Former Facebook Manager: 'We Took a Page From Big Tobacco's Playbook' (arstechnica.com) 115
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Speaking to Congress today, the former Facebook manager first tasked with making the company make money did not mince words about his role. He told lawmakers that the company "took a page from Big Tobacco's playbook, working to make our offering addictive at the outset" and arguing that his former employer has been hugely detrimental to society. His analogy continued: "Tobacco companies initially just sought to make nicotine more potent. But eventually that wasn't enough to grow the business as fast as they wanted. And so they added sugar and menthol to cigarettes so you could hold the smoke in your lungs for longer periods. At Facebook, we added status updates, photo tagging, and likes, which made status and reputation primary and laid the groundwork for a teenage mental health crisis. Allowing for misinformation, conspiracy theories, and fake news to flourish were like Big Tobacco's bronchodilators, which allowed the cigarette smoke to cover more surface area of the lungs. But that incendiary content alone wasn't enough. To continue to grow the user base and in particular, the amount of time and attention users would surrender to Facebook, they needed more."
Tim Kendall, who served as director of monetization for Facebook from 2006 through 2010, spoke to Congress today as part of a House Commerce subcommittee hearing examining how social media platforms contribute to the mainstreaming of extremist and radicalizing content. "The social media services that I and others have built over the past 15 years have served to tear people apart with alarming speed and intensity," Kendall said in his opening testimony (PDF). "At the very least, we have eroded our collective understanding -- at worst, I fear we are pushing ourselves to the brink of a civil war." As director of monetization, he added, "We sought to mine as much attention as humanly possible... We took a page form Big Tobacco's playbook, working to make our offering addictive at the outset."
Tim Kendall, who served as director of monetization for Facebook from 2006 through 2010, spoke to Congress today as part of a House Commerce subcommittee hearing examining how social media platforms contribute to the mainstreaming of extremist and radicalizing content. "The social media services that I and others have built over the past 15 years have served to tear people apart with alarming speed and intensity," Kendall said in his opening testimony (PDF). "At the very least, we have eroded our collective understanding -- at worst, I fear we are pushing ourselves to the brink of a civil war." As director of monetization, he added, "We sought to mine as much attention as humanly possible... We took a page form Big Tobacco's playbook, working to make our offering addictive at the outset."
The word that describes them all best... (Score:2)
Re:The word that describes them all best... (Score:4, Insightful)
Brink of a civil war? (Score:5, Interesting)
Does anyone else see this as self-serving crud that Facebook shareholders/management use to push the narrative that they are more influential than they are, and hence push up their advertising rates?
I know there's some emotionally stunted adults using it and screaming loudly at everything, but in the real world I only know about 2-3 people that use that site or app regularly.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What if it ends up in a civil war due to the actions of a single powerful person who tries to undermine the existing electoral system?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't think a single person is in control of the DNC. More a group of people who each pull their strings, mostly to the left but not all in the same direction.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The DNC was bailed out of near-bankruptcy by.... the Clinton Foundation back in 2015, as was well-documented on Naked Capitalism. So yes, one person or a very small group of yes-men do in fact control it.
Re: (Score:1)
The DNC was bailed out of near-bankruptcy by.... the Clinton Foundation back in 2015
Here's the memo detailing what the Clinton Foundation was getting for bailing out the DNC. Not that it's necessary, you'd only need to look at how few people ran against Hillary Clinton in 2016 to know something was up. It was Clinton and Sanders for nearly the whole primary. Even Obama faced stiffer competition.
https://www.npr.org/2017/11/03/561976645/clinton-campaign-had-additional-signed-agreement-with-dnc-in-2015 [npr.org]
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think a single person is in control of the DNC. More a group of people who each pull their strings, mostly to the left but not all in the same direction.
You misspelled "center" as "left" there.
You know what's at the center? The drain.
Re: (Score:2)
What if it ends up in a civil war due to the actions of a single powerful person who tries to undermine the existing electoral system?
A civil war needs at the very least a lot of useful idiots in addition. If one person tries to stay in power by a criminal act, no problem. Prison time or execution for the traitor, all other can just continue to go about their business as normal.
