[swed420]

I believe that threat could be prevented with the suggestions in the article.

> The people who run existing social media didn't start out evil

Um, not all of them:

> On July 6 instant messages by a 19-year Zuck appeared on Twitter, along with a link to a 2010 Business Insider story about an exchange that took place shortly after the Facebook founder launched the social-media phenomenon in his dorm room.

> “Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard just me. I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS,” Zuckerberg’s message says.

> “What? How’d you manage that one?” a friend asks.

> “People just submitted it,” Zuckerberg responds. “I don’t know why they 'trust me.' Dumb fucks.”

[__MatrixMan__]

Touche re: Zuck, but I still think that even had he started a saint, he'd be a sinner by now.

[swed420]

True, which is why you'd need well defined safeguards in place from the very beginning, with high visibility into the organization that you normally wouldn't find in a closed, for-profit business.

[__MatrixMan__]

You mean like OpenAI back when it was a nonprofit?

[swed420]

So figure out what they did wrong. It's going to have to be more original than the easily subverted traditional "nonprofit" model.

[__MatrixMan__]

Maybe the right lawyer is out there for that challenge. But legal code is running on compromised infrastructure these days so I think we should plan to operate as if the law is against us.