[etothet]

Perhaps “charlatan” in the literal sense isn’t true. I was speaking more colloquial, but that was lazy of me.

I will ask though, has he been honest when he’s testified before Congress? At best, I think we can say he hasn’t been very transparent many of those times. If that’s not for power and/or financial gain, what is it? [0]

- [0] https://dispatch.techoversight.org/top-report-mark-zuckerber... - which was previously discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47060486

> “we're told to not like Facebook…”

I didn’t have to be “told” to not like Facebook or Meta. The company’s actions for well over a decade and those of its executives, including the CEO, allowed to form that opinion on our own. I’d be willing to bet that experience is not unique to me.

[fragmede]

You know how the most important skill of being a manager is to make your reports think that their ideas are their own instead of being told what to do, because it makes them more effective they want to do something rather than being told to do something? Yes, objectively, some actions Facebook has taken are bad. But I know we're not getting the whole story and someone's pushing an agenda. You're free to believe that you're forming your opinions on your own but the framing of facts does lead to seemingly obvious conclusions that aren't actually warranted when you look into the details. I am in no way saying that Facebook is good. Mark took certain actions which made people in the media have a vendetta against him, and so that's why we're hearing about them.