It's not just Facebook (Score:3, Insightful)
The main problem is that our oligarchs made effective adjustments to their tactics after their losses to labor in the 40s and 50s and their losses to the Civil Rights movement in the 60s and 70s. They came back with a vengeance in the 80s using wedge issues & bigotry to divide us, they took over the churches (where working class people had been organizing), created a defacto hereditary military class so we wouldn't get drafted to war and fight together, took ov
Re:It's not just Facebook (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem is it took me several paragraphs just to outline what the 1% did.
The wealthy are a minority, and in a democracy a minority's interests are only upheld when they can sway public opinion in their favor. Can you really blame them?
Re: (Score:3)
And, for that reason, I regularly thank God that I don't live in a democracy.
This is not true (Score:3)
The wealthy govern primarily by creating caste systems. India's castes, America's racial & religious divides, China's Uighurs, heck when Japan had no obvious castes due to their homogeneity they created one out of whole cloth (the Burakumin).
This divides the working class and gets them "punching down" (see Beau of the Fifth Column on YouTube for more on this term). It's a basic divide on conquer strat. It's be
Re: (Score:2)
heck when Japan had no obvious castes due to their homogeneity they created one out of whole cloth (the Burakumin).
This is what happens when one's sole source of history is YouTube videos. Combine that with some prejudiced stereotyping, and out pops malarkey like this.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't underestimate the power of social media though. For example if there is a civil war, or more likely just some violence after the election, a lot of it will be down to QAnon conspiracy nuts and spurred on by Trump's tweets.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Sure. And the Antifa/BLM rioters, supported by the DA elected with Soros money, will have nothing to do with it. Wink. Wink.
All those buildings that burned to the ground were started by a Trump tweet, and a Trump tweet shot Breonna Taylor.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
And the Illuminati have been planning this all for hundreds of years to boot...
Sorry to burst your bubble but your post is filled with misinformation.
- In the 1980's, Karl Rove was a low-level official who handled direct mailing for the Reagan campaign. He certainly was not in any position to direct a vast conspiracy. He didn't rise to prominence in the Republican party 2000 when working on on George W Bush's campaign. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
- In 2016, the Republican establishment (includi
Re: (Score:1)
Looks like somebody wasn't around back then....
Re: (Score:2)
Again with the “civil war” doomsaying.
A large majority of Americans don’t even care enough about politics one way or another to even bother to go vote. There may be some absolutely epic online flamewars over politics, but the real-world equivalent isn’t going to extend beyond some angry mobs torching unoccupied buildings. Even then, that only happens because the handful of perpetrators who do that sort of thing are under the (incorrect) impression they’re unlikely to face leg
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Again with the “civil war” doomsaying.
A large majority of Americans don’t even care enough about politics one way or another to even bother to go vote. There may be some absolutely epic online flamewars over politics, but the real-world equivalent isn’t going to extend beyond some angry mobs torching unoccupied buildings. Even then, that only happens because the handful of perpetrators who do that sort of thing are under the (incorrect) impression they’re unlikely to face legal repercussions for their actions.
How many stupid demonstrators filling streets and turning buildings to ash do you really think it takes before you are sitting in your home, living in fear, trying to protect yourself and your loved ones?
Answer: A fuck of a lot less than their justification.
Good luck with that delusional theory that justice will prevail when the local precinct is the first building torched, and cops logically say "Fuck this shit", and quit.
Re: Brink of a civil war? (Score:2)
Goldwater, is that you?
Re: (Score:1)
Goldwater, is that you?
Common F. Sense is the name.
I know. A lot of people thought I was killed off by Greed N. Corruption. Not yet.
Problem is, I have too many stupid enemies now. I've got no chance in hell.
Neither does civility, morality, or humanity.
Re: Brink of a civil war? (Score:2, Insightful)
You've been duped man. Or you have no sense of scale. Maybe you're racist and primed to believe the bullshit. Maybe you're just a naturally fearful person. Enjoy your life of faux outrage, fear, and oppression.
Re: (Score:2)
Instead of sitting at home in fear, I think the data has shown that a large number of Americans have stocked up on ammo. However, I suspect that is mostly in the suburbs, and the rioting is mostly limited to city centers.
Re: (Score:3)
Instead of sitting at home in fear, I think the data has shown that a large number of Americans have stocked up on ammo.
Numbers can be misleading. Could be one angry Texan buying up 10 million rounds. Honestly, given the cost of ammo right now and the unemployment rate, I kind of doubt that many people were blowing a government paycheck on ammo.
