5 ms·

The accumulated evidence of Zuckerberg's poor character was already overwhelming. For me, all it took was the infamous "dumb fucks" quote to make me decide to n

The accumulated evidence of Zuckerberg's poor character was already overwhelming. For me, all it took was the infamous "dumb fucks" quote to make me decide to never use Facebook. That alone disqualifies someone to be a responsible custodian of my privacy. This article's evidence isn't as significant as other established facts like Zuckerberg's invasion of other people's email accounts, but it is consistent with everything else we know: in one of the modern world's great ironies, a person with no respect for his fellow human beings is the de facto gatekeeper of "friendship" on the net.

fletchowns 14y ago
How old was he when he made that comment? We all do/say dumb things when we are young...
- rjzzleep 14y ago
  he hasn't gotten much nicer with age, he just got a bit more careful on what he says in public.
  - corporalagumbo 14y ago
    He sure smiles a lot though!
- danielweber 14y ago
  It was about 5 years before he became a billionaire. If "he was young" is a defense, then "he is too young to trust as a CEO" suddenly becomes a very very valid criticism of Zuck.
  - jamesaguilar 14y ago
    > he is too young to trust as a CEO Considering he has 57% of the voting power, isn't this criticism largely moot?
    - polshaw 14y ago
      It is not moot when considering whether to use facebook's services or not (which is what OP was talking about).
- baddox 14y ago
  I don't think age matters. We all do/say dumb things, period. I suspect very few people would be happy to be represented by a worst sentences they've ever typed or uttered. If you really want to make a case that Facebook shouldn't be trusted with privacy issues, base an argument on their previous privacy failures rather than something the CEO said years ago.
- 23david 14y ago
  It's really hard to change a person's character as they get older. In general I think that by the age of 18-21 most of our ideas of right/wrong and how to behave and treat other people are pretty much established. tl;dr It's hard to stop being an arrogant asshole. I feel bad for the guy.
bicknergseng 14y ago
Don't you think this is somewhat naive and limited? He was 19 years old when he made that comment. Other people with far more power over your life have done and said far worse things. Think about your bank accounts.
- bherms 14y ago
  Agree 100%. Also take into account the context and intent. I jokingly make statements like this all the time and it has literally ZERO effect on my ability to do any job or manage anything in my life.
  - alid 14y ago
    I second that! He was 19 and in a private chat with a mate. It's all about context.
- spitx 14y ago
  In the Enron energy trading fiasco: "They're f------g taking all the money back from you guys?" complains an Enron employee on the tapes. "All the money you guys stole from those poor grandmothers in California?" "Yeah, grandma Millie, man" "Yeah, now she wants her f------g money back for all the power you've charged right up, jammed right up her a------ for f------g $250 a megawatt hour." Even that doesn't compare to the choke-hold (and the potential for indenture-ment) FB has over your current and continued life.
baddox 14y ago
How much do you know about the CEO of Walmart? Do you trust him or her with all your personal shopping history? What about your apartment's building manager? Do you trust him or her to not have hidden cameras in your apartment? How much do you trust the head of state of your country? Do you trust him or her with the almost limitless amount of your personal information that may have been collected?
- spitx 14y ago
  False equivalency. All over false equivalency. Walmart isn't a service. Walmart doesn't have access to your most intimate information like Facebook does. Heck millions of Virgin Mobile accounts have been compromised. But the potential damage isn't even in the same order of magnitude of something (hypothetically) going foul at FB, either owing to deliberate policy or accidentally. Same with JetBlue with passenger data some years ago. Not same order. Not same potential damage.
  - baddox 14y ago
    > Walmart isn't a service. I don't really know what distinction you're trying to make here. > Walmart doesn't have access to your most intimate information like Facebook does This probably varies from person to person. Walmart potentially has medical prescription data, which is inherently sensitive, but also a ton of data on nearly every product you buy and your shopping habits (obviously, only for people who buy nearly everything from Walmart, which is a lot of people), and of course credit card numbers. And some people (like myself) don't have a huge amount on Facebook. All I've got is my name, high school, college, current employer, a few movies, books, and musicians I "liked" ages ago when I first signed up, plus a tiny amount of private but nonsensitive chat history and a handful of unflattering photographs. Regarding Virgin Mobile and JetBlue customer information: I find it hard to imagine that either of these wouldn't have way more sensitive information than Facebook for the average user/customer of each organization.
    - spitx 14y ago
      Walmart, even when it's potential for misuse of customer data is taken to it's negative extreme, is just a vendor. Not a repository of your most private data. Walmart cannot deduce from your pictures printed at their photo kiosk if you are having an extra-marital affair. It doesn't have that kind of "putting together two and two" power. Plus it doesn't share that with your other family members or suggest to them that they get to know your extra-marital partner better. Where am I going with this...scratch this reply. If you can't see the potential for abuse at FB (or any other similarly massive soc-net) and somehow are trying to draw parallels to some big box vendor with no social tentacles, my explanation will not advance your understanding of it either. No current corporation, conglomerate or organization - Disney, Visa, Experian, Equifax, Transunion, ExxonMobil, Monsanto - has that kind of established and potential scope for intrusion into your life. Not even Acxiom has that kind of potential.

