"Billions of people are dependent on Facebook, especially during a period where physical interaction is less safe."
No Facebook for me, PTL. But I feel so alone. I've been watching on TV the major league baseball stadiums fill up this year and half the people in the stands are staring at their "phones." What are they looking at? There are actual live athletes right there playing, for which those fans have paid pretty big money to watch.
Except breaking up Ma Bell was one of the worst decisions ever taken, which opened up the floodgates of neo-liberal deregulation that has destroyed this country and the world., not just economically, but socially and politically as well.
AT&T was a regulated monopoly; profits were guaranteed, but much was expected of the Company in return. As a company, it was 'blue chip' stock (does anyone under the age of 45 even know what that was?) much preferred for small investors. It was a leading edge in R&D, and spent heavily on tech-school projects related to telecommunications. It was a mass employer paying middle class wages that could sustain a single-income family. Strong unions. Universal service with exceptional service, and very inexpensive customer rates (back in the mid-70's, basic service was $6.06/month, when the min. wage was about $2.05/hr).
The promise of deregulation was: cheaper rates, better service, more R&D, higher wages for workers, yadda, yadda, yadda. What neo-liberal economics delivered was higher rates, terrible service, low wages for workers (without unions), corporate profit-gouging, etc. And within two decades, the monopoly wasn't replaced with competitive networks, but a cartel of 2-3 mega-corporations that essentially operate as regional monopolies.
Like it or no, FB-type networks will a fixture of human life until climate change ends it (another 3-5 decades); I don't have a problem with an AT&T-like, heavily regulated monopoly (objectively moderated by real people instead of algorithms, non-profit, no advertising, no data sharing, no news feeds); and let the rest of them (FB, Twitter, et al) fight it out in the market place without Section 230 protection.
Well, it can be handy to have someone with the best view and replay monitors tell you if that last curveball was actually low or if it just seemed so from your perch deep in the outfield bleachers.
Slightly interesting, but probably means nothing in the long run.
Since Gawd talked to Moses, Twitter stock has acted like FAANGs do most of the time. Year in, year out. This week, TWTR has been a hedge for FB. Others too, a little bit, but moves noticeable between FB and TW. Do not myself see how the use of them is that way. It's not like Lays for Pringles. Then again, it is Wall St, so who knows?
Facemash was created to humiliate, discriminate, and harass women,and from the start, women have flocked to it.As we rewarded this profoundly ugly, incel-like misfit, Sandberg, and their thousands of amoral careerists wrecked news, politics, social life, advertising, and the self-esteem of hundreds of millions of kids. People like Z and Sandberg don't change. Some corrective legislation may help, but why not just tear it down and build better replacements?
And if social media were as responsible for polarizing society as some people claim, then why are we seeing polarization increase in the US while it stays flat or declines in many countries with just as heavy use of social media around the world?
Assumes facts not in evidence. Facebook played a pretty big part in the Brexit debacle, and has fueled ethnic cleansing in countries like Myanmar for fucks sake. Those are just off the top of my head. There is rising authoritarianism around the world.
"The argument that we deliberately push content that makes people angry for profit is deeply illogical."
"deeply illogical"
He thinks this is a viable argument. The little man who constantly tells us he couldn't possibly regulate free speech because "What is truth, really?"
I will point out the despite his growing up wealthy, given every educational advantage, you know what Zucks-2-b-u never once pursued? The arts. His hubris is glaring, and he should get a little Greek tragedy under his Gucci belt, stat.
"a fixture of human life until climate change ends it (another 3-5 decades)"
Uh, no.
Our species will probably experience large numbers of unnecessary premature deaths--which, yes, will suck--but it won't end the human species, or even technological civilization.
Oil companies already knew that GLOBAL WARMING was happening and got us to call it CLIMATE CHANGE
Fuck Zuk. I was hoping he was drinking poison in the glass.
"Billions of people are dependent on Facebook, especially during a period where physical interaction is less safe."