And they're still sitting in their homes in fear. Being armed only makes you feel slightly better about the current shituation. Believe me.
However, I suspect that is mostly in the suburbs, and the rioting is mostly limited to city centers.
Violence and crime in city centers is merely being done to make a statement. Very few are benefiting or profiting from it.
When the money runs
Re: Brink of a civil war? (Score:2)
Numbers can be misleading, individual NICS checks cannot. Per all available data there are many, many first time gun owners(a much greater percentage than normal black or female per many gun store owners anecdoes) that started buying guns after Burn, Loot, Murder and the Antifatards started burning shit to the ground and Soros funded DA's kept letting them walk.
93% of the protestors are peaceful (Score:3)
If violence happens it'll come from the right wing militias. The FBI has a mountain of statistics on this; or had, the current administration has been heavily discouraging the accumulation of data on right wing militias. Even so we know right wing extremists have killed more Americans tha
Re: (Score:2)
of those that aren't 5% have been identified as out of state agitators trying to stir up trouble. Only about 2% of the protests went violent and most of that was from the early days. There is very, very little violence.
So far.
If violence happens it'll come from the right wing militias. The FBI has a mountain of statistics on this; or had, the current administration has been heavily discouraging the accumulation of data on right wing militias. Even so we know right wing extremists have killed more Americans than 9/11.
So, if the FBI has only been suppressed from collecting right wing data, care to explain how they did not predict or prevent CHAZ/CHOP violence and death? Does BLM even warrant opening a file, or does that deadly violence somehow not count?
"They're worse than us!" Yeah, like we need more fucking flames. From either side.
I'm no fan of Right or Left right now. Because of shit-slinging like this. Keep looking Right, and you'll never see the gut punch from the Left. In case you hadn't noticed, AL
They've been protesting for months (Score:2)
As for the CHAZ/CHOP "violence and death"... really hard to stop something that didn't happen. You need to go back on your meds man. Or off them. Or get different ones. I don't know. The point is, see a professional.
Re: (Score:2)
at this point the only way those numbers are going to change is if the other side (e.g. anti-BLM) goes hot. They've got the ammo for it too. As for the CHAZ/CHOP "violence and death"... really hard to stop something that didn't happen. You need to go back on your meds man. Or off them. Or get different ones. I don't know. The point is, see a professional.
The deaths related to CHAZ/CHOP are not even up for dispute. Perhaps speaking to a mother of a dead child will convince you. You need to lay off the fucking politics. Or grow up and learn to accept facts. From Wiki:
"In the early morning hours of June 29, a fourth shooting left a 16-year-old boy dead and a 14-year-old boy in critical condition with gunshot injuries."
And if you think this was some fucking glorified Burning Man like Seattles mayor views it, go talk to Oklahoma City folks who laid down te
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not quite sure if your trolling, ignorant or willfully ignorant. On the off chance you happen to simply be ignorant. In the Twin Cities metro area alone there were over 1500 buildings that were damaged, destroyed and burned to the ground.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyl... [yahoo.com]
The BLM and Antifa rioters didn't target empty buildings. A number of times the lit buildings on fire while people were inside them.
https://www.kptv.com/news/poli... [kptv.com]
Sometimes they did so quite deliberately, trying to burn them alive.
http [dailymail.co.uk]
Re: (Score:3)
You probably know 2 or 3 that never pull the phone from their face. How many go home and cruise the Information Supersewer for a couple hours every night, and don't make a point to tell you about it?
Its impact is not to be underestimated. In undeveloped countries, where people are slightly less intelligent, visitors to the village are get called pedophiles or demons etc. on FB and a flash mobs shows up to stone them to death the next day. Do you think India and Africa have more FB users, or less?
The average
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If the US ends up in a civil war, it will not be because of the actions of a bunch of social media "influencers", it will be because of the comprehensive lack of actual political input into the US political system from the "small man", who indoctrinated into the notion that the US is "his" country, which it is not.
The facebooks and the twitters may make the problems obvious and make the radical ends of the political spectrum a bit more visible, but without a bunch of people who are ready to hear the extreme
Re: Brink of a civil war? (Score:3)
It has happened before, and it's all about money and power in reality.
A revolution is necessary - in the form of revising the election system to make it easier for more parties to enter the political scene and break the bipolar disorder that exists.