fletchowns 14y ago

How old was he when he made that comment? We all do/say dumb things when we are young...

rjzzleep 14y ago
he hasn't gotten much nicer with age, he just got a bit more careful on what he says in public.
- corporalagumbo 14y ago
  He sure smiles a lot though!
danielweber 14y ago
It was about 5 years before he became a billionaire. If "he was young" is a defense, then "he is too young to trust as a CEO" suddenly becomes a very very valid criticism of Zuck.
- jamesaguilar 14y ago
  > he is too young to trust as a CEO Considering he has 57% of the voting power, isn't this criticism largely moot?
  - polshaw 14y ago
    It is not moot when considering whether to use facebook's services or not (which is what OP was talking about).
baddox 14y ago
I don't think age matters. We all do/say dumb things, period. I suspect very few people would be happy to be represented by a worst sentences they've ever typed or uttered. If you really want to make a case that Facebook shouldn't be trusted with privacy issues, base an argument on their previous privacy failures rather than something the CEO said years ago.
23david 14y ago
It's really hard to change a person's character as they get older. In general I think that by the age of 18-21 most of our ideas of right/wrong and how to behave and treat other people are pretty much established. tl;dr It's hard to stop being an arrogant asshole. I feel bad for the guy.

bicknergseng 14y ago

Don't you think this is somewhat naive and limited? He was 19 years old when he made that comment. Other people with far more power over your life have done and said far worse things. Think about your bank accounts.

bherms 14y ago
Agree 100%. Also take into account the context and intent. I jokingly make statements like this all the time and it has literally ZERO effect on my ability to do any job or manage anything in my life.
- alid 14y ago
  I second that! He was 19 and in a private chat with a mate. It's all about context.
spitx 14y ago
In the Enron energy trading fiasco: "They're f------g taking all the money back from you guys?" complains an Enron employee on the tapes. "All the money you guys stole from those poor grandmothers in California?" "Yeah, grandma Millie, man" "Yeah, now she wants her f------g money back for all the power you've charged right up, jammed right up her a------ for f------g $250 a megawatt hour." Even that doesn't compare to the choke-hold (and the potential for indenture-ment) FB has over your current and continued life.

baddox 14y ago

How much do you know about the CEO of Walmart? Do you trust him or her with all your personal shopping history? What about your apartment's building manager? Do you trust him or her to not have hidden cameras in your apartment? How much do you trust the head of state of your country? Do you trust him or her with the almost limitless amount of your personal information that may have been collected?

spitx 14y ago
False equivalency. All over false equivalency. Walmart isn't a service. Walmart doesn't have access to your most intimate information like Facebook does. Heck millions of Virgin Mobile accounts have been compromised. But the potential damage isn't even in the same order of magnitude of something (hypothetically) going foul at FB, either owing to deliberate policy or accidentally. Same with JetBlue with passenger data some years ago. Not same order. Not same potential damage.
- baddox 14y ago
  > Walmart isn't a service. I don't really know what distinction you're trying to make here. > Walmart doesn't have access to your most intimate information like Facebook does This probably varies from person to person. Walmart potentially has medical prescription data, which is inherently sensitive, but also a ton of data on nearly every product you buy and your shopping habits (obviously, only for people who buy nearly everything from Walmart, which is a lot of people), and of course credit card numbers. And some people (like myself) don't have a huge amount on Facebook. All I've got is my name, high school, college, current employer, a few movies, books, and musicians I "liked" ages ago when I first signed up, plus a tiny amount of private but nonsensitive chat history and a handful of unflattering photographs. Regarding Virgin Mobile and JetBlue customer information: I find it hard to imagine that either of these wouldn't have way more sensitive information than Facebook for the average user/customer of each organization.
  - spitx 14y ago
    Walmart, even when it's potential for misuse of customer data is taken to it's negative extreme, is just a vendor. Not a repository of your most private data. Walmart cannot deduce from your pictures printed at their photo kiosk if you are having an extra-marital affair. It doesn't have that kind of "putting together two and two" power. Plus it doesn't share that with your other family members or suggest to them that they get to know your extra-marital partner better. Where am I going with this...scratch this reply. If you can't see the potential for abuse at FB (or any other similarly massive soc-net) and somehow are trying to draw parallels to some big box vendor with no social tentacles, my explanation will not advance your understanding of it either. No current corporation, conglomerate or organization - Disney, Visa, Experian, Equifax, Transunion, ExxonMobil, Monsanto - has that kind of established and potential scope for intrusion into your life. Not even Acxiom has that kind of potential.