[oxide]

>Personally, I believe Zuckerberg is sincere in wanting to connect everyone in the world with each other.

>I feel sure he doesn't think of it as a land grab, even privately.

why?

[click170]

I can't speak for op but I agree with them and can explain why I feel that way.

I believe most humans are inherently not evil even if they don't agree with me. They want to make the world a better place, and they are simply pursuing an agenda that accomplishes that in their eyes.

I don't have any evidence that most people aren't evil, but in my day to day interactions I have yet to meet someone who I believe is sincerely evil. I'm sure they're out there, I just have faith that there's a lot more of the rest of us.

Should you fault someone for being the change they want to see in the world? (For the record I'm opposed to Free Basics)

[chongli]

How much does it really matter, though? I'm sure Kim Jong-Un thinks he's making his country a better place, as thought Hitler.

Perhaps we should focus more on judging the outcomes of people's actions instead of their intent.

[click170]

I completely agree, results matter. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, as the old saying goes.

[jotux]

This reminds me of the saying, "We judge ourselves by our intentions and others by their behavior."

[hellameta]

You should go deeper. That you believe people aren't evil from experience is not evidence that people do not do evil - it's evidence that nobody does evil knowingly/willingly etc. You can do 'evil' very easily if you don't think it's evil. If you've justified it in some way that makes it good. That's what's so dangerous about it.

[forgottenpass]

I believe most humans are inherently not evil even if they don't agree with me.

I believe most people are incapable of recognizing well-intentioned but bad actions when they agree with the intentions. Even when you don't agree with the intentions, it's can still be hard to spot without the benefit of hindsight.

Should you fault someone for being the change they want to see in the world?

"Fault" is quite a slippery word to use in this context. As it means both a failing of character and responsibility for wrongdoing.

Obviously with the second definition it's easy to fault someone when you see their actions as wrongdoing.

With the first it's mixed, and I suspect that's the one you mean. Someone who is "being the change they want to see in the world" is seen as virtuous. But when that virtuous person is also too headstrong to see, acknowledge, and correct the negatives of their plans when they encounter well-articulated resistance? Yes, I would very much fault that person.

[macspoofing]

It is possible that he could see it as a land grab but not see a "land grab" as inherently evil.

[knughit]

"Manifest Destiny"

[colordrops]

I don't know about "evil", but I've met many people that could be described as sociopaths, especially in the VC realm in SV. They will lie, cheat, and steal from you without batting an eye, and smile and shake your hand the next day. It's not far fetched to believe that Zuckerburg, who is tight with that circle, could also exhibit the same behavior. I found the selfish attitudes of those around me rubbing off on me, especially when it felt like morals and ethics were holding me back as a business founder. But I also felt it was making me ill, both psychologically and physically, and decided to pull back from that degradation.

[rodgerd]

Intent is not magic.