4 ms·

If there is no way for them to regain trust, or make people whole in any way at all, then what reason do you leave for them trying to improve transparency? What

by mpyne 13y ago

If there is no way for them to regain trust, or make people whole in any way at all, then what reason do you leave for them trying to improve transparency? What should the Zuck do, commit seppuku? Is that what would make people happy going forward?

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
darxius 13y ago
Donate his fortune to the EFF and start from scratch. Of course, that will never happen so for now, if you're concerned with security, you need to find new services to use.
- e3pi 13y ago
  >...Donate his fortune to the EFF and start from scratch. Of course, that will never happen... Why? Would it be legally contrary to shareholder value? I think this is a terrific idea for all of them to do. Zuck and the others appear genuinely upset from Snowden disclosure blowback and are frustrated at reclaiming their user's trust. These may be their best cred ROI. Perhaps someone experienced could organize this. EFF ...itself?(?!)
bicx 13y ago
How do you regain trust in any relationship? Usually it's a combination of time and repeated demonstration of truthfulness. Right now, no one knows what happened behind closed doors, and the suspicion is still high.
fragsworth 13y ago
There is no way. The government has already shown us how they are fully capable of lying, and even worse - forcing companies under their control to lie.
- ironic_ali 13y ago
  Non-US company CIOs will be having long conversations around their previously hyped US/five eyes cloud based infrastructure. The stories around US (five eyes too?) companies getting free corporate intel for favours - presumably on their competitiors - won't have helped. The sucking sound we're hearing is trust in anything related to five eyes related corporate infrastructure having any integrity at all.
- declan 13y ago
  Yes, it's pretty clear that the DNI lied to Congress. But it is untrue that FedGov can force companies to lie. Neither AT&T nor Verizon lied: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589012-38/nsa-surveillance-retrospective-at-t-verizon-never-denied-it/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589012-38/nsa-surveillan...
  - fragsworth 13y ago
    Did you read the PRISM denials? It was very obvious that the companies were told exactly what to say. They might not be lying in a grammatical legal sense if you parse their words, but they were clearly told by someone how to deny everything.
    - declan 13y ago
      I've read all of them. I've written about them. They're categorical.
- kllrnohj 13y ago
  > The government has already shown us how they are fully capable of lying, and even worse - forcing companies under their control to lie. The government can, and does, lie. The government can NOT force other companies to lie. Nor is the claim that Facebook & others are under the governments control remotely supported by anything resembling evidence.
rayiner 13y ago
Trust is fragile, even when you're talking about the relationships and reputations of a business.
coopdog 13y ago
I don't think it's Zucks fault and there's nothing he can do, but he's still going to hurt for this. It's a political and governance problem and can only be solved at those levels. Until we're sure that intelligence agencies can't lie at senate hearings, secret courts and laws don't exist, and we're sure the government can't force CEOs to lie, we just can't be sure And until foreigners get the same right to at least a judge overseeing a warrant we're going to see a move away from US companies no matter where in the world they are.
jarek 13y ago
> what reason do you leave for them trying to improve transparency? To decrease the mistrust. Facebook hasn't been fully trustworthy for a long time, if ever. That's normal - I don't think any company really is.

by mpyne 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

darxius 13y ago

Donate his fortune to the EFF and start from scratch. Of course, that will never happen so for now, if you're concerned with security, you need to find new services to use.

e3pi 13y ago
>...Donate his fortune to the EFF and start from scratch. Of course, that will never happen... Why? Would it be legally contrary to shareholder value? I think this is a terrific idea for all of them to do. Zuck and the others appear genuinely upset from Snowden disclosure blowback and are frustrated at reclaiming their user's trust. These may be their best cred ROI. Perhaps someone experienced could organize this. EFF ...itself?(?!)

bicx 13y ago

How do you regain trust in any relationship? Usually it's a combination of time and repeated demonstration of truthfulness. Right now, no one knows what happened behind closed doors, and the suspicion is still high.

fragsworth 13y ago

There is no way. The government has already shown us how they are fully capable of lying, and even worse - forcing companies under their control to lie.

ironic_ali 13y ago
Non-US company CIOs will be having long conversations around their previously hyped US/five eyes cloud based infrastructure. The stories around US (five eyes too?) companies getting free corporate intel for favours - presumably on their competitiors - won't have helped. The sucking sound we're hearing is trust in anything related to five eyes related corporate infrastructure having any integrity at all.
declan 13y ago
Yes, it's pretty clear that the DNI lied to Congress. But it is untrue that FedGov can force companies to lie. Neither AT&T nor Verizon lied: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589012-38/nsa-surveillance-retrospective-at-t-verizon-never-denied-it/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589012-38/nsa-surveillan...
- fragsworth 13y ago
  Did you read the PRISM denials? It was very obvious that the companies were told exactly what to say. They might not be lying in a grammatical legal sense if you parse their words, but they were clearly told by someone how to deny everything.
  - declan 13y ago
    I've read all of them. I've written about them. They're categorical.
kllrnohj 13y ago
> The government has already shown us how they are fully capable of lying, and even worse - forcing companies under their control to lie. The government can, and does, lie. The government can NOT force other companies to lie. Nor is the claim that Facebook & others are under the governments control remotely supported by anything resembling evidence.

rayiner 13y ago

Trust is fragile, even when you're talking about the relationships and reputations of a business.

coopdog 13y ago

I don't think it's Zucks fault and there's nothing he can do, but he's still going to hurt for this. It's a political and governance problem and can only be solved at those levels. Until we're sure that intelligence agencies can't lie at senate hearings, secret courts and laws don't exist, and we're sure the government can't force CEOs to lie, we just can't be sure And until foreigners get the same right to at least a judge overseeing a warrant we're going to see a move away from US companies no matter where in the world they are.

jarek 13y ago

> what reason do you leave for them trying to improve transparency? To decrease the mistrust. Facebook hasn't been fully trustworthy for a long time, if ever. That's normal - I don't think any company really is.