Depending on which country. He could have become a president of some poor, maybe African or Asian state and use his knowledge and funds to help it. If you are talking about US president, then no, definitely no.
Two reasons I've heard given are that: this year he's had the stated goal of visiting all the states in the US (seemingly with a large focus on meeting "everyday people"), and that he's publicly changed his view on religion to be more positive about it.
There are so many signs that are leading to his possible bid for presidency. Otherwise why would he ask his staff to find out a democratic family who voted for #45.
Thank god he's not charismatic enough to pull something like that off. Whereas Trump is merely a boasting incompetent idiot, Zuckerberg is actually truly evil.
If the Democratic machine chose Mark Zuckerburg as presidential nominee, I would vote Republican or third party for the first time in my life.
For someone with so much information about each of us, he is astoundingly tone-deaf when it comes to public criticism of Facebook and it's profound negative side effects, whether it's fake news, Facebook Live streaming of murders, or simply the effect that social media has on a brain developed for survival on the savannah.
Mark Zuckerberg knows too much about us. And yet, he understands surprisingly little.
I'd love it if he would run and would lose. That way all the dirt about Facebook would finally come to light. I'm sure that more than one FB employee would feel honor bound to make sure the degree of transparency would go up a couple of notches. Two birds with one stone: no MZ as president and Facebook possibly mortally wounded.
Facebook would become the world's biggest propaganda machine. I'm 100% sure it would give rise to an alternate social network if Zuckerberg went full democratic.
The way he was trying to push free Internet in Africa and India, I'd be very worried. He would do more damage than trump.
I really don't want Billionaires and wives of presidents leading the country. Just sends the wrong message.
I'm extremely concerned about the ethics around converting Facebook into an election machine. Three issues concern me:
1. Using the platform to push his campaign
2. Using the platform to suppress opposition press and views
3. Using the data analytics to gain an unfair advantage
Whichever party is on the receiving end of that candidacy has all rights to be pissed and somewhat concerned. It's not a fair advantage. Last saturday, my s/o got a push notification to watch Zuckerberg have a "drive about chat" with the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, so it's already happening.
Is that an "ought" or "is" type of "reasonable"? Current conflict-of-interest laws appear toothless against a President who doesn't voluntarily follow their spirit.
And I thought my dislike of FB as the scourge of the web was bad...This entire submission is filled with vitriolic comments for a person most of us have not met. I understand having significant concerns, but can we turn down the ad hominem a bit here?
Nononononono he might make me vote third party if he wins the nomination. Fuck Zuckerberg. You don't build something like Facebook and get a fucking reward for it!
So much negativity in the comments. I don't think he'd be ready for the presidency but if we starts a public service career based on decent opinions and policies, augmented by his wealth and reach so he doesn't need to sell out to campaign financiers, couldn't a good thing come out of it? I don't think having been successful with Facebook is enough to bury him already, same way is not enough to vote for him yet, he needs to make his case. Presidency would be too hasty of course, he'd need to put 10-15 years of public service first I'd say, if he wants to capitalize on his fame to launch a marketing bid at the office then no.
Herbert Hoover was a mining engineer for a while. This is a rather unfortunate example.
I can't remember any names, but I know other countries have a had a better go of it. Specifically I'm thinking of an Eastern Asian country but I really can't remember who and what country.
I think it'd be interesting - I mean, yeah, Zuck gives me the heebie jeebies, nut it'd at least be entertaining to watch. Hopefully he'd have some interesting tech ideas to move things forward. Whether that'd be happen or not would have to be seen, but if nothing else, the process would be entertaining.
I'm extremely concerned about the ethics around converting Facebook into an election machine. Three issues concern me:
1. Using the platform to push his campaign
2. Using the platform to suppress opposition press and views
3. Using the data analytics to gain an unfair advantage
So far, I've not seen much from him that I find compelling.
I think the very asking, and responding, to this question is dangerous. We should not entertain the possibility because the mere presence of the idea in the public consciousness is to his benefit.
67 comments
[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 127 ms ] threadDid he say he'd run or something?
1 - http://wgntv.com/2017/04/30/ohio-family-surprised-when-mark-...
For someone with so much information about each of us, he is astoundingly tone-deaf when it comes to public criticism of Facebook and it's profound negative side effects, whether it's fake news, Facebook Live streaming of murders, or simply the effect that social media has on a brain developed for survival on the savannah.
Mark Zuckerberg knows too much about us. And yet, he understands surprisingly little.
The way he was trying to push free Internet in Africa and India, I'd be very worried. He would do more damage than trump.
I really don't want Billionaires and wives of presidents leading the country. Just sends the wrong message.
How about their daughters and inlaws?
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb fucks.
1. Using the platform to push his campaign
2. Using the platform to suppress opposition press and views
3. Using the data analytics to gain an unfair advantage
Whichever party is on the receiving end of that candidacy has all rights to be pissed and somewhat concerned. It's not a fair advantage. Last saturday, my s/o got a push notification to watch Zuckerberg have a "drive about chat" with the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, so it's already happening.
See also: http://www.nature.com/news/facebook-experiment-boosts-us-vot...
EDIT: This thread got modded off the FP.
Seriously though, it'd be interesting to have any kind of programmer / engineer / etc as President. Have we ever had that?
I can't remember any names, but I know other countries have a had a better go of it. Specifically I'm thinking of an Eastern Asian country but I really can't remember who and what country.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/05/prime...
that's the kind attitude that got us to where we are now.
Damn.
South Park was remarkably prescient.
Second this:
I'm extremely concerned about the ethics around converting Facebook into an election machine. Three issues concern me: 1. Using the platform to push his campaign 2. Using the platform to suppress opposition press and views 3. Using the data analytics to gain an unfair advantage
So far, I've not seen much from him that I find compelling.