3 ms·

Honestly, agreed.. Well to start, Facebook is neither good or nor bad - it is not a person and does not have morality. The human mind is not really capable of

Honestly, agreed.. Well to start, Facebook is neither good or nor bad - it is not a person and does not have morality. The human mind is not really capable of dealing with an abstract entity such as a corporation so we anthropomorphize the large mess of people, software, and hardware presenting us a little app on our phones as imbued with a personality and morality. Then we debate whether this mess, which has Zuch's vague face over it, is a personification of good or evil. It's neither - it is a morality-free phenomenon. Facebook's properties have benefits for certain slices of the population in certain instances, and negative effects for other parts of the population. Businesses rely on Facebook's properties for communication, people rely on Messenger and especially WhatApp for communication, artists rely on Instagram for inspiration and social outreach, teens use the properties to connect with each other and to feel sad or happy about themselves in social contexts (as teens tend to anyway). In some cases the teen are happier, in others sadder. I got to know my gf over Messenger, I have wasted tons of time on Facebook, Instagram has been a medium influence on me. Life happens, people happen, and now social media happens. Zuckerberg is the public face of the organization now and it is his life's work. He has an entire society's worth of social media interactions he is tasked with controlling, censoring, and maintaining. People tell him they want it free for some speech, closed for other speech, they want Facebook to hire tons of people to censor and curate the content, they want great decisionmaking, they want to be be free to say anything they want to say (so long as it matches their specific moral values), they want their kids to only see good things online, they want their kids to find what they need but see only what they should see on all of Facebook's multifaceted properties. It is a huge task. Why would Zuckerberg intentionally want to fail at this task and have people hate his company? To make more money? He is not an idiot and knows that the success of the company is dependent on its reputation. How exactly could he NOT do his utmost best to mitigate the negative effects of his properties, enhance the positive effects and thereby positively influence everyone - the users, the company, himself? I don't understand the cynicism which drives all these comments either

annadane 5y ago
> people rely on Messenger and especially WhatApp for communication, artists rely on Instagram for inspiration and social outreach Great. Zuckerberg also bullied the Instagram co-founders out of the company, ditto Whatsapp, and they've routinely lied about both
- goatsi 5y ago
  It's pretty standard that when you sell your company to someone for vast sums of money, they get to control it. Their vision and goals now win, because it's now their company.
hans-moleman 5y ago
Your argument is the same as “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people”. It’s still something with potential to cause a great deal of harm and should be regulated. > Why would Zuckerberg intentionally want to fail at this task and have people hate his company? Nobody wants to fail at anything. Doesn’t stop people from failing all the time. Nobody wants to get fired but if you suck at your job you get fired all the same. You’re approaching this way too logically without considering the social aspects. Stop trying to think like a robot.
- chillage 5y ago
  > Your argument is the same as “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people”. Sort of, the argument is more like "Computers don't kill people. People with computers kill people by starting revolutions, committing online crimes, etc. Also, people with computers do lots of non lethal and helpful stuff as well too." Facebook and mass social media are like that computer. Lots of benefits, lots of detriments as well. Doesn't mean you should cancel the computer.

annadane 5y ago

> people rely on Messenger and especially WhatApp for communication, artists rely on Instagram for inspiration and social outreach Great. Zuckerberg also bullied the Instagram co-founders out of the company, ditto Whatsapp, and they've routinely lied about both

goatsi 5y ago
It's pretty standard that when you sell your company to someone for vast sums of money, they get to control it. Their vision and goals now win, because it's now their company.

hans-moleman 5y ago

Your argument is the same as “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people”. It’s still something with potential to cause a great deal of harm and should be regulated. > Why would Zuckerberg intentionally want to fail at this task and have people hate his company? Nobody wants to fail at anything. Doesn’t stop people from failing all the time. Nobody wants to get fired but if you suck at your job you get fired all the same. You’re approaching this way too logically without considering the social aspects. Stop trying to think like a robot.

chillage 5y ago
> Your argument is the same as “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people”. Sort of, the argument is more like "Computers don't kill people. People with computers kill people by starting revolutions, committing online crimes, etc. Also, people with computers do lots of non lethal and helpful stuff as well too." Facebook and mass social media are like that computer. Lots of benefits, lots of detriments as well. Doesn't mean you should cancel the computer.