11y agoAren't this "foundations" essentially just tax loopholes for the rich? http://www.salon.com/2013/04/12/10_tax_dodges_that_help_the_rich_get_richer_partner/ http://www.salon.com/2013/04/12/10_tax_dodges_that_help_the_... read point 4.
- bigbugbag 11y agoyes, yes they often are.
- dmix 11y agoThe problems with these tax systems are far greater than just the wealthy exploiting income tax. There are so many hidden costs in the endless complexity of the tax and financial systems in nearly all of the modern Western governments. It's a shame people rarely protest the sytematic issues, preferring to attack people or specific groups of people (often the wealthy or left vs right) - which are positions that generate adversarial responses rather than rational counter-arguments: http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/ The surest way to minimize abuse/loopholes while being supported by rational a-political benefits: Flat tax + basic income. Eliminating millions of hours of wasted time due to beaurocracy (and while treating each social class with consistent dignity). These arguments are more likely to be persuasive to politicians - both left and right. This is a lesson I believe the general public missed after the whole Occupy movement failed to result in much political change. The problem with the obsessive focus on "the 1%" was that it generated an us vs them response, further entrenching positions on both sides and further distancing already strained policial/social group relationships. For example: the simplification of taxes would very likely increasing the speed at which people file taxes and therefore signficantly increasing the speed that tax revenue could be collected annually, while reducing the amount of time they spend chasing down people who fail to do taxes. <- These are the types of a-political positive benefits I hope will eventually get attention one day to make the previously mentioned policies less of a pipe dream.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- pg_is_a_butt 11y agoyour dad is a bitch, and your mother is chubby. love, zuck
- FussyZeus 11y agoWhen things like this pop up, as well intention-ed as they may be, I just think to myself, if this were just a regular guy and not famous, would anyone give a shit?
- abalone 11y agoCouple problems with this otherwise well-intentioned effort: 1. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what governments spend on a regular basis trying to solve these problems. (Bill Gates has said as much.) 2. Private charity by the billionaire class is not a scalable solution. Historically most social advancement has happened through popular organization and government programs, not charity. Silicon Valley itself is a product of government spending. The Internet and thus Facebook wouldn't exist without billions of taxpayer investment in early stage high risk research and procurement via DARPA and other government agencies. That continues today (just a couple examples: Siri and autonomous vehicles). If we are serious about accomplishing social change and "long term investments over 25, 50 or even 100 years," the answers lie in greater government investment in these areas. Just like Silicon Valley. And that means all Silicon Valley companies should be paying back to the government just as they would an early stage investor. Not as a "noble choice" but as an obligation. (Currently they get the core tech pretty much for free.) That would drum up an order of magnitude more funding for much-needed social projects. I'd like to hear more Silicon Valley CEOs talk about that.
- jnpatel 11y agoTo quote the letter itself: "We know this is a small contribution compared to all the resources and talents of those already working on these issues. But we want to do what we can, working alongside many others."
- abalone 11y agoA far cry from "we know this is payback for public investment in tech companies, and we call on all of silicon valley to support formal remuneration to the federal government to give back to the public."
- NN88 11y agothis melodramatic bs
- fantasticsid 11y agoReading some of the comments make me sad. This has happened so often lately..
- derefr 11y agoAs far as I can tell, this is a speech directed at other billionaires, attempting to 1. put them in an idealistic frame of mind and then 2. making the suggestion that the natural outlet for that idealism is philanthropy, while 3. Putting his own money where his mouth is for some peer-pressure. If that works, then this will singlehandedly be the highest-ROI "evangelism" anyone has ever done. Unlikely, though.
- breakyerself 11y agoWell I hope he learned something from the boondoggle his grant to Newark schools turned out to be.
- dimdimdim 11y agoAs I said in previous post --- if I were writing a letter to my son, it would be a private affair and not posting it worldwide on FB. Also, there is a huge difference between pledging to donate during our lifetime and "donating". Anyone can make that pledge and then decide a comfortable schedule.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- melted 11y agoI like Zuck. He seems to have picked the right role model to follow (Bill Gates). I just hope he cashes out before a credible competitor takes over.
- charlie_vill 11y agoThank you Mark.
- robinsen 11y agoThe heading is attractive
- salgernon 11y agoIn the end, the only thing anyone has to give is their time. How many billions of hours are spent daily on Facebook? His fortune is won on the backs of those poor fools. It ain't gonna happen, but shutting down Facebook now would be a greater philanthropic act. (Yea and obviously OtherFacebook would come online.)