Re:Brink of a civil war? (Score:4, Interesting)
There have been plenty of civil wars all over the world before there was social media. Plenty of countries had slaves, but the US seems to be unique in having torn itself asunder and drenched itself in blood over the issue. I don't think you can blame the newspapers, which would be the equivalent of social media at the time. I think it might have had something to do with our (also unique) combination of Puritan heritage which made abolition a crusade rather than a compromise, and on the Southern side there was paranoia about what the North would do if it had the votes to abolish. Religious zeal vs. paranoia. Sound familiar? Nothing to do with media, everything to do with the psychological make-up of our nation. I hope I'm wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Hard to see how you could compromise on the abolition of slavery... Although the US managed it somehow, i.e. it's still legal for prisoners.
Really it's down to treating capitalism like a religion and individualism being a core part of American values. The proposition was to cause massive economic harm to a bunch of people by ending their source of extremely low cost labour. Look at how upset people get now being told to lockdown or wear a mask, and imagine how people felt when they were told their businesse
Re: (Score:1)
Hard to see how you could compromise on the abolition of slavery... .
Great Britain did... Brazil did.. Quite a few countries did.
Re: (Score:2)
combination of Puritan heritage which made abolition a crusade rather than a compromise
We had a compromise.
Then the slave states realized they'd continue to be out-voted, and did not like that. So they abandoned the compromise, started several insurrections out West, and then started the civil war.
Re: (Score:2)
The 2-3 people you mention are within your circle of friends, family, and work colleges. These are probably mostly educated professions or reasonably successful and stable smart people.
There are plenty of people who read a story on facebook or actual hate sites and accept it as true without any further evidence required. Many of those people are extremely angry about supposed injustices. Many of them are armed. You can call these people stupid, and you are probably right, but they definitely exist in very l
Re: (Score:1)
The 2-3 people you mention are within your circle of friends, family, and work colleges. These are probably mostly educated professions or reasonably successful and stable smart people.
There are plenty of people who read a story on facebook or actual hate sites and accept it as true without any further evidence required. Many of those people are extremely angry about supposed injustices. Many of them are armed. You can call these people stupid, and you are probably right, but they definitely exist in very large numbers. I've met plenty of rant about the conspiracy of the day like it's absolute fact and I've seen governments use the same tactics to gather support for military action with entirely fabricated stories.
This has less to do with stupid people and more to do with a lack of trust in our media institutions. When you can see they are clearly biased who do you trust?
Some people choose poorly. This does not make them stupid, it makes them ignorant of how to determine truth from fiction (this is a skill)
but calling people stupid just polarizes them against you and perpetuates the problem
Re:Brink of a civil war? (Score:4, Funny)
"If the US ends up in a civil war due to the actions of a bunch of social media "influencers" and marketing teams, then the average american is far more stupid than ever I imagined."
I just chalk that up to you not having a very good imagination.
Re: (Score:2)
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it!"
Re: (Score:2)
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it!"
Sad that much like Orwell, fictional musings turned into a fucking prophecy.
Intelligence isn't just rare now. It's being targeted and assassinated by stupidity.
And there aren't enough brains to go around, to prevent it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, imagine the most stupid thing that can happen. Write it down. Wait a while and see some group of people taking it as an instruction manual.
The average person is astonishingly stupid. And 50% are below that. That we have some really smart people in the human race is really no indicator for the intellectual competence of the rest.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
then the average american is far more stupid than ever I imagined.
Are you aware they elected Donald Trump as their president?
Re: (Score:2)
then the average american is far more stupid than ever I imagined.
Are you aware they elected Donald Trump as their president?
They may yet top that pinnacle of stupidity by electing him again...
Re: (Score:2)
If the US ends up in a civil war due to the actions of a bunch of social media "influencers" and marketing teams, then the average american is far more stupid than ever I imagined.
Given recent evidence, that may indeed be the case.
capitalism in the USA has degenerated (Score:3)
Re: capitalism in the USA has degenerated (Score:2)
Straight out - slavery under indentured debt.
Re: (Score:3)
Huh? Is someone signing your name to credit applications? I mean, we don't even have debtor's prisons anymore. Who is beating you or selling off your children to pay debts?
Re: (Score:2)
Student loans, housing loans, car loans. Just let it roll on.
