It’s weird. Many journalists try to analyze what Mark Zuckerberg believes as though he might actually has some philosophy for FB other than making money.
One is reminded of the almost ostentatiously pretentious attempts of the young Hugh Hefner to persuade the world that in publishing his magazine he was not merely exploiting the concupiscence engendered by his "playmates," but had a novel and penetrating Weltanschauung to share.
-
-
I think this is worse though because buying playboy was voluntary with no unforeseen consequences but having your data sold is a different story even if the consequences are foreseen
-
If you're not paying for the product, you are the product.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Boo Hef’s work until he left Chicago was great for the world. Magazine really did include stellar writing and he really did advance good ideas, like combating racism Then it all went downhill once he got in a fight with feminists and went to LA. I assume coke was involved.
-
Hefner certainly did advocate for political and social reforms that in their time were controversial, and of course his magazine published much excellent writing. But his own prolix account of the "Playboy philosophy" was turgid, self-indulgent and pretentious. Nobody read it.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.