Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
August1991

Zuckerberg's Testimony Before Congress

Recommended Posts

For me, there are three takeaways:

1. The congressmen looked like idiots. They apparently have no concept of how ordinary people use this modern technology. IME, politicians are very competitive people: they hate losing and they particularly hate being blind-sided.

2. I'm with Steyn. People like Mark Zuckerberg and Justin Trudeau live in a multinational world. They never go through security. They never touch their passport. The limo goes on to the tarmac. The Austrian-Hungarian Empire was somehow similar.    

3. This modern technology is useful. It means that people waste less time; advertising/information, for example, is directed to people who want to know.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zuckerberg was roasted on the internet ("invented" by 70 year-old Al Gore) for using a booster seat at the hearings.   

CNN mocked that he was like a child in a restaurant ready to order chicken fingers and apple juice.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Zuckerberg was roasted on the internet ("invented" by 70 year-old Al Gore) for using a booster seat at the hearings.   

CNN mocked that he was like a child in a restaurant ready to order chicken fingers and apple juice.

 

CNN?  Booster seat?

======

The Congressmen are clueless and as competitive people, I'm certain that they are now asking aides to explain what went wrong.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, August1991 said:

CNN?  Booster seat?

 

 

In the first joint hearing, Zuckerburg used a booster seat to have more stature while giving testimony.  

Zuckerburg is only 5' 7", but the "internet" quickly pounced on this.   Ex-FBI director James Comey didn't need any steenkin' booster seat.

mark-final_(1)_630_630.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

In the first joint hearing, Zuckerburg used a booster seat to have more stature while giving testimony.

....

b_c, Zuckerburg is only 5'7"?

You are as clueless as the Congressmen asking the questions.

====

Every Congressmen is now turning to an aide and asking: why do people think I'm an idiot? (This is a George Bush Snr laser price check moment.)

But it's more: it's also about the phrase "Only in America".

And finally, it's also about people like Thomas Edison. 

Edited by August1991
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, August1991 said:

b_c, Zuckerburg is only 5'7"?

You are as clueless as the congressmen asking the questions.

 

 

Maybe you didn't get to see the entire spectacle....Zuckerburg was portrayed as the young (and tiny) leader of Facebook.

Make no mistake, and just like radio, comic books, and television regulation, Zuckerburg better figure it out before those "clueless congressmen" regulate his ass for political advertising, privacy, and monopoly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Maybe you didn't get to see the entire spectacle....Zuckerburg was portrayed as the young (and tiny) leader of Facebook.

'''

He was portrayed this way on CNN.

I suspect that congressmen are very competitive, and Zuckerberg's testimony is a wake-up call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, August1991 said:

He was portrayed this way on CNN.

I suspect that congressmen are very competitive, and Zuckerberg's testimony is a wake-up call.

 

Not just CNN.....the "internet" is brutal that way....not even Zuckerberg is immune from mockery and criticism.

54f602ca1194832e54eaf5aedfbf75de

 

http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/social/internet-roasts-alien-zuckerberg-as-facebook-memes-get-even-weirder/news-story/cc701892e95ee212995998798ca7eb95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was watching the show of Zuckerberg answering the questions of the Congressmen and I couldn't help feeling that if those people (Congressmen) really have the confidence of the electorate to run the affairs of a modern society we are all doomed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -TSS- said:

I was watching the show of Zuckerberg answering the questions of the Congressmen and I couldn't help feeling that if those people (Congressmen) really have the confidence of the electorate to run the affairs of a modern society we are all doomed.

I agree.

I am sure that Senators/Congressmen/women are now asking younger aides why everyone thinks that they look clueless.

=====

But for all Americans, I consider the question about whether Facebook is, well, American - well, it's an American question.

And the rest of the world, even Russians and Chinese, wait for a reply.

Edited by August1991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not Zuckerberg's fault, Facebook was never meant to be a serious social medium. He's just capitalizing on it. Users are to blame for being so gullible, to be honest I can understand the confusion from the senators/congress people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Auguste.  Zuckerberg is short, and so what.  He is identified with a new communication platform more closely than anyone since Marconi, and the most important American technologist arguably ever.  

"Zuckerburg better figure it out" is funny because ... he actually told them that regulation is inevitable.  I doubt they even realized that until he told them.  The American model of free-for-all/every-man-for-himself is a good way to deal with new technologies until their impacts on human sense ratios are better understood.  

