Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Why Mark Zuckerberg is the most dangerous person in the world, according to this NYU business professor

  1. #1
    The lion's gate Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    20 Hours Ago @ 10:49 PM
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Politics
    Vlkisch traditionalist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,241
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,546
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,663
    Thanked in
    1,168 Posts

    Why Mark Zuckerberg is the most dangerous person in the world, according to this NYU business professor



    Source: CNBC

    As the CEO of Facebook, a business that has the attention of billions of people, Mark Zuckerberg has incredible power.

    And thats what makes the Facebook chief executive the most dangerous person in the world, New York University Stern School of Business professor Scott Galloway said on Bloomberg Markets: The Close on Wednesday.

    Galloway, who teaches marketing and is a self-made millionaire entrepreneur, made the comment while discussing Facebooks move to integrate the messenger services of the various platforms it owns: WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook Messenger. (Facebook bought Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014.) While customers will still be able to use all three messenger apps individually, the three services will all be running off of the same back-end technical infrastructure when Zuckerbergs plan is completed, either by the end of this year or in early 2020.

    Mark Zuckerberg is trying to encrypt the backbone between WhatsApp, Instagram and the core platform, Facebook, such that he has one communications network across 2.7 billion people, Galloway said in the Bloomberg interview. What could go wrong?

    Indeed, more than 2.7 billion people use at least one of those Facebook-owned services each month, the company says. And more than 2.1 billion use Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, or Messenger every day on average, according to Facebook.

    The notion that we are going to have one individual deciding the algorithms for an encrypted backbone of 2.7 billion people is frightening regardless of that persons intentions, Galloway tells Bloomberg.

    Thats because a variety of public voices and perspectives should, at least in theory, help keep the democratic process healthy, Galloway tells CNBC Make It.

    A key safeguard for society is diversity of media/viewpoints, checks and balance, Galloway says. He adds that people should be concerned by the notion that one set of algorithms, controlled by one person who cannot be removed from office would have a significant influence over the platform through which billions of Facebook users around the world consume information every day. Another relevant matter of concern regarding Zuckerberg and Facebook, Galloway adds, is that the social networking giant has already faced high-profile criticism regarding bad actors (such as Russian propagandists) using the platform to spread misinformation and sow discord through Facebook and Instagram.

    [Zuckerberg] has not demonstrated ability, or will, to ensure the doomsday machine will not be weaponized (repeatedly) by bad actors, Galloway says.

    Meanwhile, Facebooks move to integrate its messaging infrastructure could actually be an effort to build a defense against a possible pending antitrust case, Galloway argues.

    At the end of July, the U.S. Department of Justice said it was opening an antitrust review of some of the nations largest tech companies, and while no companies were named specifically, the DOJ is launching the review based on new Washington threats from Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal.

    Zuckerberg wants to get to the point where, if the government were to attempt to break up Facebook, the company would try claim it is not possible without killing the entire social network and taking out the economic benefits with it, Galloway says. What Facebook is doing is taking prophylactic moves against any sort of antitrust so that [Zuckerberg] could say, It would be impossible to unwind this now, Galloway tells Bloomberg.

    This argument, though, is not likely to work, antitrust lawyer Steven Levitsky tells CNBC Make It. No one likes to unscramble the eggs of a corporate integration. But when companies have operated separately, and only now become integrated, its obvious that they can be separated again, Levitsky says. The cost of the separation is one that the defendant would have to bear.

    Facebook may also try to claim that if it were broken into smaller pieces it wont be able to compete with Chinese tech behemoths, such as the Chinese messaging and mobile payment app WeChat and social media video app Tik Tok, Galloway tells CNBC Make It in a follow-up phone call.

    This, Galloway says, is called the national champions argument in economics: If you, in any way, diminish our size and power, we wont be able to defend our shores against the Chinese companies that are coming for us, Galloway says. He doesnt by that argument. Smaller, more nimble, agile companies have shown an ability to be just as effective countervailing forces than large lumbering ones, he says.

    This is absolutely bad for the planet, bad for society and it is clear where they are going, Galloway says. He also called the federal regulators approval of Facebooks acquisition of Instagram a failure.

    I think we all probably regret that now, Galloway said. To this, the Federal Trade Commission had no comment, a spokesperson told CNBC Make It.

