4 ms·

The lack of understanding Zuckerberg has about image is rather amazing. I think the fact that he has never had a real job - one where he could easily be fired

The lack of understanding Zuckerberg has about image is rather amazing. I think the fact that he has never had a real job - one where he could easily be fired for messing up, has a lot to do with this. You learn very quickly when you or someone else gets hell rained down upon them from a boss who decides they did or said something inappropriate - no matter what the context or meaning was. I know I've seen people get fired, or come close to it, for saying something that I never before would have given a second thought to, but I definitely did after that. So when it comes down to it, there is no way I'm going to risk my professional career by letting my Facebook identity be my public persona. Hell, I even have a rule against having family members friend me on Facebook. It's not about being a different person in each setting, it's about being able to act appropriately in each setting. --Being someone who is viewed as a dependable, professional expert at work, being able to have a serious discussion with my father about my mother's Alzheimer's at home, or being able to relax and let out my inner child a bit with friends. These are all parts of me, but there's a time and place for everything. Zuckerberg doesn't understand that.

PedroCandeias 16y ago
This. All this.
Duff 16y ago
I'm sure Zuckerberg gets this -- it is a pretty blatantly obvious concept. But addressing this technically is hard to do, and likely to be unsuccessful. Think about your own rules that you posted about. How is Facebook going to successfully deal with them? What happens when you decide that some friends get to see the "inner child" and some don't? There are probably ways to accomodate these things, but they are complicated, and 80% of the hundreds of millions of users will screw it up and blame Facebook. So Facebook deals with it by pushing it down to you and making your problems your problem. Don't want your boss to see the pictures of you doing body shots on Spring Break? Don't want your parents to know your sexual orientation? Fine -- don't post it on Facebook, or don't invite people to read it. It's not that Facebook doesn't get it -- they just choose not to get involved.
- michaelchisari 16y ago
  What happens when you decide that some friends get to see the "inner child" and some don't? In Appleseed, you create an "inner child" friends circle, and post it only to them. Nobody else would know that friends circle even exists. It's a challenge, from a UI/UX perspective, but if I could fix it in a way that is generally intuitive, with barely any funds, working in my spare time, then surely Facebook, with all it's engineers and funding can do the same.
  - Duff 16y ago
    I'm sure the engineers could hack something up, no problem. The problem is that Facebook's market defines mass-market -- the unwashed masses need to be able to figure out how to do stuff. That's hard.
- pnathan 16y ago
  Sure, it's not 'simple', but Livejournal had that feature before I even heard of Facebook. Dreamwidth took that concept and made it even more sophisticated. Which is part of why I use Dreamwidth. Under a pseudonym, of course. :-)
Vivtek 16y ago
I have a nephew who works for Menard's. Facebook gives Menard's specific privileges and tools to monitor the accounts of their employees. One of their rules is that management and floor employees can't socialize. At all. Well, my nephew, a floor employee has a friend who is now a manager. By which I mean that the friendship predates the employment. They're smart enough never to post anything on Facebook about anything they do together, but a few months ago they went out for an evening on their motorcycles, and the friend and my niece posted about riding bikes on the same day. Management talked to both of them the next morning, and pointedly threatened my nephew's job. That is the world Mark Zuckerberg is proud of. That is the world he considers to have integrity. Instead of decrying the spread of petty fascism, he figures he can get rich selling the tools. The man is a sociopath.
- awakeasleep 16y ago
  Do you have any more information or links referring to the Facebook-Menard's deal? That sounds scandalously interesting, but I can't find anything discussing it.
  - Vivtek 16y ago
    A careful read of their terms of service reveals no such language - so perhaps (gasp!) my nephew is going a little conspiracy-theory on me on that point. But while I wipe this egg off my face, allow me to reassert that Menard's definitely does do this monitoring, even if Facebook doesn't specifically enable it - and that's the basic problem with this notion of abolishment of all anonymity. I made some comments last week pooh-poohing the "single point of failure" aspect of Facebook identity management - but Zuckerberg's ambition certainly seems to be the single point of failure of society as a whole.
reemrevnivek 16y ago
I tried to have a rule against having professional relations as friends on Facebook, and keep my profile for my friends and family. That failed: My school and professional relationships have a Facebook presence, and try to interact via Facebook. Therefore, I deleted my Facebook account.

PedroCandeias 16y ago

This. All this.

Duff 16y ago

I'm sure Zuckerberg gets this -- it is a pretty blatantly obvious concept. But addressing this technically is hard to do, and likely to be unsuccessful. Think about your own rules that you posted about. How is Facebook going to successfully deal with them? What happens when you decide that some friends get to see the "inner child" and some don't? There are probably ways to accomodate these things, but they are complicated, and 80% of the hundreds of millions of users will screw it up and blame Facebook. So Facebook deals with it by pushing it down to you and making your problems your problem. Don't want your boss to see the pictures of you doing body shots on Spring Break? Don't want your parents to know your sexual orientation? Fine -- don't post it on Facebook, or don't invite people to read it. It's not that Facebook doesn't get it -- they just choose not to get involved.

michaelchisari 16y ago
What happens when you decide that some friends get to see the "inner child" and some don't? In Appleseed, you create an "inner child" friends circle, and post it only to them. Nobody else would know that friends circle even exists. It's a challenge, from a UI/UX perspective, but if I could fix it in a way that is generally intuitive, with barely any funds, working in my spare time, then surely Facebook, with all it's engineers and funding can do the same.
- Duff 16y ago
  I'm sure the engineers could hack something up, no problem. The problem is that Facebook's market defines mass-market -- the unwashed masses need to be able to figure out how to do stuff. That's hard.
pnathan 16y ago
Sure, it's not 'simple', but Livejournal had that feature before I even heard of Facebook. Dreamwidth took that concept and made it even more sophisticated. Which is part of why I use Dreamwidth. Under a pseudonym, of course. :-)

Vivtek 16y ago

I have a nephew who works for Menard's. Facebook gives Menard's specific privileges and tools to monitor the accounts of their employees. One of their rules is that management and floor employees can't socialize. At all. Well, my nephew, a floor employee has a friend who is now a manager. By which I mean that the friendship predates the employment. They're smart enough never to post anything on Facebook about anything they do together, but a few months ago they went out for an evening on their motorcycles, and the friend and my niece posted about riding bikes on the same day. Management talked to both of them the next morning, and pointedly threatened my nephew's job. That is the world Mark Zuckerberg is proud of. That is the world he considers to have integrity. Instead of decrying the spread of petty fascism, he figures he can get rich selling the tools. The man is a sociopath.

awakeasleep 16y ago
Do you have any more information or links referring to the Facebook-Menard's deal? That sounds scandalously interesting, but I can't find anything discussing it.
- Vivtek 16y ago
  A careful read of their terms of service reveals no such language - so perhaps (gasp!) my nephew is going a little conspiracy-theory on me on that point. But while I wipe this egg off my face, allow me to reassert that Menard's definitely does do this monitoring, even if Facebook doesn't specifically enable it - and that's the basic problem with this notion of abolishment of all anonymity. I made some comments last week pooh-poohing the "single point of failure" aspect of Facebook identity management - but Zuckerberg's ambition certainly seems to be the single point of failure of society as a whole.

reemrevnivek 16y ago

I tried to have a rule against having professional relations as friends on Facebook, and keep my profile for my friends and family. That failed: My school and professional relationships have a Facebook presence, and try to interact via Facebook. Therefore, I deleted my Facebook account.