09-22-2010, 10:52 AM
I've seen some interviews with Facebook's founder, Mark Zuckerberg. From a Law of One point of view, I think there's no doubt he is trying to create a "social memory complex" through technology.
In his vision, everyone will know about the activities, ideas and opinions of each other... through his site.
Ultimately everyone can know what other people liked, and go buy it too. When business offers something that isn't liked by everyone, they get a quick and powerful incentive to change. If they come up with something better targeted to what the consumer wants, they are rewarded.
As far as I can tell, Zuckerberg's vision does not go beyond that. I haven't seen him talk about this improved communication leading to interpersonal harmony, smoother teamwork, world peace, or any other bigger ideas. For him, the collective consciousness is about being a consumer, easily reached by advertisers.
The site can certainly be used for alternative spirituality networking. But that is the flea on the dog's back. It's the consumer marketing that is the tail wagging the dog.
I feel that Zuckerberg is developing a socially useful utility, but doing it from an STS point of view. Not that he deliberately sets out to be mean, or that he objects to happy positive socializing on the site. He might even be fun to have a beer with. But it seems he's pretty much indifferent and oblivious to whoever and whatever doesn't help him get his way, to build the site and make it indispensable.
I'm reminded of Rockefeller, who drove down the price of oil and got it distributed everywhere. He was hands-on with the details, as is Zuckerberg. Rockefeller went onsite with the oil wells and Zuckerberg makes a lot of software himself. Both used people and are reported as personally abrasive when anyone is in their way.
Facebook is driving down the price of online interaction, making it free and simple for everyone. With the mobile connection you can plug into the hive mind anywhere, just as Standard Oil brought oil across the country. Both tycoons became wildly rich in the process.
Rockefeller's energy supply network helped a huge industrial revolution transform the country. It also included some injustices that led to new types of laws. New antitrust rules dealt with business manipulations that most people would never have imagined.
One thing Zuckerberg says is exactly right, as far as I can see: If he hadn't done it first, someone else would have built a similar system. The idea of a social memory complex is starting to get through to a lot of people. As with the antitrust laws from Rockefeller, I think Facebook's growth may lead to new types of personal privacy laws and more public awareness of privacy issues.
I'm curious if the new movie, the dramatized bio made without his involvement, will influence public perception of Facebook and the guy behind it.
In his vision, everyone will know about the activities, ideas and opinions of each other... through his site.
Ultimately everyone can know what other people liked, and go buy it too. When business offers something that isn't liked by everyone, they get a quick and powerful incentive to change. If they come up with something better targeted to what the consumer wants, they are rewarded.
As far as I can tell, Zuckerberg's vision does not go beyond that. I haven't seen him talk about this improved communication leading to interpersonal harmony, smoother teamwork, world peace, or any other bigger ideas. For him, the collective consciousness is about being a consumer, easily reached by advertisers.
The site can certainly be used for alternative spirituality networking. But that is the flea on the dog's back. It's the consumer marketing that is the tail wagging the dog.
I feel that Zuckerberg is developing a socially useful utility, but doing it from an STS point of view. Not that he deliberately sets out to be mean, or that he objects to happy positive socializing on the site. He might even be fun to have a beer with. But it seems he's pretty much indifferent and oblivious to whoever and whatever doesn't help him get his way, to build the site and make it indispensable.
I'm reminded of Rockefeller, who drove down the price of oil and got it distributed everywhere. He was hands-on with the details, as is Zuckerberg. Rockefeller went onsite with the oil wells and Zuckerberg makes a lot of software himself. Both used people and are reported as personally abrasive when anyone is in their way.
Facebook is driving down the price of online interaction, making it free and simple for everyone. With the mobile connection you can plug into the hive mind anywhere, just as Standard Oil brought oil across the country. Both tycoons became wildly rich in the process.
Rockefeller's energy supply network helped a huge industrial revolution transform the country. It also included some injustices that led to new types of laws. New antitrust rules dealt with business manipulations that most people would never have imagined.
One thing Zuckerberg says is exactly right, as far as I can see: If he hadn't done it first, someone else would have built a similar system. The idea of a social memory complex is starting to get through to a lot of people. As with the antitrust laws from Rockefeller, I think Facebook's growth may lead to new types of personal privacy laws and more public awareness of privacy issues.
I'm curious if the new movie, the dramatized bio made without his involvement, will influence public perception of Facebook and the guy behind it.