No Facebook for me, PTL. But I feel so alone. I've been watching on TV the major league baseball stadiums fill up this year and half the people in the stands are staring at their "phones." What are they looking at? There are actual live athletes right there playing, for which those fans have paid pretty big money to watch.
Except breaking up Ma Bell was one of the worst decisions ever taken, which opened up the floodgates of neo-liberal deregulation that has destroyed this country and the world., not just economically, but socially and politically as well.
AT&T was a regulated monopoly; profits were guaranteed, but much was expected of the Company in return. As a company, it was 'blue chip' stock (does anyone under the age of 45 even know what that was?) much preferred for small investors. It was a leading edge in R&D, and spent heavily on tech-school projects related to telecommunications. It was a mass employer paying middle class wages that could sustain a single-income family. Strong unions. Universal service with exceptional service, and very inexpensive customer rates (back in the mid-70's, basic service was $6.06/month, when the min. wage was about $2.05/hr).
The promise of deregulation was: cheaper rates, better service, more R&D, higher wages for workers, yadda, yadda, yadda. What neo-liberal economics delivered was higher rates, terrible service, low wages for workers (without unions), corporate profit-gouging, etc. And within two decades, the monopoly wasn't replaced with competitive networks, but a cartel of 2-3 mega-corporations that essentially operate as regional monopolies.
Like it or no, FB-type networks will a fixture of human life until climate change ends it (another 3-5 decades); I don't have a problem with an AT&T-like, heavily regulated monopoly (objectively moderated by real people instead of algorithms, non-profit, no advertising, no data sharing, no news feeds); and let the rest of them (FB, Twitter, et al) fight it out in the market place without Section 230 protection.
“At the heart of these accusations is this idea that we prioritise profit over safety and wellbeing. That’s just not true,” he said.
And all those billion$$$$$....
Quoting Dylan from the tune "Idiot Wind:" ... I can't help it if I'm lucky...
Well, it can be handy to have someone with the best view and replay monitors tell you if that last curveball was actually low or if it just seemed so from your perch deep in the outfield bleachers.
Slightly interesting, but probably means nothing in the long run.
Since Gawd talked to Moses, Twitter stock has acted like FAANGs do most of the time. Year in, year out. This week, TWTR has been a hedge for FB. Others too, a little bit, but moves noticeable between FB and TW. Do not myself see how the use of them is that way. It's not like Lays for Pringles. Then again, it is Wall St, so who knows?
Facemash was created to humiliate, discriminate, and harass women,and from the start, women have flocked to it.As we rewarded this profoundly ugly, incel-like misfit, Sandberg, and their thousands of amoral careerists wrecked news, politics, social life, advertising, and the self-esteem of hundreds of millions of kids. People like Z and Sandberg don't change. Some corrective legislation may help, but why not just tear it down and build better replacements?
My non-comment disappeared. The gist was that fb is not Ma Bell.
Better Dylan quote, "money doesn't talk; it swears"
When it comes to zuckerfuck, I've seen preying mantises with more soul.
Hahahahahahah!
And if social media were as responsible for polarizing society as some people claim, then why are we seeing polarization increase in the US while it stays flat or declines in many countries with just as heavy use of social media around the world?
Assumes facts not in evidence. Facebook played a pretty big part in the Brexit debacle, and has fueled ethnic cleansing in countries like Myanmar for fucks sake. Those are just off the top of my head. There is rising authoritarianism around the world.
"The argument that we deliberately push content that makes people angry for profit is deeply illogical."
"deeply illogical"
He thinks this is a viable argument. The little man who constantly tells us he couldn't possibly regulate free speech because "What is truth, really?"
I will point out the despite his growing up wealthy, given every educational advantage, you know what Zucks-2-b-u never once pursued? The arts. His hubris is glaring, and he should get a little Greek tragedy under his Gucci belt, stat.
Preach!
"a fixture of human life until climate change ends it (another 3-5 decades)"
Uh, no.
Our species will probably experience large numbers of unnecessary premature deaths--which, yes, will suck--but it won't end the human species, or even technological civilization.