Re: (Score:2)
they know they can get away with it because the government does not care to go after white collar criminals most of the time, since everything can be bought
It's because the government is primarily a bunch of white collar criminals. Pork is fraud, and defrauding the federal government is a felony. These bastards have to keep the system going or they're ALL going to lose their heads.
when's Delete Facebook day this year? (Score:2)
Could be worse: (Score:2)
"We took a page from Adolf Hitler's playbook ..."
Hopefully Amazon doesn't try to invade Russia with that as a reference. And I'm sure Alphabet is using someone more noble like Napoleon as their inspiration.
In other news.. (Score:4, Funny)
Slashdot adds status updates, photo tagging and likes to its comments section...
So what? (Score:1)
Making a product people love and want to use is bad now?
Also, aren't facebook users more to blame for this? I mean, facebook was tempted by the fact that users wanted it so bad. If you're broke and someone offers you a way to make money .. wouldn't you do it? Don't lie. You're guilty, but so is the one giving you revenue.
Re: (Score:2)
Making a product people love and want to use is bad now?
Fucking hell. Yeah, OK addict. Talk about delusional. There's a reason you "love and want" that shit. And it was manufactured.
Also, aren't facebook users more to blame for this? I mean, facebook was tempted by the fact that users wanted it so bad. If you're broke and someone offers you a way to make money .. wouldn't you do it? Don't lie. You're guilty, but so is the one giving you revenue.
OK, so we're going to legalize prostitution for the millions of unemployed in dead industries? Think the women you know will be up for it? Don't lie. If someone offers you a way to make money...
(Yes. Desperation will get this bad, due to unemployment. People have to eat.)
Re: (Score:2)
Making a product people love and want to use is bad now?
Are you talking about Facebook or tobacco in that statement? 8^)
Facebook != big tobacco (Score:5, Insightful)
Big tobacco profited from selling literal poison that would put you through withdrawal symptoms if you tried to quit. Furthermore, the nasty health effects of smoking are a direct result of consuming the product. The problems caused by Facebook are absolutely not inherent to the platform itself. One can easily find misinformation, propaganda, and toxic social interaction on plenty of other places on the internet, and if Facebook ceased to exist something else would fill the void (ie: Twitter decided to purge racists from their platform and Gab sprung up).
Facebook is basically just holding a mirror up to society, and it's not Facebook's fault if we don't like what we see.
Re:Facebook != big tobacco (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
poison, noun: a substance that is capable of causing the illness or death of a living organism when introduced or absorbed.
I'm not trying to be pedantic. The point is that words like "addictive" and "poison" mean specific things and they are being used as weasel words by people who are trying to appeal to emotion rather than making objective, logical and rational arguments.
It's their algorithm that does the harm
1) Which algorithm, specifically?
2) Quantify "harm"
3) Show a concrete, casual connection between 1 and 2
Otherwise it's pure weasel speak
Re: (Score:2)
No. Your handwaving doesn't make the harm go away. It's obvious. It's also obvious which algrorithm so it's also obvious that you are either trolling or a shill, or both.
I'm not trying to be pedantic.
And yet you've succeed at it.
Show a concrete, casual connection between 1 and 2. Otherwise it's pure weasel speak
Yeah, unless I personally prosecute a case against Facebook beyond any reasonable doubt, I am a weasel. STFU weasel.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool! Now link the definition of metaphor.
Re: (Score:3)
Mirror implies lack of bias, which is not the case. You have personalized distortion in the mirrors, so that you can see what they want you to see.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Facebook != big tobacco (Score:5, Insightful)
Big tobacco profited from selling literal poison that would put you through withdrawal symptoms if you tried to quit. Furthermore, the nasty health effects of smoking are a direct result of consuming the product. The problems caused by Facebook are absolutely not inherent to the platform itself. One can easily find misinformation, propaganda, and toxic social interaction on plenty of other places on the internet, and if Facebook ceased to exist something else would fill the void (ie: Twitter decided to purge racists from their platform and Gab sprung up).
Facebook is basically just holding a mirror up to society, and it's not Facebook's fault if we don't like what we see.
Facebook is not merely a mirror. It is the tool creating and propagating this shit.
You have no idea how much content on Facebook, is even created by a machine. To manipulate. To addict. To control.
And this isn't "Facebook" we're talking about here. It is all social media. If Facebook ceased to exist, addiction and greed will fill that void when it shouldn't ever be fucking filled again.
