facebook-exposed

EDITORIAL, STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
Intellectual Property Rights Give Zuckerberg His Fake Size
By Daily Bell Staff - February 21, 2017

Facebook Plans to Rewire Your Life. Be Afraid … Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s manifesto, penned clearly in response to accusations leveled at the social network in the wake of the bitter U.S. election campaign, is a scary, dystopian document. It shows that Facebook — launched, in Zuckerberg’s own words five years ago, to “extend people’s capacity to build and maintain relationships” — is turning into something of an extraterritorial state run by a small, unelected government that relies extensively on privately held algorithms for social engineering.

Mark Zuckerberg is one of the richest young men in the world with a company that spans the globe. And now he is putting that company to work defining what fake news is and is not. To help him in this task he has has recruited other like Snopes.

Snopes is run by a man who just divorced the co-founder to marry someone else. They seem to publish way too many articles for their small staff. Some have speculated the CIA is helping them. But no one is saying, exactly. So it’s speculation.

Zuckerberg says he’s done the best he can to build an unimpeachable references organization to help him decide what is fake and what isn’t. Presumably he will change it as necessary.

More:

In 2012, Zuckerberg addressed future Facebook investors in a letter attached to the company’s initial public offering prospectus. Here’s how he described the company’s purpose:

People sharing more — even if just with their close friends or families — creates a more open culture and leads to a better understanding of the lives and perspectives of others. We believe that this creates a greater number of stronger relationships between people, and that it helps people get exposed to a greater number of diverse perspectives. By helping people form these connections, we hope to rewire the way people spread and consume information. We think the world’s information infrastructure should resemble the social graph — a network built from the bottom up or peer-to-peer, rather than the monolithic, top-down structure that has existed to date. We also believe that giving people control over what they share is a fundamental principle of this rewiring.

The article points that whatever Zuckerberg has intended to do, it has largely failed. That includes his upcoming effort to differentiate between real and fake news.

And it points out that Zuckerberg has actually made anxieties worse for a number of people. That’s because Facebook is ultimately a competitive situation with everyone trying to create a perfect online life. This caused people overall to have less life satisfaction when using Facebook, not more.

The same thing happens when new mothers get on Facebook to share the joys of newfound parenting. “Failing to get enough … validation causes depressive symptoms.” In other words the exposure to others who seem to be doing better than you, once again turns Facebook into software that is damaging to individuals rather than life-affirming.

But from our point of view, Zuckerberg shouldn’t be where he is anyway. The CIA apparently built up his operation and its size and scale is dependent on various post Civil War decisions. The CIA wants the real-time data that Facebook is collecting from over a billion people (or so we are told).

Chief among the court decisions are elaborations of corporate personhood and intellectual property rights. Also fiat, central-bank money and various kinds of regulation that only very large companies can fully fulfill.

For Zuckerberg, it is probably intellectual property rights that are among the most important parts of his empire. An article entitled From Zero to Zuckerberg tells the tale of just how critical IP is.

Firstly, protecting your IP enables your company to differentiate itself from other businesses and can act as its unique selling point, often helping it to secure future investment.

In fact, many VCs may not back a business at all if its IP isn’t protected. It can be seen as vulnerable to competitors — especially larger, cash-heavy companies who can swoop in and replicate it — and therefore too risky to scale. Put it another way, IP effectively ensures that the ‘new’ Zuckerberg can exist.

IP has virtually lifted Zuckerberg into the position he is in today. The idea that software telling people about the lives of other similar people can be worth literally trillions is based on what society has decided to protect

There is no reason why society should protect IP. If Zuckerberg want protection, he should pay for it himself. Right now you and I pay.

Zuckerberg is worth tens of billions based on post Civil War decisions that back up IP ideas that shouldn’t have been debated in the first place. The only people IP helps these days, for the most part, are those with the very largest companies like Zuckerberg’s.

IP helped Zuckerberg build what is essentially a false company. Now he is compounding the problem. Because of his size he is becoming an arbiter of what is and is not Fake News.

Conclusion: Zuckerberg will push forward on this track, perhaps oblivious to the ridiculousness of his position. He shouldn’t be where he is, and his current size has as much to do with the CIA as it does with IP determinations. Put together the two influences built a behemoth. It shouldn’t exist but it does.

Tagged with:
Posted in EDITORIAL, STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • lulu

    So don’t use Facebook. The way it operates is immoral and deceptive. While pretending to improve relationships, it in fact undermines human connections. The only obvious and easy way to destroy it is to bypass it. Any chance?

    • Marcopolo

      Share your point of view. Don’t use it, never have, never will. my kids don’t use it either.
      Spent some time with an acquaintance as they used the site and couldn’t believe there are that many people sharing that much in an open forum that allows one to unwittingly/unknowingly/ignorantly provide a “proctoscope” into one’s life.
      It is checked by hiring employers as a point of fact, let alone government.
      If it were a film, it would be titled “Egos run Wild.”

