>> At what point of scale do people start imagining they have a right to make demands on how something somebody else built and owns should be run? This is a pr

>> At what point of scale do people start imagining they have a right to make demands on how something somebody else built and owns should be run? This is a pretty weird take. Do you apply the same logic to citizens of a country? I mean, they're just one vote, what right do they have to make demands of a country they only joined 20/30/50/70 years ago? Meta isn't some plucky little privately held startup. Vanguard, Blackrock and Fidelity combined own more than Zuckerberg, and those funds are primarily the savings of individuals and pension plans, so I think people do have legitimate grounds to make demands. He's maintained control without ownership, and I think this makes him extra worthy of criticism. He's highly leveraged and gambling with far more than his own outcome.