Propaganda machines this powerful usually turn into war machines. THAT is why we need to seriously deal with this. Rampant narcissism and attention whoring are the next issues to address before they destroy our youth.
Re: (Score:2)
If it is a mirror, it's a funhouse mirror designed to distort, enhance and minimize the reality reflected in it. Humanity has some pretty ugly flaws but Facebook has to own up to its responsibility in shaping that mirror.
Fuck this guy. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
After he dies in a burning van he can go fuck off and sing Futuristic Sex Robotz "Fuck the MPAA".
The world needed to hear this. It's worth repeating. Testifying in court with. Again and again.
And here you are, shallow enough to tie your jealousy over his net worth to continued silence. Every sinner, can find value in redemption. Even you.
I'd agree (Score:1)
Duh. (Score:3)
We knew this years ago, confirmed by the very CEOs of social media companies.
"Do you let your own children use your products?
Answer: No.
All social media has become, is a tool to manipulate the masses. It is now a tool of the intelligence gathering communities the world over. It has been one of the, if not THE primary tool used to destroy privacy. And much like the drug dealer wanting to addict a new customer, the concept of giving it away for free the first time, simply stuck.
Attention Whore is now a valid profession rife with millionaires (yes, we love it so), and narcissism consumes our youth to the point where a considerable negative impact in social media status can initiate suicides rather easily. Enjoy the after-effects of this shit. Psychologists will for decades. Reap what you sow.
For more information about this subject (Score:3)
Watch Netflix's "The Social Dilemma [wikipedia.org]". Fantastic documentary, despite its very depressing content. Tim Kendal is one of the many former social network employees interviewed.
Not the root cause (Score:4, Insightful)
Every company is ultimately playing the playbook of trying to get customers addicted to a product, but there are huge differences between companies like Facebook / Apple / Google, and Big Tabaco. The tabaco companies dosed up people chemically. Whereas *every* other company does little more than exploit the human weakness of being addicted to something that feels good.
Whether it's the feeling of belonging to a select crowd of shiny iPhone users, or the feeling of happiness when someone hits that like button acknowledging that you exist, or that feeling after you came back from a gym, or just ate something delicious. It all is related to endorphines.
The root problem is people have this insane need to be acknowledged and recognised. It strokes their ego, and stroking egos releases endorphins, and *that* is what you get addicted to. Facebook is a fucking scourge on society, but providing a system to share something, talk to others, and hit a few likes is not what makes them evil and doesn't remotely equate them to what Big Tobaco was doing.
Remember Milton Friedman (Score:3)
Just because he's a bastard (Score:3)
But you're not trying to rebuke his points. You're a troll trying to derail the conversation.
Re:Just because he's a bastard (Score:4, Insightful)
What points are there to rebuke that were not known when this fucktard was making money from them?
He's an asshole who profited massively from the shit he's criticizing, and he's criticizing because there is some profit for him somewhere in it.
Should I be grateful or something?
Fuck off too.
Re:Just because he's a bastard (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
What "good" are they doing exactly? They are answering questions about ugly shit that got them rich instead of being punished for it. You want to lick their assholes on the account of that, be my guest.
Re:Just because he's a bastard (Score:5, Insightful)
What points are there to rebuke that were not known when this fucktard was making money from them?
He's an asshole who profited massively from the shit he's criticizing, and he's criticizing because there is some profit for him somewhere in it.
Should I be grateful or something?
Fuck off too.
There's one individual person who's far from perfect, but probably won't matter for the rest of his life. There's a 70 billion dollar company with over 50k employees which continues to attempt to dominate inter-personal communication for people over the whole planet. This article covers both, but for some reason we are are discussing the individual. This guy doesn't need to be loved to be useful. Don't ask "what do we owe him" (you don't owe him anything) ask "what difference does he make"?
Facebook is clearly harmful. It's also clearly addictive. What we normally do with harmful addictive things is ban them. This isn't a freedom of speech issue - it's a product design issue. This guys statement is useful since it can be used to show that the harmful, addictive nature of Facebook is a deliberate product design feature. We knew that before, but having testimony from a former employee means it should be possible to prove that by finding the other people who worked with him and gave him orders. Don't you think we should use that to ban Facebook?