He's a billionaire for life now, his concerns are not about losing money but making sure his legacy is a good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/14/2018 at 3:03 PM, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

It's not Zuckerberg's fault, Facebook was never meant to be a serious social medium. He's just capitalizing on it. Users are to blame for being so gullible, to be honest I can understand the confusion from the senators/congress people. 

Thinkoutside, I tend to agree. Facebook is a network (like the water pipe/phone line into your house - why have two?) and hence it's a natural monopoly.

But Facebook is also like the TV networks of the 1960s. People log in (for free) and then watch the ads.

As if Google hasn't figured that out. Well, Google hasn't. Facebook is a network like Bell/water pipe. Unlike Google (as much as Google has tried), Google is no Bell.

======

IMHO, Americans (and American politicians in particular) dislike the concentration of power. Their Constitution is designed to stop it.

Edited by August1991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Facebook is a network (like the water pipe/phone line into your house - why have two?) and hence it's a natural monopoly.

Sort of.  They invented the whole idea of facebook, so it's a monopoly of intellectual property also.  

27 minutes ago, August1991 said:

But Facebook is also like the TV networks of the 1960s. People log in (for free) and then watch the ads.

Sure.  I think analogies are helpful here in parsing how these things work.

28 minutes ago, August1991 said:

 

As if Google hasn't figured that out. Well, Google hasn't. Facebook is a network like Bell/water pipe. Unlike Google (as much as Google has tried), Google is no Bell.

Google HAS figured it out.  Google has ads also.  

Google Market cap is about 250 Billion more than Facebook's also.

https://ycharts.com/companies/GOOG/market_cap

28 minutes ago, August1991 said:

IMHO, Americans (and American politicians in particular) dislike the concentration of power. Their Constitution is designed to stop it.

Yes.  Standard Oil wrote the book on breaking up monopolies.  Nowadays they are so many chains you wouldn't know it was the same company.  Esso Exxon Mobil Amoco Texaco Chevron Enco.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Google HAS figured it out.  Google has ads also.  

....

Google HASN'T figured it out.  Google has ads, true, but Google's not a network.

=====

Facebook is a network, with ads. (It's a "bundled club good", as economists would say.)

I'm surprised that Hal Varian didn't advise Google better.

Microsoft? I reckon that they're taking the Austrian view of innovation.

Edited by August1991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Returning to my OP,

I have now two points:

1. US politicians are clueless. Believe me, people like rich Russian, European, US politicians and Justin Trudeau live in a different world: for example, they never touch a passport.

3. This modern technology is useful. Not because it exposes unfairness/"theft" but because it allows ordinary people to contact one another.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Google HASN'T figured it out.  Google has ads, true, but Google's not a network.

I'm sure they are crying and wiping their tears on the ~300B market cap that they have over Facebook.

24 minutes ago, August1991 said:

\Facebook is a network, with ads. (It's a "bundled club good", as economists would say.)

I'm surprised that Hal Varian didn't advise Google better.

What are you ON about ?  Google has it over on facebook because nobody goes to facebook FIRST to google information.  Furthermore, Google has Gmail which snoops your private messages to your grandmother, your senator, the Grand Wizard of your klan...

24 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Microsoft? I reckon that they're taking the Austrian view of innovation.

Magic 8 ball says "Can not figure out anything you are saying"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

...

What are you ON about ?  Google has it over on facebook because nobody goes to facebook FIRST to google information....

Zuckerberg understood that it's about connecting.

But here's the key - Austrian - question: what's the cost of creating a new, better network?

=====

In the case of railways or plumbling, it would be costly to replace such a network.

In the case of Facebook, I suspect that shareholders of fb.nyse should think again.

(BTW, facebook is listed on nasdaq. It's a tech stock.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, August1991 said:

Google HASN'T figured it out.  Google has ads, true, but Google's not a network.

=====

Facebook is a network, with ads. (It's a "bundled club good", as economists would say.)

I'm surprised that Hal Varian didn't advise Google better.

Microsoft? I reckon that they're taking the Austrian view of innovation.

Use adblock and you won't have to put up with ads from Facebook OR google. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! People really don't get it, this is crazy. 

Facebook is a social media platform who's business model is to generate revenue based on information provided by it's users. It's like in a mall where a shop owner is observing people passing by. He notices allot of people are wearing running shoes so he decides to set out a sandwich board advertising running shoes, he observes more customers come in to buy more shoes. He watches more closely and adjusts his advertising and invetory accordingly. As time goes on he begins using cameras to observe people then he thinks to listen also, this provides him with means to target his advertising even more. As time goes on he figures out how to tighten advertising to groups and eventually individuals. This is Facebook's business model, they go to businesses and claim they have a two billion person user base that they know the most intimate of information about. They tell the potential client they pay for advertising only to potential new customers, they can pinpoint advertising that accurately. 

