26 ms·

But he’s apologizing for everything now, so it’s ok. /s

FredPret 2y ago
Wasn’t he like 21 at the time? We’ve all said some stupid shit and later apologized. The healthiest thing is for everyone to move on.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  AFAIK he didn't move on. He's being tried in real time in multiple countries and still does it. That's part of the problem. I moved on years ago, but he probably still has my data.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  An apology from a serial killer is pretty meaningless if they spend the next twenty years killing people. Same applies here.
- girdie 2y ago
  [flagged]
- lancesells 2y ago
  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/18/technology/meta-instagram-investigation-teens.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/18/technology/meta-instagram...
- 31337Logic 2y ago
  Swing and a miss, Fred. Next time.
- stackghost 2y ago
  No I think the healthiest thing would be to dismantle Meta, seize Zuckerberg's wealth, and roll it into social programs. "Moving on" and letting a social parasite continue to profit from our personal data seems very far down the list of healthy things.
  - taneq 2y ago
    But if we seize his wealth, then we might seize my wealth when I finally become a multibillionaire! I don’t want to risk it. /s
    - fwn 2y ago
      This argumentative pattern comes up regularly. It's the idea that someone arguing against something they think is wrong (on moral, strategic, practical grounds - it doesn't matter) is somehow less valid because it's unlikely that the arguing person will ever be personally affected by it. It's completely bogus, though; technically, it's an ad hominem. A distraction.
      - meiraleal 2y ago
        the argumentative pattern of defending billionaires that exploit society reducing arguments to fallacies also comes up very regularly. A distraction.
        FredPret 2y ago
        My life is materially and socially richer because of Facebook and Instagram. I frequently get laser-focused targeted ads that actually help me discover products I love. Unsure how I’m getting exploited. Seems to me I’m better off all round and all I had to do was to be alive in 2024.
        stackghost 2y ago
        I have never in my life encountered an advertisement that I enjoyed. Nor have I ever encountered a product that I "loved". That is a completely bizarre and alien mindset to my own.
        consteval 2y ago
        I truly cannot fathom there are people who actually enjoy ultra-targeted ads. You understand the purpose of advertising is to attempt to manipulate you into spending money you wouldn't otherwise, right? Even if you enjoy the product, I too enjoyed smoking. A lot. I miss it actually. The point is that it's targeting your brain, and the monkey-brain of humanity in general, with the intention of siphoning money from you to them. Hyper-consumerism isn't a virtue, it's an addiction. Sincerely, I doubt you'd be worse off if you bought less stuff. Or, rather, considered your purchases in a less impulsive manner - buying from an ad is impulsive. I also struggle to understand how Facebook and Instagram have made anyone "socially richer". From where I'm standing, the proliferation of social media has greatly increased all the bad parts of human social nature. Competitiveness, insecurity, self-hatred. These platforms are designed for maximum engagement and as such they target your most sensitive emotion, particularly fear. It's gotten to a point where most people cannot even socialize in-person properly due to the fear. Everyone is hyper-aware of how they may be perceived, and everyone is constantly comparing themselves to others. In addition, fear about the state of the world has been on the rise for a while. There's 0 doubt in my mind that social media has been instrumental to this degredation.
- latexr 2y ago
  > We’ve all said some stupid shit and later apologized. That’s worth nothing if you don’t mean it. It’s not like he apologised and changed his behaviour. > The healthiest thing is for everyone to move on. No, the healthiest thing would be for Meta to stop exploiting everyone’s data. Then we can consider moving on. It’s like a guy is repeatedly punching you in the face, apologises but continues doing it, and you’re saying “well, it’s healthy for us to just move on” while still being punched in the face.
- maeil 2y ago
  We've all greatly accelerated a few genocides in Myanmar and not given a shit. People should stop harping on about it, he's only human!

Wasn’t he like 21 at the time? We’ve all said some stupid shit and later apologized. The healthiest thing is for everyone to move on.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
AFAIK he didn't move on. He's being tried in real time in multiple countries and still does it. That's part of the problem. I moved on years ago, but he probably still has my data.
ceejayoz 2y ago
An apology from a serial killer is pretty meaningless if they spend the next twenty years killing people. Same applies here.
girdie 2y ago
[flagged]
lancesells 2y ago
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/18/technology/meta-instagram-investigation-teens.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/18/technology/meta-instagram...
31337Logic 2y ago
Swing and a miss, Fred. Next time.
stackghost 2y ago
No I think the healthiest thing would be to dismantle Meta, seize Zuckerberg's wealth, and roll it into social programs. "Moving on" and letting a social parasite continue to profit from our personal data seems very far down the list of healthy things.
- taneq 2y ago
  But if we seize his wealth, then we might seize my wealth when I finally become a multibillionaire! I don’t want to risk it. /s
  - fwn 2y ago
    This argumentative pattern comes up regularly. It's the idea that someone arguing against something they think is wrong (on moral, strategic, practical grounds - it doesn't matter) is somehow less valid because it's unlikely that the arguing person will ever be personally affected by it. It's completely bogus, though; technically, it's an ad hominem. A distraction.
    - meiraleal 2y ago
      the argumentative pattern of defending billionaires that exploit society reducing arguments to fallacies also comes up very regularly. A distraction.
      - FredPret 2y ago
        My life is materially and socially richer because of Facebook and Instagram. I frequently get laser-focused targeted ads that actually help me discover products I love. Unsure how I’m getting exploited. Seems to me I’m better off all round and all I had to do was to be alive in 2024.
        stackghost 2y ago
        I have never in my life encountered an advertisement that I enjoyed. Nor have I ever encountered a product that I "loved". That is a completely bizarre and alien mindset to my own.
        consteval 2y ago
        I truly cannot fathom there are people who actually enjoy ultra-targeted ads. You understand the purpose of advertising is to attempt to manipulate you into spending money you wouldn't otherwise, right? Even if you enjoy the product, I too enjoyed smoking. A lot. I miss it actually. The point is that it's targeting your brain, and the monkey-brain of humanity in general, with the intention of siphoning money from you to them. Hyper-consumerism isn't a virtue, it's an addiction. Sincerely, I doubt you'd be worse off if you bought less stuff. Or, rather, considered your purchases in a less impulsive manner - buying from an ad is impulsive. I also struggle to understand how Facebook and Instagram have made anyone "socially richer". From where I'm standing, the proliferation of social media has greatly increased all the bad parts of human social nature. Competitiveness, insecurity, self-hatred. These platforms are designed for maximum engagement and as such they target your most sensitive emotion, particularly fear. It's gotten to a point where most people cannot even socialize in-person properly due to the fear. Everyone is hyper-aware of how they may be perceived, and everyone is constantly comparing themselves to others. In addition, fear about the state of the world has been on the rise for a while. There's 0 doubt in my mind that social media has been instrumental to this degredation.
latexr 2y ago
> We’ve all said some stupid shit and later apologized. That’s worth nothing if you don’t mean it. It’s not like he apologised and changed his behaviour. > The healthiest thing is for everyone to move on. No, the healthiest thing would be for Meta to stop exploiting everyone’s data. Then we can consider moving on. It’s like a guy is repeatedly punching you in the face, apologises but continues doing it, and you’re saying “well, it’s healthy for us to just move on” while still being punched in the face.
maeil 2y ago
We've all greatly accelerated a few genocides in Myanmar and not given a shit. People should stop harping on about it, he's only human!