3 ms·
Facebook ruins Zuckerberg Xmas
- joshuahornby 14y agoHow can he be angry? Posted a photo on a social network site which he developed, his security flaw, his mistake. You post a photo, you can't be angry when your security flaw means it goes global.
- tedunangst 14y agoTypically, the pronouns "she" and "her" are used for females.
- tjoff 14y ago"Zuckerberg responded, saying, “Not sure where you got this photo. I posted it only to friends on FB. You reposting it on Twitter is way uncool.”" Zuckerberg uploaded the photo, his sister "leaked" it. While Zuckerbergs response resonates well with me I don't really get what he was thinking taking this so publicly, making full use of the Streisand-effect. Either way, it is hilarious and he does deserve every bit of it. Even if he did nothing wrong in this case.
- matthuggins 14y agoDid you consider that Mark's sister's last name is also Zuckerberg? The article is all about Randi Zuckerberg, not Mark Zuckerberg.
- tjoff 14y agoI just did :( My mind inserted Mark, even as a copy-pasted it. Sigh, good night.
- dlisboa 14y agoHis sister posted the photo, some other woman reposted it. The "Zuckerberg" they mention in the article is Randi.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- arrrg 14y agoYou don't seem to understand the very simple concept of politeness and knowing that you shouldn't share every photo you have access to publicly. There is no technological solution to this and Facebook can't create it. I don't think they should try. People still have to shoulder the responsibility of being polite and decent themselvess. If they cannot manage, it's ok to be annoyed at them.
- tijs 14y agoAnd making demands and disciplining someone through the public channel of Twitter instead of just calling your supposed friend is very decent and polite you think?
- matthuggins 14y agoDid you read the article? Hell, did you even read the first sentence?
- kstenerud 14y agoThis from the guy who says privacy is no longer the social norm?
- dangrossman 14y agoNo, this is not from "the guy", as all the quotes and tweets in the article are Randi's. Mark is only mentioned as being her brother.
- joering2 14y agoSure but isn't the blood connection here the major reason why we are even reading about this story?
- dangrossman 14y agoI fail to see how that makes it OK to misattribute quotes.
- zemanel 14y agoThat moment when, what was that line by Mark? "Dont post online if you have anything to hide" or something? ... gets back at you and bites in the ass ...
- norswap 14y agoThe Streisand effect strikes again.
- j79 14y agoWait, isn't this the same Zuckerberg who said something along the lines of internet anonymity needing to go away?? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/27/randi-zuckerberg-anonymity-online_n_910892.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/27/randi-zuckerberg-an... Oh, the irony indeed!
- natrius 14y agoWhat, pray tell, does this have to do with anonymity?
- fitzpasd 14y agoI imagine they were pointing out the irony that someone who wanted to see the end of internet anonymity, which would inherently reduce privacy, is now complaining of a privacy breech on a site where there is relatively no anonymity.
- natrius 14y agoI imagine that as well, but it's easy to see that these are meaningfully different kinds of privacy at stake.
- clobber 14y agoYes indeed and I am loving the irony here.
- tiles 14y agoI'm disappointed to have to emphasize that this is Randi Zuckerberg responding to the leaked picture, not Mark Zuckerberg. There's no sweet irony here about creating a site and being burned by it, just being it's former chief marketing officer, I suppose.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- sakopov 14y ago> Zuckerberg’s takeaway was “digital etiquette,” saying: ”always ask permission before posting a friend’s photo publicly. It’s not about privacy settings, it’s about human decency.” Apparently "human decency" doesn't apply when Zuckerberg sells your information to 3rd party advertisers on Facebook and changes the TOS to let you know you don't own squat on his company's site. The irony is strong here.
- tedunangst 14y agoApparently reading comprehension isn't necessary when commenting about Facebook.
- joering2 14y agoI wonder what Harvard's “digital etiquette”, Harvard's websites privacy settings, OR overall "human decency" meant to Zuckerberg when he was unlawfully scraping data off of their websites.
- dangrossman 14y agoWrong Zuckerberg. Randi did not scrape anything off a Harvard website.
- dangrossman 14y agoYou are quoting Randi Zuckerberg. She does not work at Facebook, so she certainly doesn't sell your information to advertisers or change the site's TOS.
- sakopov 14y agoI realize that. However she is not a dummy and should know better when she says her privacy's being violated on Facebook. Especially when her brother owns the damn company.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- tedunangst 14y agoSince that's not what happened, you're wrong.
- dale386 14y agoThey're Jewish.
- roopeshv 14y agoi think no one got why wrote so above. they're jewish, they don't celebrate xmas. hence, no zuckerburg xmas was ruined.
- mblake 14y agoWhat an exaggerated titled. Does the pic show anything compromising/very intimate? It appears it does not. Then why all the fuss about it? This could've went swiftly under the radar if she simply would've handled it privately. A simple direct message on Twitter: 'hey, that's not supposed to be public, can you take it down please? and delete your tweet too.' Simple and I can't imagine she would've been denied the request, for the very same reason, that she's a Zuckerberg.
- aspinner 14y agoPretty hilarious!