Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

One-percent

Zuckerberg concerned about globalisation

Recommended Posts

Find it hard to believe, from a national security point of view, one person would be allowed dominion over such a powerful information dissemination tool, as Facebook, without government agencies exerting some major veto power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, SNACR said:

Find it hard to believe, from a national security point of view, one person would be allowed dominion over such a powerful information dissemination tool, as Facebook, without government agencies exerting some major veto power.

Government agencies are knuckle deep in Facebook and Google, that is how they become outright winners (so quickly), the compliant and record sharing companies get oh so many mentions on the media and away you go. Far too much trouble having do deal with 10/20 companies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hotairmail said:

I think if you are Jewish,  you are probably deeply sceptical of anything that smacks of nationalism. Even more so if you have become very rich from same said globalisation.

However, on the other hand, I feel without a degree of control over external trade, capital flows and immigration you might not be able to have a functioning welfare state that works for all in said country.

Except presumably zionism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually read his comment, and it's devoid of specifics. He keeps using the word "infrastructure" without explaining what that means ("we need infrastructure to help those left behind by globalisation").  What, like REAL jobs? Ha ha ha.   He also conflates "connecting people" with "globalisation".  This is very weak propaganda.  Globalisation is outsourcing to the cheapest manufacturer.  It's about big corps exporting their profits so they don't pay tax (I literally pay more taxes than Facebook, as I'm sure you do, dear reader).  That is not connecting people.  It's exploiting them. The internet connects people.  Telephone lines connect people.  The postal services connects people.  Facebook is just a dumb website (with crappy, 90s design if I may subjectively add).  In aggregate, I would say Facebook makes people more miserable than happy (IMO).  All we have here is an inflated ego that desperately wants the 0.01% to keep on keeping on.  And I'm sure his army of snowflakes will defend his elitist opinions to the hilt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Facebook wants to replace my regular texting and email on my smartphone, apparently. Either way with Zuckerberg (who I despise more than Bill Gates and the late Steve Jobs) it's beginning to dawn on him that the system he got rich off of has hit the buffers and it's pi$$ed off too many millions of people and he wants to dampen down the growing backlash like Blair is doing despite his name being dirt, but I fear it's too late now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, canbuywontbuy said:

Facebook is just a dumb website (with crappy, 90s design if I may subjectively add).

It really is amazingly shitty, it is not even obvious how it works beyond throwing stuff up there via their crappy interface which may, or may not get shown to your friends and of course now you get this huge pop-up that interferes with looking at any page unless you agree to take it where the sun don't shine from Zuckerberg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, davidg said:

It really is amazingly shitty, it is not even obvious how it works beyond throwing stuff up there via their crappy interface which may, or may not get shown to your friends and of course now you get this huge pop-up that interferes with looking at any page unless you agree to take it where the sun don't shine from Zuckerberg.

It looks to be past its sell-by date. I hear far more people talking about WhatsApp these days and when people are drawn to something newer and shinier then the clock is ticking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

It looks to be past its sell-by date. I hear far more people talking about WhatsApp these days and when people are drawn to something newer and shinier then the clock is ticking.

Facebook owns WhatsApp. Interestingly WhatsApp doesn't actually 'earn' any money. The whole point of it is to spy on users so that Facebook is able to more accurately target its advertising. 

Share this post


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

Facebook owns WhatsApp. Interestingly WhatsApp doesn't actually 'earn' any money. The whole point of it is to spy on users so that Facebook is able to more accurately target its advertising. 

Whatsapp charge a small fee every year to use it i think.

 

I don't have a facebook so I'm costing them money , goodie. 

Share this post


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

I actually read his comment, and it's devoid of specifics. He keeps using the word "infrastructure" without explaining what that means ("we need infrastructure to help those left behind by globalisation").  What, like REAL jobs? Ha ha ha.   He also conflates "connecting people" with "globalisation".  This is very weak propaganda.  Globalisation is outsourcing to the cheapest manufacturer.  It's about big corps exporting their profits so they don't pay tax (I literally pay more taxes than Facebook, as I'm sure you do, dear reader).  That is not connecting people.  It's exploiting them. The internet connects people.  Telephone lines connect people.  The postal services connects people.  Facebook is just a dumb website (with crappy, 90s design if I may subjectively add).  In aggregate, I would say Facebook makes people more miserable than happy (IMO).  All we have here is an inflated ego that desperately wants the 0.01% to keep on keeping on.  And I'm sure his army of snowflakes will defend his elitist opinions to the hilt.

Thanks for reading it so I don't have to visit his website and help them earn more money.

Facebook has simply used the infrastructure paid for by other Americans and then pulled up the ladder behind them by refusing to pay taxes to sustain that infrastructure.

I know several people who work at very senior levels in Silicon Valley and get to hear their inside stories.  I wouldn't call Zuckerberg stupid, but people like him can be shockingly childish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Montecristo said:

It's free.

It's not free.  You give up your privacy for nothing, and they make all the money off it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Montecristo said:

Agreed.   But you are not charged a fee for this privilege.  

Yes you are - unless you are the exception who has been using it on an iPhone for a number of years. These seem to have some lifelong 'Free' deal by the look of it.

Anyway WhatsApp has about 500 million users and charges most about 70p a year. That's hundreds of millions - nearly all profit.

And without even using Google to check (The irony !!) I'm pretty sure it was Google who bought it not FB ? 