Re: (Score:2)
Meh. Never had a taste for tobacco, couldn't afford a gambling addiction, and too much alcohol just puts me to sleep.
So naturally Facebook was unappealing and a bit confusing and I was off it in a matter of months.
Slashdot is actually my longest lasting "social" platform.
Re: (Score:3)
That won't protect you from its impact on society and your loved ones.
Re: (Score:2)
I think he's just giving example of how subjective appeal is. He doesn't like tobacco but we know some people are very compulsive over it. Facebook is so weird and unappealing, that it's hard to imagine people could stay there long enough to get addicted, but actually a lot of people do really like it whether you can identify with that or not. You just never know what kind of anything might take hold of peoples' lives.
If you sniffed glue and didn't like it, how could you ever predict that some people would
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What makes you think that the government would decide to regulate speech in your best interest?
The whole point of the first amendment is that when the government gets into the speech control business bad government simply crushes dissent and criticism. Is that the type of power you would like this administration to have?
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think that the government would decide to regulate speech in your best interest?
I have no suggestion that the government should regulate speech.
Re: (Score:2)
Heroin, Crack, Methamphetamines, even Cannabis. Obviously there are levels, but if Google is IMHO a bit below the Tabacco level at which banning is arguable and would have been regulated if, when it was a new product, people understood it then Facebook is especially addictive crack cocaine with dangerous additives.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Regardless of ones opinion of a person, them doing something good is still preferable to them doing something bad. So yes, you should be grateful for that good act. That doesn't mean you have to forget whatever else they've done.
I think there are a lot of people in murderous regimes who are in exactly the position you describe. Even good people in bad situations trying to minimize harm that fear coming forward because of how harshly they will be judged.
Consequently many hideousness crimes go unreported, not because there is a problem with judgement, but because those judging are hypocrites.
Re:Just because he's a bastard (Score:5, Insightful)
Should I be grateful or something?
You can hate this guy with the heat of a burning star. But right now he is leaking the evil plans to an audience who at least partially doesn't believe there was an evil plan to began with.
Re:Just because he's a bastard (Score:5, Insightful)
What points are there to rebuke that were not known when this fucktard was making money from them?
He's an asshole who profited massively from the shit he's criticizing, and he's criticizing because there is some profit for him somewhere in it.
Should I be grateful or something?
Fuck off too.
Every company I've worked for has done shitty things I disagreed with, but I still had to work, so I stayed there a while.
I don't blame him one bit. If I could have made millions off idiots like my sister in law who constantly posts crap on Facebook, I certainly would have.
Re: Just because he's a bastard (Score:3)
The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.
Look back at what happened after '45 between the victors, east block v.s. west block and the cold war.
Re: Just because he's a bastard (Score:5, Insightful)
The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. Nothing more, nothing less.
Re:Just because he's a bastard (Score:4, Interesting)
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
That's probably the most dangerous misconception ever.
Re: (Score:2)
The right thing for the wrong reasons is still the right thing.
He did evil, now he is trying to revert some of it by explaining the evil. This is a good thing and we should listen so we understand the evil and can better fight it.
Re: So, you, the facebook multimillionaire, (Score:2)
Re:So, you, the facebook multimillionaire, (Score:5, Insightful)
think this "testimony" is now making you a sort of a hero, or what?
Go die in a fire, and we may take you seriously.
I've already said this, but it's worth repeating for you.
The world needed to hear this. It's worth repeating. Testifying in court with. Again and again.
And here you are, shallow enough to tie your jealousy over his net worth to continued silence. Every sinner, can find value in redemption. Even you.
Re: So, you, the facebook multimillionaire, (Score:2)
It reminds me of Edward Bernays, who convinced women to smoke via a campaign for 'equal rights' and then, in the 90ies, became anti smoking campaigner...
Whatever pays, I guess, and if you can score some 'look at me, I'm so virtuous' points along the way, all the better!
Re:So, you, the facebook multimillionaire, (Score:5, Insightful)
think this "testimony" is now making you a sort of a hero, or what?
Go die in a fire, and we may take you seriously.
You generally need whistleblowers, insiders, spies, double agents, and defectors.
It's extremely hard to attack something with an entirely outside force.
Most if not all wars are fought and won with help from the local populations.
Re: I no longer feel any joy in using computers. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Richard Stallman, we hear you.
He's not Stallman. Stallman wouldn't bother us on here.