7 ms·
Sheryl Sandberg: I want to address some of the claims that have been made
- mixologic 8y agoWhat about the Rohingya, Sheryl?
- kochikame 8y agoEveryone is reading this in Archer's voice
- nickgrosvenor 8y agoIt's over for facebook, they are myspace 2.0. They should count their blessings they bought instagram.
- iKevinShah 8y agoHowever, they're also atleast ^2 times bigger than MySpace and have hands in various portfolios (albeit failing ones or the ones which will fail if they over-monetize it). But still far far from over, IMO.
- shard972 8y agoCome back in 6 months and say that. Not trying to be cruel, but it seems like social media entities like FB seem almost impossible to unseat from their position of being the new public space of the 21st century. Nothing over the last day has been overly surprising and pretty much typical facebook behaviour, doesn't seem like near enough to overcome the demand-side economies of scale they hugely benefit from.
- cheeze 8y agoFacebook is still big, but it is losing it's throne as king. Facebook is only used by older folks at this point.
- yesenadam 8y agoArgh, I keep reading that (your second sentence) on here. Maybe that's true in the US? It's certainly not true in many countries, at all.
- King-Aaron 8y ago> Facebook is only used by older folks at this point. This is objectively false.
- austincheney 8y agoIt is safe to say that social media is a young person's drug. There is an addiction factor that they cannot walk away from. The only thing that could displace Facebook is vaping if somehow that were mutually exclusive.
- sbuk 8y agoIt may be anecdotal, but I know plenty of over 50’s that constantly use Facebook. It's not just a “young persons drug”...
- austincheney 8y agoNeither is crack or meth, but I suspect there are fewer persons in their 70s in the meth scene.
- gingerbread-man 8y agoSpeaking personally, two things have kept me from permanently deleting my Facebook account: my contact list, and apps that require FB sign-in. Facebook's core utility as the web's primary identity provider, and the network effects underlying that position, form a tremendous "economic moat." The amount of time users spend on Facebook.com and the iOS/Android apps may decline and cut into their revenue, but their core platform isn't going away for a long time.
- llampx 8y ago> Facebook's core utility as the web's primary identity provider, and the network effects underlying that position, form a tremendous "economic moat." Maybe its just me being extremely privacy-conscious, but I only ever had Airbnb and Spotify linked to Facebook. I never wanted to link Facebook further into my life than I had to. When I deleted my Facebook account it was simple to convert my Airbnb account, and I just let the fb-linked Spotify account die with it.
- shard972 8y ago> Facebook's core utility as the web's primary identity provider, and the network effects underlying that position, form a tremendous "economic moat." That is one thing i found horrific when i went to delete my FB account. I was denied being allowed to delete it because my spotify was linked and spotify has no functionality to change your authentication method so I had to transfer my collection from 1 account to another just so i could delete my spotify so i could delete my facebook...
- notacoward 8y ago> Come back in 6 months and say that. He probably will. And again six months after that, and six months after that, and so on. Because it's fun and socially rewarding to predict an enemy's demise. Whether the prediction has any chance of coming true is irrelevant.
- fuddle 8y agoI find Google trends to be a good indicator. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=Facebook https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=F...
- Kaveren 8y agoIt might be indicative of something, but how many people are going to be searching for Facebook anymore? There's only so many markets to expand into, and if you have it installed you probably won't search for it much. Not that I necessarily think Facebook is thriving right now, but I'm not convinced that Google Trends is a good indicator for established mainstream applications people already own.
- tminima 8y agoYeah and even in browser one can quite easily open the website using facebook.com. No need to search on google for it really.
- akrain 8y agoThe trend for Facebook has been going down since 2013. That maybe because people are using the app more than they are using it on a browser.
- georgiecasey 8y agotell that to my mother who's addicted to facebook and views it as the internet basically
- SonicSoul 8y agoPeople viewed AOL as internet once. Until they didn’t
- hereiskkb 8y agoFacebook is directly culpable in abetting a genocide level event in Myanmar. Enough said.
- shard972 8y agoAnd what are we going to do about it? Sanction facebook? Fine them? Shame Zuckerberg into doing more? I'm curious how we could actually make facebook do something to fix the current situation but nothing really seems like it would work short of threatening their existence.
- CaptainZapp 8y agoHow about regulating the holy bejeezes out of them? This company does not seem capable to either learn or clean up it's act.[1] https://www.fastcompany.com/40547045/a-brief-history-of-mark-zuckerberg-apologizing-or-not-apologizing-for-stuff https://www.fastcompany.com/40547045/a-brief-history-of-mark...
- cityzen 8y agoDo you have a Facebook account?
- ssijak 8y agoPeople are, not the tools. There are always tools that could be used for bad acts but people are the once who can deicide how to use them.
- 8y ago
- ravenstine 8y ago> We’re no longer working with them but at the time, they were trying to show that some of the activity against us that appeared to be grassroots also had major organizations behind them. I did not know we hired them or about the work they were doing, but I should have. It never occurred to anyone at Facebook to audit what Definers was doing? For goodness sake, make sure you don't read the comments on that post.
- thoughtexplorer 8y agoWhy do you think no one did? That just says that she didn't.
