[ken]

I don't think he's suggesting anyone should do anything violent. I think he's suggesting that if Zuckerberg continues down this road, he's going to face problems by whatever routes remain available. The only thing GP said anyone should do is Zuckerberg should "probably hire more personal security".

Would it have come across as less of a threat if he had quoted JFK ("Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable")? Was JFK threatening Latin America when he said that to their diplomats?

[freewilly1040]

This is a very common rhetorical tactic for people who wish to advocate violence. Parent comment is not advocating violence by asking someone to commit a violent act, they are advocating violence by arguing that violence is reasonable / inevitable.

[logfromblammo]

Crime exists. I advocate that everyone apply whatever measures that fit within their means to ameliorate it, or avoid it altogether.

It applies on the small scale as easily as the grand. If you insult someone's mother, watch for and avoid the retaliatory punch. If you violate the privacy of a billion people, call them morons for trusting you, profit greatly from their personal information, and continue to demonstrate eroding ethics, then install a safe room in your house(s) and hire some bodyguards.

That said, individual violence is reasonable, after the non-violent and collectively-violent possibilities have been exhausted. There always has to be some way to effectively retaliate against anti-social behavior.

[joyeuse6701]

True, though I'd argue he doesn't need to use the rhetorical tactic. Tyrants invite violence implicitly when they exercise their power over the weak.