Advertising per se isn't out of alignment with the customer and doesn't have to impact privacy. Obviously TV and radio have been ad-supported since forever and that has no privacy implications (just costs the consumer time). And I can imagine an ad-supported free-service that provided customized ads without compromising privacy. But I don't believe that Google and Facebook are willing to make that commitment.
If the money a company receives is from advertisers to put ads in front of your eyes, then by definition you are product (as Cook said).
You make money selling people's information and no amount of spin can change that.
Mark Sugarloaf finally shows his true colors - a bastard, privacy-intruding moron who profits from people's lives and still pretends he's doing "no evil". I am so glad I got rid of my Bookface account a year ago.
"A frustration I have is that a lot of people increasingly seem to equate an advertising business model with somehow being out of alignment with your customers," Zuckerberg <a href="http://time.com/facebook-world-plan/">told</a> <em>Time</em>. "I think it's the most ridiculous concept. What, you think because you're paying Apple that you're somehow in alignment with them? If you were in alignment with them, then they'd make their products a lot cheaper!"
Hey Zuckerberg? Shut the **** up, please. Apple can't even keep their new phones on shelves, and they again this year will smash every single sales record imaginable. Almost every single product they make is the best selling in its category, from phones, to tablets, to notebooks, to mp3 players. So clearly, Apple products are in alignment with customes, and people more than willing to pay the asking prices, because they truly believe the products are worth their value. The solution to everything isn't to make cheap shit.
I wonder what would happen to Facebook usage if you started charging for it, eh zuck? What a fucking child you are, especially since you're getting a shitload of FB usage from Apple products. And Tim was referring to Google, not you, you small minded fuckwit.
Don't bother arguing with dumb ass kids like Mark Z.!!
Dumb ass kid has a net worth of $33.3 billion. Pretty good for a dumb ass. I guess he just got lucky or no it was all handed to him... no no he just slapped his keyboard a few times and it appeared.
Zuckerberg's attitude is starting to resemble that of Justin Bieber.
Btw: It took the computer industry over 3 years to begin breaking-even with their iPad knockoff devices. So I'm not sure what he means by Apple being "a lot cheaper."
Dumb ass kid has a net worth of $33.3 billion. Pretty good for a dumb ass. I guess he just got lucky or no it was all handed to him... no no he just slapped his keyboard a few times and it appeared.
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/183748/mark-zuckerberg-calls-apple-ceo-tim-cooks-view-on-ad-supported-business-ridiculous#post_2648112" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false">Quote:<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>malta</strong> <a href="/t/183748/mark-zuckerberg-calls-apple-ceo-tim-cooks-view-on-ad-supported-business-ridiculous#post_2648112"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /> <p> </p><p>Dumb ass kid has a net worth of $33.3 billion. Pretty good for a dumb ass. I guess he just got lucky or no it was all handed to him... no no he just slapped his keyboard a few times and it appeared.</p></div></div><p><br />He's a very intelligent dumb-ass.</p>
"In (Google's business) model, the users are the real product."
Zuckerberg may not like it but that's the way informed consumers – not to mention legal precedent – perceives Facebook's business model.
Quote:
"What, you think because you're paying Apple that you're somehow in alignment with them?
Yes, if "in alignment" means that Apple's consumers voluntarily pay what they consider a reasonable price in exchange for the product or service they receive, which they obviously do. Apple's motivations (to make lots and lots money) are "in alignment" with their customers' willingness to spend lots and lots of money. If they were not "in alignment", that relationship would cease to exist.
If people are willing to use Facebook in exchange for divulging personal shopping habits or other information, that's OK too. Their motivations are equally "in alignment".
Quote:
If you were in alignment with them, then they'd make their products a lot cheaper!"
No, that's just an absurd statement devoid of logic.
That is precicely why Apple doesn't rely on ads for money, they charge so much for their products. Meanwhile, other companies give their products away and then whore out their users info for profit. I would much rather be a part of the former than have my info given out freely.
