5 ms·

I had a facebook account for a good while, was lazy enough to have used it to authenticate to this very site. I was always somewhat troubled by the way the site

by doron 16y ago

I had a facebook account for a good while, was lazy enough to have used it to authenticate to this very site. I was always somewhat troubled by the way the site privacy system morphed overtime, but it served a great utility for me especially in my social event management, so I let sleeping dogs lie. As I investigated it more (admittedly since social graph announcement and other developments of late ) I decided to remove my account. My decision was based in part due the fact that I have friends and colleagues who do not enjoy the relative safety both political, and social, that I enjoy as an educated white American citizen of heterosexual persuasion. In a sense I feel that it is irresponsible of me to possibly "out" a friend by accident just because it is a non issue for me. I find the statements attributed to Zuckerberg profoundly distressing and ignorant of the world we live in, you don't have to go far to find people who maintain different identities so they can merely survive. it is a lack of intellectual integrity on his part.

philwelch 16y ago
I don't think Zuckerberg--or the idea of transparency--is as naive or ignorant as you point it. It may ultimately be a bad idea but for deeper reasons than "they never thought of people with unusual lifestyles who may be oppressed because of them". Here's the argument: people keep secrets because people keep secrets. Those of us who have different sexual orientations and make other non-traditional lifestyle choices keep it secret because it's socially taboo, but it's socially taboo only because we continue keeping it secret. We'd be better off if that was broken down, but you don't want to be the first one coming out of the closet. Thanks to game theory we're all worse off. That's why you need to change the game. 20 years ago you'd be shocked to find that your uncle was in a gay polyamorous relationship. The idea is to build a world where you won't care because you'll know two dozen gay people and two dozen polyamorous people.
- doron 16y ago
  The idea of transparency resonates with me, but to attribute a lack character to people who do not live and have the opportunity the Mr Zuckerberg enjoys is something i find abhorrent. Transparency starts at home, Facebook is not a transparent organization, if his ideals call for it, he should be the first in line, and his business should tag along. his case would look better if he led by example.

by doron 16y ago

philwelch 16y ago

I don't think Zuckerberg--or the idea of transparency--is as naive or ignorant as you point it. It may ultimately be a bad idea but for deeper reasons than "they never thought of people with unusual lifestyles who may be oppressed because of them". Here's the argument: people keep secrets because people keep secrets. Those of us who have different sexual orientations and make other non-traditional lifestyle choices keep it secret because it's socially taboo, but it's socially taboo only because we continue keeping it secret. We'd be better off if that was broken down, but you don't want to be the first one coming out of the closet. Thanks to game theory we're all worse off. That's why you need to change the game. 20 years ago you'd be shocked to find that your uncle was in a gay polyamorous relationship. The idea is to build a world where you won't care because you'll know two dozen gay people and two dozen polyamorous people.

doron 16y ago
The idea of transparency resonates with me, but to attribute a lack character to people who do not live and have the opportunity the Mr Zuckerberg enjoys is something i find abhorrent. Transparency starts at home, Facebook is not a transparent organization, if his ideals call for it, he should be the first in line, and his business should tag along. his case would look better if he led by example.