  • rahrog

    SECEDE from the federal government and you walk away from the court decisions and banking/monetary system that empower the likes of Fakebook & Suckerberg.

    • autonomous

      Secede from the government and they will will hunt you down, and if they can’t force you into submission they will torture and or kill you.

      • Don Duncan

        We can secede personally, if not publicly. I did so in the ’70s. I hide in plane sight. But even so, this is a very dangerous world, thanks to the majorities’ fear of self governance and support of govt. coercion.

        • john cummins

          There is a place not too far from my home, where a guy looks to be somewhat self-sufficient: goats, chickens, etc. and his place is right next to the road but would be ignored by 99.9% of the people. He is hiding in fairly plain sight, though when the leaves come out will be well hidden. It’s an interesting topic. I remember reading a book by Skousen on how to become a private person and my takeaway was it is nearly impossible and very, very expensive. So, I’ve vacillated between survivalist type hermiting and/or hiding in plain sight. Haven’t ever arrived at a conclusion. Some, like Alex Jones, see their protection in being very out there, etc.

      • rahrog

        If the government can’t force you into submission they will hunt you down, torture you, and kill you whether you SECEDE or not.

        • Don Duncan

          Freedom begins in our mind. If we reject myth/superstition and embrace reason “on principle”, as a life choice, we come to the conclusion that NAP (non-agression principle) is practical/moral. Next we see it is violated by every national political system. This is scary and painful to witness. But it is reality. Knowing is always better than ignorance. It may alienate us from society, politically, but it doesn’t have to socially. Politics is not controlling if we don’t allow it to be. Our resistance can take an infinite number of expressions, limited only by our imagination.

          • rahrog

            I agree that politics is only controlling if we allow it to be. However, the current banking/monetary system sanctioned by the federal government IS controlling. It controls the fruits of the labors of everyone. It is an aggressive use of force in the extreme.

            One of the keys to individual liberty is decentralization of power.

            SECEDE…SECEDE…SECEDE!!! Then SECEDE again!

          • Don Duncan

            I support any secession, as a starting point. The final secession is when governance is down to the individual. I won’t see that widespread in my lifetime (a decade?). But I would hope humanity reaches that enlightened society before it’s too late (extinction). With destructive technology so powerful, it’s like giving a hand grenade to a toddler trusting “the bomb” to politicians.

  • autonomous

    Blaming Zuckerberg for the dangers to public space ignores the danger inherent in public space. Just as watering holes attract predators, public spaces attract them, including the Zuckermans (and government agents). Cautious prey are wary of tight and crowded places, yet are fully aware that the need for water must be balanced against the dangers. Unfortunately, the nature of the predator (and his own need for survival) requires him to be more cunning than his prey is cautious.

  • JDB

    Don’t blame SUGARMOUNTAIN…the blame is with all the brainless twits who subscribe to all of this nihilistic self-serving rubbish…share your joy and sorrow with those you love …there is not need to feed the greedy and the manipulators,

  • Montana

    Facebook is a pacifier for useful idiots who crave affirmation that is neither real nor personal. It does not elevate learning, discussion, or human connections, but it does debase and dumb down its users. It is illuminating how the lowest common denominator has emerged as everyman’s intellectual ground.

  • Bruce C.

    I don’t have a Facebook account and so have never gotten into it. Seemingly, almost everyone else beyond my business/social circle has one however and I can attest that every one is very political on it. It’s really not as honest as advertised. Only the most superficial and unimportant things are posted. Sometimes things are posted to observe the reaction, or to start a rumor, etc. It’s a lot of BS. Far more angst is created than not because of Facebook. If the CIA et al think they’re culling valuable info then they’re just stupid. It’s not so easy to fool naves and fools, precisely because they are because naves and fools.

    “There is no one more ingenious than an idiot”
    – My first boss at my first real job

  • Praetor

    How many E-mails can you create. How many people can you be on Facebook. How many times can you call Facebook, Fake. I doubt there are 1 billion, half more like it, if that.!!!

  • Rosicrucian32

    Live life in the now not on the web. FB has no place in our society for folks that can think for themselves, to paraphrase Eleanor:
    Highly intelligent people discuss ideas, average intelligence people discuss current events, and below average people discuss others…………
    Appropriate in this case I believe. Fight clowns like Zuckerburg by not using their products. Power of the purse.

  • georgesilver

    I think Facebook is great! All these po-faced pseudo intellectual who say they never touch Facebook but feel extremely confident that they know all about it. I bet they also say “I’ve never watched television” but can hold forth about the terrors of watching TV. LOL.
    Facebook is a tool to be used like the telephone or email. Use it to your own advantage it costs nothing. All those out there that consider themselves superior and intelligent because they are frightened of using Facebook here is another thing to shock and terrify you………….. I also use Twitter. LOL.

loading