- gabea 11y agoIt is unfortunate that we cannot accept the kindness and generosity from those who have been blessed with wealth and whom wishes to share it with others. Rather we ridicule them and surmise that they have some hidden agenda behind their desire to share.
- seanlinehan 11y ago> Can we truly empower everyone -- women, children, underrepresented minorities, immigrants and the unconnected? Part of me thinks that Zuck means people without family or otherwise ties to wealth and influence. But another part of me thinks that he means those that aren't connected to the internet. If it's the latter, this is quite the bold statement. The implication would be that people without access to the internet are structurally disadvantaged. Which in a lot of ways are true. The internet enables anybody to acquire knowledge, skills, and relationships with an ease that is otherwise impossible. Thankfully, this bucket has a fairly clear solution path.
- YorkianTones 11y agoApplause to the Zuck for the public commitment to invest 99% of his fortune in charitable causes. Providing cheap, reliable internet to underserved areas of the planet seems like an achievable goal. Much of the technology is present, and so this goal can be attacked now given available funding. The technology should improve further and become cheaper in the near horizon. Go for it Zuck. Make a dent. "Curing disease", however, or "learning and experiencing 100x more than we do today" - these trite and nebulous platitudes seem line lines stolen from HBO's Silicon Valley script. "Eradicating polio" is a concrete, well-scoped, measurable, and realistic goal (regardless of whether its is the best apportioning of resources). "Curing disease" is not. Does someone who's married to a doctor really believe that all disease is eradicable in the next 100 years? Must we resort to impossible moonshots and unqualified invocations like "Make the world a better place!"? Something like "colonize space!" is not a helpful goal; "build a habitation on Mars which produces enough food, water, and O2 to sustain 5 people for a year" begins to be. This pedestrian rallying cry is a chaotic amalgam of cliches. I hope Zuckerberg puts more thought, organization, and direction into how he will invest his billions for the betterment of posterity.
- o0-0o 11y agoThis would have been a lot more genuine if he had just wrote the letter - tucked it away - and then let his actions do the talking. When a choice is between doing the right thing loudly, and doing the right thing quietly, the amount of noise you make is the inverse of the size of your dick. ~_^
- zurn 11y agoWow, addressing climate change and unsustainable resource consumption are absent from the list and "protecting the environment" is once mentioned in passing.
- nemo44x 11y agoNew money mistake. You don't change the world by putting your money into non-profits but rather cultivating a dynasty that has tentacles in business, government and thus policy. You consolidate this kind of wealth into the proper channels to influence public opinion and thus a much greater sum (measured in trillions) over a greater time to get the real change you believe in. It's a good gesture but a losing strategy. But it's his money to do as he pleases so, cheers Zuck.
- ForFreedom 11y agoKayne and Kim named their son, North Mark and Priscilla named his daughter MAX.
- jpeg_hero 11y agoPatrick Bateman -- World problems speech https://youtu.be/dZlK_ThjMk4 https://youtu.be/dZlK_ThjMk4
- fijal 11y agoI think a bad sentiment here is mostly generated not about what Mark says on his post, but what he does otherwise. We've seen a fair share of controversy regarding facebook, privacy practices etc, we've seen a fair share of controversy regarding internet.org. I for one find it all skeptical - I don't see how his ideas would align with facebook goals as a company
- frame_perfect 11y agoActions speak louder than words.
- robert_tweed 11y agoMaybe I'm being too cynical, but this seems about as philanthropic as Ron Hubbard starting a religion. Firstly, the donation is stock not cash, so the value of this foundation will be directly linked to the value of Facebook shares. Secondly, it has been stated that one of the things this foundation will do is "participate in policy debates". If the headline was "Mark Zuckerberg to put $45 billion is stock behind lobbying effort to establish Internet.org as a monopoly in developing countries", that wouldn't sound quite so positive, would it?
- Veedrac 11y agoI think you're being too cynical. So what if the donation is stock? Since when does > We must participate in policy and advocacy to shape debates. Many institutions are unwilling to do this, but progress must be supported by movements to be sustainable. mean "lobbying effort to establish Internet.org as a monopoly in developing countries"?
- youFuckingIdiot 11y agoBu..but he clearly knows how to put billions of dollars to better use than the guy who earned said billions of dollars.