    Facebook did not respond to CNBC Make Its request for comment.
    "If we were going to stand in darkness, best we stand in a darkness we had made ourselves. ― Douglas Coupland, Shampoo Planet

  2. #2
    Senior Member schwab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 03:35 AM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Alsatian/Suevi
    Ancestry
    germanic/alsatian/Elsaesser
    Subrace
    Child of Creator God
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Oregon Oregon
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    retired - Aerospace Quality Engi
    Politics
    independent
    Religion
    Born again Christian,
    Posts
    841
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    769
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,006
    Thanked in
    493 Posts
    "Zuckerberg" which translates to "Mountain of sugar/sugar mountain".
    As everyone knows, sugar is deadly.

  3. #3
    Grand Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    Thursday, October 31st, 2019 @ 04:26 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English, Anglo-Saxon
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South Coast
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Self Employed
    Politics
    Free Speech / Anti-EU
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    5,040
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,584
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,598
    Thanked in
    1,394 Posts
    ... but extremely addictive, just like Facebook!

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to SaxonPagan For This Useful Post:


  5. #4
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    30 Minutes Ago @ 06:43 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,940
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,244
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,353
    Thanked in
    588 Posts
    FB attempts to relabel itself as "publisher" in a lawsuit, instead of a tech-platform so that they can censor whatever they like and claim this as their rights derived from the first amendment. That despite all former efforts in public to be not labelled as publisher, just when it suites them to avoid being held accountable for their doings.

    Would be great if it gets broken up again, so maybe MySpace can return in its old fashion form, and all the other "platforms" like Instagram, SnapShot, WhatsApp and whatever else they've bought up to eliminate concurrence to their monopoly. Best would be to shut down FB alltogether to make room for better systems, and Suckerberg be arrested for spying on the whole world and manipulating public opinion.

    #FBsucks
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefrchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


  7. #5
    Senior Member schwab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 03:35 AM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Alsatian/Suevi
    Ancestry
    germanic/alsatian/Elsaesser
    Subrace
    Child of Creator God
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Oregon Oregon
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    retired - Aerospace Quality Engi
    Politics
    independent
    Religion
    Born again Christian,
    Posts
    841
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    769
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,006
    Thanked in
    493 Posts
    Facebook releases long-secret rules on how it polices the service

    https://www.aol.com/article/finance/...vice/23418793/

  8. #6
    Moderator "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    GroeneWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Dutch
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Country
    Netherlands Netherlands
    State
    Utrecht Utrecht
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Single adult
    Religion
    Germanic Heathendom
    Posts
    3,066
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    317
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    413
    Thanked in
    224 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    FB attempts to relabel itself as "publisher" in a lawsuit, instead of a tech-platform so that they can censor whatever they like and claim this as their rights derived from the first amendment. That despite all former efforts in public to be not labelled as publisher, just when it suites them to avoid being held accountable for their doings.
    Which could open a can of legal worms for them. Since platforms like Facebook under a special deal could not be prosecuted for what their users placed on their profiles/channels/ect. under the understanding that social media sites are a new form of public spaces. So that would mean that they now can be persecuted when someone commits illegals acts trough sites like Facebook.

    But heck, that is the price they have to pay if they want to be able to censor people who state things they do not like. And of course them claiming to be publishers might also provoke even more action from politicians who are becoming aware of the impact social media is having.
    The sense of honor is of so fine and delicate a nature that
    it is only to be met with in minds which are naturally noble or
    cultivated by good examples and a refined education.
    - Sir Richard Steele

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to GroeneWolf For This Useful Post:


  10. #7
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    30 Minutes Ago @ 06:43 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,940
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,244
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,353
    Thanked in
    588 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by GroeneWolf View Post
    Which could open a can of legal worms for them. Since platforms like Facebook under a special deal could not be prosecuted for what their users placed on their profiles/channels/ect. under the understanding that social media sites are a new form of public spaces. So that would mean that they now can be persecuted when someone commits illegals acts trough sites like Facebook.
    Among them some interesting cases, like hosting a bride auctioning with live bidding, streaming a murder, streaming killing sprees... that would make for some very interesting lawsuits. Plus the data transfer without user consent to criminals like Cambridge Analytica, in general selling user data without user consent etc

    But heck, that is the price they have to pay if they want to be able to censor people who state things they do not like. And of course them claiming to be publishers might also provoke even more action from politicians who are becoming aware of the impact social media is having.
    Absolutely.
    And then some judge thinks it's "public space" where the first amendment applies to everyone, sacks the whole thing and puts it under public regulation

    Talk about can of worms^^
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefrchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Did Mark Zuckerberg Really Create Facebook?
    By Chlodovech in forum Internet, Security, & Privacy
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Tuesday, July 9th, 2019, 06:34 PM
  2. Mark Zuckerberg: 'Let Children Under 13 Use My Website'
    By celticviking in forum Parenthood & Family
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 28th, 2011, 08:12 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •