- Zuckerberg denied he is running for president in 2020. I wonder what is the reason of his postelection tour in America and his big PR team. [1] I don't think it's possible to be both Statesman Zuck and Silicon Valley engineer Zuck. As the article says, you cannot be concerned with only quantifiable outcomes and at the same time propagate fuzzy human ideas like ethics, judgment and intuition.
- Facebook's motto of Move Fast and Break Things seems to be replaced with Break Things and Test Results. The News Feed has turned into a Skinner box to study the daily behaviour of more than a billion people.
- I get very overstimulated looking at the picture of their newsfeed office for a few seconds - bravo for people being able to be focused and able to write code in that environment!
> Zuckerberg denied he is running for president in 2020.
That's a common tactic. I'm all but sure he plans on entering politics. In addition to his recent tour of America and big PR team, he also recently renounced his atheism. That, imo, is a big tell.
Trumps win this fall is going to open the door for many other billionaire-celebrities. He basically proved that name recognition alone can take you very far.
This is why you see people like Mark Cuban mulling a campaign.
Zuck has name recognition - arguably more than Trump - is less blatantly offensive, and has a treasure trove of data. Not to mention a natural marketing/communications/propaganda platform. He also has a seasoned team of lobbyists at his disposal. Oh and he's loaded, too.
> Zuckerberg denied he is running for president in 2020. I wonder what is the reason of his postelection tour in America and his big PR team.
He might have a different plan in mind for effecting changes in the world. Being elected President gives you certain powers, but it also comes with a lot of responsibilities and limitations; whereas, being a traveling Do-Gooder and (ugh) Thought Leader or whatever, with several billion dollars behind you and no constitutional limitations on what you can spend the money on might be more freeing.
Basically, a Heinlein novel come to life and adjusted for the 21st century.
Or it could be simply that he wants to understand the people of the country better. After Trump's election he may be surprised by the outcome, and instead of cursing intelligence of people who voted him, he just wants to understand the perspective.
I know Zuckerberg is not a well liked on HN, but still if we consider his previous resolutions of reading book, running, building AI. Most are simple without ulterior motives of ruling the world.
Mark Cuban wants to run, Zuck wants to run. Trump basically proved that truck loads of money will get you very far in govt.
It seems America is slowly becoming a plutocracy where decisions originate from one place and Congress has to uphold that decision in the fear of being fired or losing on copious amount of lobbying money.
> I get very overstimulated looking at the picture of their newsfeed office for a few seconds - bravo for people being able to be focused and able to write code in that environment!
The office looks like a Facebook news feed: Cluttered disarray.
"After studying how people shared 1.25 million stories during the campaign, a team of researchers at M.I.T. and Harvard implicated Facebook and Twitter in the larger failure of media in 2016."
This is one problem, but according to Nicholas Carr the problem might be deeper and more fundamental : "free-flowing information makes personal and cultural differences more salient, turning people against one another instead of bringing them together."
Well of course..It's the echo chamber effect that's been discussed since the 90's.
I didn't read the article because, frankly, I have no interest in Zuck's pointifications ... He created a 900lb gorilla and sometimes the beast is gonna wreck havoc. Nothing with the deep social significance of FB can skate through culture without ripping up a few roads.
I think it's much ado about nothing and is nothing but the new normal.
The free-flowing information is not exactly "free" flowing though.
All content is logistically tailored by the corporations and presented to it's user with the goal of maximizing profits.
All I wanted from facebook regarding that problem on how to deal with news on my timeline was one option to hide all shared links and content and show only my friend's original content. When I want news I know where to find them and it's not on facebook.
News on Facebook is a real problem, because the news stories that get shared on Facebook are things that people get really upset about. Donald Trump got tons of press because he deliberately and repeatedly said the most outrageous things.
I've now individually hidden every major news source (BBC, CNN, etc...). Huge improvement to my Facebook experience. While I still get ads from companies, my Facebook feed has been entirely purged of Donald Trump and mass murders.
When you hide a shared link, you can tell Facebook to hide all links from that domain, forever. It takes surprisingly few blanket bans from the big clickbaity domains before your feed gets back to showing mostly original content.
Bernard Stiegler and a bunch of French philosophers have been writing about this idea of 'Algorithmic Governmentality' which I think is a useful way of discerning Mark Zuckerberg's intentions, press releases, denials etc aside.
"I would like to show that with algorithmic governmentality, what we
face is precisely a crisis of the regimes of truth. To my mind, we are less facing the
emergence of a new regime of truth than a crisis of regimes of truth. A whole range of
notions are in crisis: the notions of person, authority, testimony."
