3 ms·
Ordinarily such things shouldn't concern us. One's religion, privately practiced, is a private matter. Mark Zuckerberg is a special case because he is intention
by dTal 10y ago
Ordinarily such things shouldn't concern us. One's religion, privately practiced, is a private matter. Mark Zuckerberg is a special case because he is intentionally driving us towards a "post-privacy" world. So when he's cagey about some aspect of his private life, we should be merciless. He does not get to be The Man Who Kept Privacy For Himself.
- dbbk 10y agoI'm not being obtuse but I'm not sure how he's driving us towards a "post-privacy" world. If he was doing that wouldn't the default Facebook privacy settings be 'Public' and WhatsApp messages not be encrypted?
- dTal 10y agoThis article (the top google result for 'zuckerberg privacy') is a pretty good summary as of 6 years ago, complete with worrying Zuckerberg quotes: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/jan/11/facebook-privacy https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/jan/11/facebook-... tl;dr He defends the constant slackening of privacy control defaults by purporting to believe that it's the natural social evolution and therefore Facebook's manifest destiny.
- michaelbuddy 10y agoHe can try to drive that, he can attempt to lie about himself to seem human but he can't force anyone to use facebook for any extra minute that they don't want to. A trust / consent relationship only works if you have an account and use it. Otherwise he's got nothing and he knows it. Facebook can be another myspace. We've got linkedin, meetup, telephones, texting, insta-whatever and as soon as user engagement dips, advertisers make adjustments, shareholders start asking questions, finding out why and making demands for changes.
- dcwca 10y agoI guess, that's fine for Facebook, but here on HN we get to decide what's appropriate. A story about someone's personal belief in God changing from one thing to another doesn't belong here IMHO.