- morgante 11y agoIt sincerely depresses me that the top comment on Hacker News is so incredibly cynical. The man is giving away a huge amount of money and you can only find ways to detract. > Firstly, the donation is stock not cash, so the value of this foundation will be directly linked to the value of Facebook shares. So? The vast majority of his wealth is in Facebook shares. That doesn't change the fact that he's giving away the vast majority of it. You think he should have sold it all now, destroyed its value, and donated a much smaller pot? > it has been stated that one of the things this foundation will do is "participate in policy debates". One of many things. Not to mention he has never attempted to make Internet.org anything close to a monopoly. That your reaction to an incredibly charitable act is such pure cynicism is absolutely disgusting. There are plenty of billionaires who hoard their money or perpetuate hereditary fortunes, and those who don't should be commended.
- zeofig 11y agoIt astounds me that people are taken in by this. There are so many ways that Zuckerberg can manipulate this to his self-worshiping benefit that I can't even guess which ones he'll pick. Consider the type of charity Zuckerberg has previously favoured: totally monopolistic internet infrastructure in India. Sure, people get internet, but it'll Zuckernet from now until forever. Philanthropy is a broken system, because powerful philanthropists never really give away their money: they retain control of whatever the charity is used to build. When you have everything and it's not enough, that kind of control is worth a lot of dollars to you.
- DanBC 11y agoDo you think your comments apply to Bill Gates?
- zeofig 11y agoIt's less clear cut with Gates because he has a quite different personality to Zuckerberg. Gates has a genuine desire to understand and fix things, although that is amongst his more positive traits. Zuckerberg/Facebook, on the other hand, has well-documented antisocial and indeed malicious behaviour.
- andr3w321 11y agoI'm all for rich people giving their mass fortunes to charity but they sure do seem to take a long time to do it. Bill Gates is STILL the richest person on the planet in 2015 and his wealth GREW $3.2 billion last year. Can we save the praise for giving away $44 billion until he actually gives it away? Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kerryadolan/2015/03/02/inside-the-2015-forbes-billionaires-list-facts-and-figures/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kerryadolan/2015/03/02/inside-th...
- petewailes 11y agoIt's actually quite hard to give away money faster than you get it above a certain level of wealth. I suspect this reflects more the performance of the investments Bill has than the level of charitable investment.
- tmsh 11y ago"He has informed us that he plans to sell or gift no more than $1 billion of Facebook stock each year for the next three years and that he intends to retain his majority voting position in our stock for the foreseeable future." http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000132680115000035/form8kdec2015.htm http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/0001326801150... What an amazing donation! But not for the foreseeable future. I don't care how multiplicative his voting shares are. If there is no plans to sell them in the foreseeable future, this is a pledge spread out across a generation, decades, while real problems are affecting us every year. Every year where he just capped himself at 1 billion dollars in donations. Why are you applauding this?
- youFuckingIdiot 11y agoHow dare he donate only $1 billion each year? He's literally Hitler.
- youFuckingIdiot 11y agoAgreed
- youFuckingIdiot 11y agoKill yourself, you fucking idiot.
- hellofunk 11y agoI'm signed up for CNN's "Breaking News" emails that are sent out whenever some earth-shattering crisis occurs or particularly important news that affects everyone. I received one of these email alerts upon the arrival of their daughter. This gave me a great sigh; good news for them, but how did it become worthy of worldwide immediate news notification?
- erikrothoff 11y agoYou didn't read the article did you?
- hellofunk 11y agoI did. What does that have to do with CNN Breaking News?
- DyslexicAtheist 11y agoI'm so excited about the trickle-down economics that I can hardly curb my enthusiasm
- seanhandley 11y agoI find it disgusting that he's just had his first child and is already piggybacking a PR exercise off it. In spite of the enormity of the announcement, to tie it up as "A letter to our daughter" is deeply crass and makes me feel queasy.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- poub 11y agoI would have loved having parents writing such beautiful letter to me for my birth. It’s an extraordinary beautiful welcoming.
- artur_makly 11y agohttps://imgflip.com/i/v2fo1 https://imgflip.com/i/v2fo1
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- lagudragu 11y agoNot to be cynical, but isn't this also just a method to ensure your company will remain for a longer duration? As a decline in facebook stock will indirectly hurt the philanthropic projects which are linked to it through his foundation. I would take his "pledge" more serious if he would invest actual capital (money, resources, ...) in such projects.
- cJ0th 11y agoAlternative proposal: Use that money to turn Facebook into a self-sustaining non profit that solely cares about maximizing its users experience and stop breaching privacy so that data can be sold. Perhaps that's not as fancy as investments in health, education or the environment but at least it seems very doable and could solve one problem (excellent means for human communication) for good.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jordache 11y agoso you equate to internet monolopy as impactful as curing diseases?? So the dude is doing something else you find objectionable, but it doesn't come close to good stuff he is trying to accomplish.