Buckminster Fuller talked about the same thing in Cybernetics. He made the proposal that a feedback formula such as PID would lead to utopia when applied to government... but as many note, the problem is less about distribution of quantifiable resources than managing conflicting values.
Good info in article. Name / age of news feed head and 99.9% belief to name one thing.
I also came away still believing even more how we are still better off now - even with some fake news- than the time of Walter Cronkite and the pre cable networks. All you had was whatever THEY decided you should know. One of two newspapers with editors that chose for you.
Even as a news junkie in my pre teens I wondered why they chose what they chose. Thus, by default , what they chose was important.
Now people choose and we just don't like the results, especially the old school hardcore journalists.
To the people working at FB NF, do not let old school editors change your "user decides" algorithms. And never put a human in an editing position.
I think the Internet and competition from social media has made journalism better, as you can no longer buy up every local paper when Twitter and Facebook and Blogger make journalists out of anybody, and as a result the news companies have to work extra hard to justify their subscriptions.
In addition, mainstream US newspaper subscriptions have been booming since the election with readers demanding unprecedented oversight over this new administration and its addiction to blatant lying. In a way, fake news made real newspapers great again.
> In the span of a few months, the Valley has been transformed from a politically disengaged company town into a center of anti-Trump resistance and fear
Is this true? As a Valley-raised New Yorker who visits frequently, Silicon Valley seems politically sleepy. Conversations are vibrant as ever. But action is slim.
I would guess that the "action" of SV-ites would show up more online than in-person. Building websites that send letters to congressmen, things like that.
My guess is that this discussion wouldn't even be happening if Hillary had won. Is my instinct correct there?
The whole article basically paints Trump supporters in the same light as terrorists and Nazis - nothing unfamiliar in discourse certainly - but certainly not a neutral stance.
I mean basically all of this "introspection" and everything surrounding facebook "investigating" fake news etc... came, not from FB, but from the MIT/Harvard study as well as from either side of the aisle shouting fake news and news bubbles.
This article and (one-sided) discussion is simply an extension of the Ad Hominem filled election cycle. Anyone who doesn't believe Trump is a dictator must be a nazi, racist, sexist, reads fake news, doesn't understand how (insert topic) works etc.
This is the story of how heroic outlets like the NYT are defenders of Real News(TM) against terrorists and neer-do-wells, and how Zuckerberg and his use of his proprietary data collection and mood manipulating reality construction system to take a stand against Fake News(TM) will save us all from evil boogeymen, damnit!
Get on 'the right side of history' already, sheesh.
This is why establishment politicians were so scared of Trump's victory -- it may well have triggered a celebrity apocalypse in DC, a city sometimes referred to as Hollywood for the Less Attractive.
At least we haven't reached the point where the armed forces are auctioning the Presidency.
[+] [-] clydethefrog|9 years ago|reply
- Zuckerberg denied he is running for president in 2020. I wonder what is the reason of his postelection tour in America and his big PR team. [1] I don't think it's possible to be both Statesman Zuck and Silicon Valley engineer Zuck. As the article says, you cannot be concerned with only quantifiable outcomes and at the same time propagate fuzzy human ideas like ethics, judgment and intuition.
- Facebook's motto of Move Fast and Break Things seems to be replaced with Break Things and Test Results. The News Feed has turned into a Skinner box to study the daily behaviour of more than a billion people.
- I get very overstimulated looking at the picture of their newsfeed office for a few seconds - bravo for people being able to be focused and able to write code in that environment!
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-18/this-team...
[+] [-] ithinkinstereo|9 years ago|reply
That's a common tactic. I'm all but sure he plans on entering politics. In addition to his recent tour of America and big PR team, he also recently renounced his atheism. That, imo, is a big tell.
Trumps win this fall is going to open the door for many other billionaire-celebrities. He basically proved that name recognition alone can take you very far.
This is why you see people like Mark Cuban mulling a campaign.
Zuck has name recognition - arguably more than Trump - is less blatantly offensive, and has a treasure trove of data. Not to mention a natural marketing/communications/propaganda platform. He also has a seasoned team of lobbyists at his disposal. Oh and he's loaded, too.
[+] [-] pavel_lishin|9 years ago|reply
He might have a different plan in mind for effecting changes in the world. Being elected President gives you certain powers, but it also comes with a lot of responsibilities and limitations; whereas, being a traveling Do-Gooder and (ugh) Thought Leader or whatever, with several billion dollars behind you and no constitutional limitations on what you can spend the money on might be more freeing.
Basically, a Heinlein novel come to life and adjusted for the 21st century.
