5 ms·
Starting with that he invented (or stole, or something) FB? That he ran psychological experiments on unsuspecting users? That even before this election he did a
by Fins 9y ago
Starting with that he invented (or stole, or something) FB? That he ran psychological experiments on unsuspecting users? That even before this election he did allow one side fart greater access than what would be allowed to the other? That he changes how your account can be found in direct contradiction to how you had it configured for years?
That he called somebody "dumb fucks" ages ago is quite a minor thing. Maybe only shows that getting into Harvard does not mean you are that smart.
And yes, one could argue that everyone at Facebook is bad. But Zuck is the one who has control over what FB does, not some peon toiling away at what he was told to toil away at.
- matte_black 9y agoSo A/B testing on users is considered bad now? Getting Obama elected was down right despicable? People not keeping their settings up to date is his fault? And everyone at Facebook is bad? Jesus
- Fins 9y agoA/B testing of link colors if fine, of course. Manipulating users' emotions -- not so much. Interfering in elections, without proper disclosure, and providing data of people who did not agree to it to support just one side -- yes, quite despicable. And if it weren't, then what's the problem with Cambridge? It shouldn't really matter that that one time they've supported the candidate that, I make a guess, you liked. And it's not like the give you a new setting that you need to update. They remove, completely, the capability that you had. You just can't keep it "up to date" with the same discoverability settings you had before just because Zuck decided that you shouldn't. Of course, it's not like every FB employee is given an operatic villain's costume during their orientation. But if you work there, you're enabling it.