Hence Google keyboard appearing on it a few months ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least he recognises that Facebook is partially responsible for the political hysteria sweeping the world.

Its obvious that an echo chamber is going to emit polarised views as biases get fed back into the system and amplified.

Wonder if he will suggest closing Facebook down? Glad I don't use it, but probably goes some way to explain why my world view is at odds with my friends who do....

Edit: Polarised views are especially likely if virtue-signalling/narcissism is rampant. You get bombarded with pseudo-virtuous groupthink...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, why should we be listening to Zukerberg as if he's become some sort of world leader or visionary.

He created a website (not the first of it's type) that for the most part has been a useless time sink and helped lead to the culture of narcissism that we have today.

We have strange hero's these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, waynezilla said:

At least he recognises that Facebook is partially responsible for the political hysteria sweeping the world.

Its obvious that an echo chamber is going to emit polarised views as biases get fed back into the system and amplified.

Wonder if he will suggest closing Facebook down? Glad I don't use it, but probably goes some way to explain why my world view is at odds with my friends who do....

Edit: Polarised views are especially likely if virtue-signalling/narcissism is rampant. You get bombarded with pseudo-virtuous groupthink...

facebook is useless as a platform for debate...you cant have a group conversation as you cant refer back to a point to discuss it. It does allow very simple virtue signalling to shout down any opposing point of view.

It is the very home of the virtue signaller.

You can only like or ignore a comment.

Share this post


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

Once again, why should we be listening to Zukerberg as if he's become some sort of world leader or visionary.

He created a website (not the first of it's type) that for the most part has been a useless time sink and helped lead to the culture of narcissism that we have today.

We have strange hero's these days.

True. I have always described Facebook as "Everything that is wrong with the world today."

Had great potential to share views and opinions, but instead just shows that the world is bursting at the seams with shallow morons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Bloo Loo said:

facebook is useless as a platform for debate...you cant have a group conversation as you cant refer back to a point to discuss it. It does allow very simple virtue signalling to shout down any opposing point of view.

It is the very home of the virtue signaller.

You can only like or ignore a comment.

Facebook is worse than useless, though.  It's not just that having a reasoned debate is impossible, but as the political posturing nonsense has now come to overwhelm the entire site, it makes it useless for anything else.  I was posting pictures of my son on Facebook so that family could see him, but it's not worth it anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, richc said:

Facebook is worse than useless, though.  It's not just that having a reasoned debate is impossible, but as the political posturing nonsense has now come to overwhelm the entire site, it makes it useless for anything else.  I was posting pictures of my son on Facebook so that family could see him, but it's not worth it anymore.

Indeed, a thing today appeared on "my" wall about trump announces a veil ban....it came on mine because a "friend" had endorsed the question "do you support this?" and shared...

The meme is that Trump has banned veils with the picture of a Muslim woman and therefore an attack on Islam.  The meme is true in these peoples minds, for they have agreed with the sentiment, and they felt it OK to share it....

Fact is, Trump has made no such declaration.

Fake news fuels the left.

Share this post


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

Yes you are - unless you are the exception who has been using it on an iPhone for a number of years. These seem to have some lifelong 'Free' deal by the look of it.

Anyway WhatsApp has about 500 million users and charges most about 70p a year. That's hundreds of millions - nearly all profit.

And without even using Google to check (The irony !!) I'm pretty sure it was Google who bought it not FB ? 

Hence Google keyboard appearing on it a few months ago.

It's owned by Facebook. They dropped all user fees, the information they get on people is far more valuable than the small annual fee they charged.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/unicornomy.com/how-does-whatsapp-make-money/amp/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there you go then !!

Seems strange at the very same time Google search and Google keyboard appear. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, whitevanman said:

It's owned by Facebook. They dropped all user fees, the information they get on people is far more valuable than the small annual fee they charged.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/unicornomy.com/how-does-whatsapp-make-money/amp/

I think they think they can sell the information to people who think its useful.

Yet, with all this information, the information purchasers still go bust, get the polls wrong, get caught off guard when the new meme slaughters them, and the "cried wolf" shoves their targets to their competition.

Wankers the lot of them.

Exploited to the hilt by the zuckerbergs of this world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bloo Loo said:

I think they think they can sell the information to people who think its useful.

Yet, with all this information, the information purchasers still go bust, get the polls wrong, get caught off guard when the new meme slaughters them, and the "cried wolf" shoves their targets to their competition.

Wankers the lot of them.

Exploited to the hilt by the zuckerbergs of this world.

Well, I'm just starting a targetted Facebook advertising campaign for my business so I hope your wrong :P

You're probably not wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zuckerberg aside,  the biggest concern with complete globalisation would be the fact that if the single emerging ruling elite decide to go down a path of totalitarianism there would be nobody left to stop them.

I would suggest you always need at least three world leaders chosen by 3 different electorates to mitigate at least some of the risk.

That probably wouldn't help if all populations form their opinions from the same information / social groups though..  which seems to be the path we are moving down.   Both Britain and the US voted the "wrong way" recently hence the sudden interest in "fake news" to clear platforms like Facebook of information that might make people believe the "wrong" thing.  The problem is the more you censor the media, the more people feel they are being mislead..  leading to a lack of confidence in "the system" and an increase in votes for candidates who offer to "drain the swamp".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   81 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.