People, every one of us as users of social media have given up our rights to privacy when we signed the user agreements. This has never been hidden from us and it has absolutely nothing nothing to do with the size of the company and any of that crap. Get it into your head NOTHING IS FREE!!! Facebook does it, Google does it, Twitter does it, YouTube does it, Microsoft does it, Apple does it etc.. 

Social media is a public gathering place and should be treated as such. Advertising on social media is designed to steer you toward advertisers so they can sell to you, politics will always find loopholes and ways to alter your point of view through social media so don't expect it to go away. You want any degree of privacy use emails and phone calls. 

Zuckerberg, a person who's figured out how to capitalize on people's need to share their opinions is trying to explain to a group of people who think the population should have more common sense then it has demonstrated over the past few years why his platform may have influenced America's politics. My opinion I think it hasn't, I think people were just sick of the status quo... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/17/2018 at 8:46 AM, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

Wow! People really don't get it, this is crazy. 

Facebook is a social media platform who's business model is to generate revenue based on information provided by it's users.

....

Thinkinout...

Facebook seems like Network TV in the 1960s - get millions of people to look at a screen, then show them something to sell.

===

With that said, there are three differences:

1. Facebook directs information. Network TV in the 1960s couldn't.

2. Facebook can tell advertisers who is watching. Network TV in the 1960s couldn't.

3. With Network TV in the 1960s, there was a collective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, August1991 said:

Thinkinout...

Facebook seems like Network TV in the 1960s - get millions of people to look at a screen, then show them something to sell.

===

With that said, there are three differences:

1. Facebook directs information. Network TV in the 1960s couldn't.

2. Facebook can tell advertisers who is watching. Network TV in the 1960s couldn't.

3. With Network TV in the 1960s, there was a collective. 

You can say that about all forms of advertising, the idea is to get your attention then convince you need that product or service. 

It's amazing what advertisers are allowed to get away with, one example is those banners that tell you your device is infected, click here to fix, very popular in apps. That's advertising based on false information. 

Personally I've trained myself to ignore advertising and I think I'm pretty good at it, I use adblock and usually I enlarge the screen so the ads are pushed off the side. If they are too intrusive I move on or delete the app. 

If I need something I Google it, of course many of the hits are based on paid advertising but in my opinion that's different because then I'm in the market for a particular product or service. If advertising is based on my input then advertisers are always one step behind so they are useless anyway. 

As far as Facebook (or any social media for that matter) is concerned l never use the like (or whatever other) button, instead I'll leave a comment, or text, email or call the person. I leave as small personal data footprint as possible, my personal information is non of Facebook's business. 

For politics l visit here and see what the experts have to say :) , then I Google and try to figure out why politicians say and do what they do, usually give up and move on to something more interesting. I have a short attention span... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2018 at 7:23 PM, -TSS- said:

I was watching the show of Zuckerberg answering the questions of the Congressmen and I couldn't help feeling that if those people (Congressmen) really have the confidence of the electorate to run the affairs of a modern society we are all doomed.

Politicians are the problem. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2018 at 4:45 PM, August1991 said:

For me, there are three takeaways:

1. The congressmen looked like idiots. They apparently have no concept of how ordinary people use this modern technology. IME, politicians are very competitive people: they hate losing and they particularly hate being blind-sided.

2. I'm with Steyn. People like Mark Zuckerberg and Justin Trudeau live in a multinational world. They never go through security. They never touch their passport. The limo goes on to the tarmac. The Austrian-Hungarian Empire was somehow similar.    

3. This modern technology is useful. It means that people waste less time; advertising/information, for example, is directed to people who want to know.    

Most congressman/women and journalists are a bunch of idiots because they have allowed themselves to become puppets on a string for the globalist bankster zionist elitists. Zucky boy is just one of those elitists. I like Steyn, he does not hold back and says what needs to be said. Something lacking in politics today. Today only lies and misinformation is being spread around by those paid off politicians and the MSM. Steyn has a great website called steynonline.com. Great reading and a very informative website. I recommend it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2018 at 5:13 PM, taxme said:

... become puppets on a string for the globalist bankster zionist elitists. Zucky boy is just one of those elitists. I like Steyn....

I strongly disagree.

==================

As it happens, my first boyfriend was Jewish - the second love of my life was Catholic; and the one who got away was named Sirine.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×