[+] [-] LeeHwang|9 years ago|reply
There is increasing unrest and resentment towards the very rich including silicon valley ceos in america.
[+] [-] throwaway136|9 years ago|reply
I know Zuckerberg is not a well liked on HN, but still if we consider his previous resolutions of reading book, running, building AI. Most are simple without ulterior motives of ruling the world.
[+] [-] nojvek|9 years ago|reply
It seems America is slowly becoming a plutocracy where decisions originate from one place and Congress has to uphold that decision in the fear of being fired or losing on copious amount of lobbying money.
America is no longer a functional democracy.
[+] [-] alexkavon|9 years ago|reply
The office looks like a Facebook news feed: Cluttered disarray.
[+] [-] sixQuarks|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] clumsysmurf|9 years ago|reply
"After studying how people shared 1.25 million stories during the campaign, a team of researchers at M.I.T. and Harvard implicated Facebook and Twitter in the larger failure of media in 2016."
This is one problem, but according to Nicholas Carr the problem might be deeper and more fundamental : "free-flowing information makes personal and cultural differences more salient, turning people against one another instead of bringing them together."
http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2017/04/21/how-technology-c...
[+] [-] cubano|9 years ago|reply
I didn't read the article because, frankly, I have no interest in Zuck's pointifications ... He created a 900lb gorilla and sometimes the beast is gonna wreck havoc. Nothing with the deep social significance of FB can skate through culture without ripping up a few roads.
I think it's much ado about nothing and is nothing but the new normal.
[+] [-] olleromam91|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bigato|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] propter_hoc|9 years ago|reply
I've now individually hidden every major news source (BBC, CNN, etc...). Huge improvement to my Facebook experience. While I still get ads from companies, my Facebook feed has been entirely purged of Donald Trump and mass murders.
[+] [-] munificent|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JakeAl|9 years ago|reply
http://www.fbpurity.com
[+] [-] supernumerary|9 years ago|reply
"I would like to show that with algorithmic governmentality, what we face is precisely a crisis of the regimes of truth. To my mind, we are less facing the emergence of a new regime of truth than a crisis of regimes of truth. A whole range of notions are in crisis: the notions of person, authority, testimony."
More here if you're interested: https://iainmait.land/pdf/Rouvroy-Stiegler.pdf
[+] [-] chillingeffect|9 years ago|reply
Buckminster Fuller talked about the same thing in Cybernetics. He made the proposal that a feedback formula such as PID would lead to utopia when applied to government... but as many note, the problem is less about distribution of quantifiable resources than managing conflicting values.
[+] [-] losteverything|9 years ago|reply
I also came away still believing even more how we are still better off now - even with some fake news- than the time of Walter Cronkite and the pre cable networks. All you had was whatever THEY decided you should know. One of two newspapers with editors that chose for you.
Even as a news junkie in my pre teens I wondered why they chose what they chose. Thus, by default , what they chose was important.
Now people choose and we just don't like the results, especially the old school hardcore journalists.
To the people working at FB NF, do not let old school editors change your "user decides" algorithms. And never put a human in an editing position.
Remember, it's JUST news.
[+] [-] rm_-rf_slash|9 years ago|reply
In addition, mainstream US newspaper subscriptions have been booming since the election with readers demanding unprecedented oversight over this new administration and its addiction to blatant lying. In a way, fake news made real newspapers great again.
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|9 years ago|reply
Is this true? As a Valley-raised New Yorker who visits frequently, Silicon Valley seems politically sleepy. Conversations are vibrant as ever. But action is slim.
[+] [-] derefr|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AndrewKemendo|9 years ago|reply
The whole article basically paints Trump supporters in the same light as terrorists and Nazis - nothing unfamiliar in discourse certainly - but certainly not a neutral stance.
I mean basically all of this "introspection" and everything surrounding facebook "investigating" fake news etc... came, not from FB, but from the MIT/Harvard study as well as from either side of the aisle shouting fake news and news bubbles.
[+] [-] snowpanda|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cat199|9 years ago|reply
This is the story of how heroic outlets like the NYT are defenders of Real News(TM) against terrorists and neer-do-wells, and how Zuckerberg and his use of his proprietary data collection and mood manipulating reality construction system to take a stand against Fake News(TM) will save us all from evil boogeymen, damnit!
Get on 'the right side of history' already, sheesh.
[+] [-] pc2g4d|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] artur_makly|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] squozzer|9 years ago|reply
At least we haven't reached the point where the armed forces are auctioning the Presidency.
[+] [-] blurrywh|9 years ago|reply
Reminds me of 'Spirits that I've cited // My commands ignore.' (Goethe)