- jakelazaroff 8y agoTwo suspicious things about these claims: 1) In Facebook's official response [1], they say > Our relationship with Definers was well known by the media – not least because they have on several occasions sent out invitations to hundreds of journalists about important press calls on our behalf. But somehow neither Sheryl Sanders nor Mark Zuckerberg [2] were aware of this "well known" relationship. 2) If Definers' job were really as benign as exposing faux-grassroots criticism, why mask the connection to Facebook by going through then? Why wouldn't Facebook respond directly, as they did to the New York Times exposé? [1] https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/11/new-york-times-update/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/11/new-york-times-update/ [2] https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-says-he-didnt-know-facebook-hired-definers-to-discredit-critics-2018-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-says-he-didn...
- smt88 8y agoAt a certain point, their excuse of being naive or ignorant have to stop being believable. They’ve gone to that same well over and over again. Either they don’t know about major decisions of their own company and they’re too incompetent to lead, or they do know and they’re too corrupt to lead. Either way, they need to go. It’s literally becoming farcical to see these people apologize over and over again while displaying the same pattern of greed, tone-deafness, and recklessness.
- jf 8y agoInternet Archive link for those who don’t want to give Facebook any traffic or have the site blocked: https://web.archive.org/web/20181116055923/https://m.facebook.com/717545176/posts/10160967443525177/ https://web.archive.org/web/20181116055923/https://m.faceboo...
- shard972 8y agoSo facebook didn't know that they were paying for the creation of fake news? Seems like they are really going to be up against the wall trying to figure out who their platform is making fake news if they can't even see it under their own nose.
- patrickg_zill 8y agoThey lied to congress directly in claiming during testimony that Palmer Luckey was not fired because of his $10k donation to an anti Hillary PAC. As the recent Wall Street Journal article shows, what FB told Congress was untrue. Why believe them now?
- cityzen 8y agoSay it under oath, Sheryl.
- smaili 8y ago> I also want to address the issue that has been raised about a PR firm, Definers...I did not know we hired them or about the work they were doing, but I should have. To be fair, are COO's normally aware of every firm that the company is working with? I feel like the CFO would need to know given their role in overseeing company financials, but not sure if it would make sense for a COO to be in the loop.
- villgax 8y agoWhat's good, Facebook go home!
- LaserToy 8y agoI think it is time to Lean In and do something, like put your customer first. Honestly, after integrating with your platform 6 years ago, I realized that if you want to post something privately on FB - you just don’t post it.
- pm90 8y agoShe doesn’t address any of the specific facts that investigators found among: * hiring Republican lobbyists to make a good name for FB * Sen. Schumer’s apparently personal involvement in protecting FB * the firing of Alex Stamos, who surfaced Russian Inflirtration This is just another vapid “we’re sorry, we promise to do better next time” posts. Completely meaningless... does she really think SV will be fooled by this crap?
- cjhopman 8y ago> * hiring Republican lobbyists to make a good name for FB ??? There's an entire paragraph in her post about that. > * Sen. Schumer’s apparently personal involvement in protecting FB True, she didn't address that. It doesn't really seem to be one of the major issues people have found offensive. > * the firing of Alex Stamos, who surfaced Russian Inflirtration The NYTimes never claimed that Stamos was fired (and, afaik, no reputable source has).
- pm90 8y agoA social media company getting the Senate leader of one of the 2 major parties in the US on their side is a huge fucking deal. The Stamos firing is mentioned prominently in the article. He seems like the only person with the guts to speak truth to power... and he was fired, his career basically ended, for exposing the truth of a foreign Governments malicious interference? Come on man... this is HUGE. The message She sent with Stamos’ firing was: if you get in the way of our growth, we will git ya. And she hasn’t addressed that in this post.
- cjhopman 8y agoDude, you're full of shit. The article makes only this claim about Stamos's departure from Facebook: "Mr. Stamos and other high-profile executives have left after disputes over Facebook’s priorities"
- cjhopman 8y ago> A social media company getting the Senate leader of one of the 2 major parties in the US on their side is a huge fucking deal. Odd then that in the many comments on this very website discussing the original article (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18453958 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18453958), the terms "Schumer", "Senator", "Senate", and "Sen." never appear.
- decebalus1 8y agoOh dear.. I don't know what to believe. Hasn't Facebook reached the whole 'check with legal' thing yet? I mean seriously, I've worked with companies the size of Facebook and vetting vendors/vendor relations was always a thing, especially for touchy matters (large transactions, government relations, government contracts, PR, anything that touches politics, PACs etc..). I find it hard to believe upper management legitimately has total ignorance.
- dorchadas 8y agoThey're used to getting away with things, and think it's going to keep happening. They've been running unregulated, so have really had no need to check with legal.
- seagullz 8y ago> I did not know we hired them or about the work they were doing... If true, was this by design, to have plausible deniability, much like the willful ignorance on the part of the military top brass when it comes to massacres etc.? Regardless, some lack of coordination seems real even as now the scandal unfolds: > Our relationship with Definers was well known by the media... [https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/11/new-york-times-update/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/11/new-york-times-update/]
- pm90 8y ago@dang.. why has this article disappeared from the front page?
- oculusthrift 8y agohow can we vote for either part when the leader (schumer) is so corrupt?
- anonuser123456 8y agoAs a society we are learning that democracy doesn't work when you vote for the person you least hate, or the other side hates most. Don't vote for a party. Vote for a person, and the person you actually want.
- oculusthrift 8y agooh please really? her excuse is she’s incompetent and didn’t know who she was hiring? and what about the fact that she yelled at the security chief for being honest about russia?
- benwad 8y agoTo clear things up for confused people like me, when she says the IRA she means the Internet Research Agency, not the Irish Republican Army.
- tarboreus 8y agoThat dang IRA is always popping up.
- dshdjdjsjs 8y agoShe used to be attractive