Aww... did someone knock the crown off of precious baby King Zuckerberg?
Wake up there Mark. People are frustrated with getting spammed by advertisements, game requests and other crap. I hope Apple comes out with something that's free and ad-free and your little empire will collapse.
Aww... did someone knock the crown off of precious baby King Zuckerberg?
Wake up there Mark. People are frustrated with getting spammed by advertisements, game requests and other crap. I hope Apple comes out with something that's free and ad-free and your little empire will collapse.
I suppose Apple could buy a cross-platform competitor that could wipe FB out. I just don't think they're that interested in doing it.
Zuckerberg can't hold Cook's jock strap. He's a kid who invented something cool. Now Facebook is practically Orwellian. Of course he's going to mock Cook's comments...his whole financial empire rests on exploiting data.
Actually, he didn't invent anything. MySpace was already around when Facebook showed up. He just did it better at the time.
You have fuc*ing ads plastered all over my wall, in which 99% of them don't pertain to me and I won't click on the other 1%. This means you are not and will never make money off of me.
Face it, you sold out when Facebook went public. Deal with it.
Comments
Advertising per se isn't out of alignment with the customer and doesn't have to impact privacy. Obviously TV and radio have been ad-supported since forever and that has no privacy implications (just costs the consumer time). And I can imagine an ad-supported free-service that provided customized ads without compromising privacy. But I don't believe that Google and Facebook are willing to make that commitment.
If the money a company receives is from advertisers to put ads in front of your eyes, then by definition you are product (as Cook said).
Suck a rooster Mark.
You make money selling people's information and no amount of spin can change that.
Mark Sugarloaf finally shows his true colors - a bastard, privacy-intruding moron who profits from people's lives and still pretends he's doing "no evil". I am so glad I got rid of my Bookface account a year ago.
Now go **** yourself you ass-faced clown.
Tim is right on.
FB have taken the spying into personal info to new heights and as a result Google and other sites are following FB's lead, to become worse spies.
Trying to avoid this extreme net spying has become a significant task, I've even increased my use of fake IDs for my net activities.
This spying becomes even more serious when we realize they collect some incorrect info and keep it forever.
Almost all web sites, including this one, push using these spies for their login.
See DuckDuckGo for a good overview of net spying.
Since Mark speaks Chinese, this might be fitting: ?????????·?????
Ought to arrest him for 4th amendment violations.
Hey Zuckerberg? Shut the **** up, please. Apple can't even keep their new phones on shelves, and they again this year will smash every single sales record imaginable. Almost every single product they make is the best selling in its category, from phones, to tablets, to notebooks, to mp3 players. So clearly, Apple products are in alignment with customes, and people more than willing to pay the asking prices, because they truly believe the products are worth their value. The solution to everything isn't to make cheap shit.
I wonder what would happen to Facebook usage if you started charging for it, eh zuck? What a fucking child you are, especially since you're getting a shitload of FB usage from Apple products. And Tim was referring to Google, not you, you small minded fuckwit.
Don't bother arguing with dumb ass kids like Mark Z.!!
Dumb ass kid has a net worth of $33.3 billion. Pretty good for a dumb ass. I guess he just got lucky or no it was all handed to him... no no he just slapped his keyboard a few times and it appeared.
Zuckerberg's attitude is starting to resemble that of Justin Bieber.
Btw: It took the computer industry over 3 years to begin breaking-even with their iPad knockoff devices. So I'm not sure what he means by Apple being "a lot cheaper."
Dumb ass kid has a net worth of $33.3 billion. Pretty good for a dumb ass. I guess he just got lucky or no it was all handed to him... no no he just slapped his keyboard a few times and it appeared.
He's a very intelligent dumb-ass.
Zuckerberg is such a sleazeball anyway, this really doesn't lower my opinion of him since it can't get much lower.
I think Tim is right, if you are not paying then you are the product.
Not only Tim - it was the exact written opinion of a federal judge dismissing a case against Google one year ago last week:
http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1589&context=historical
"In (Google's business) model, the users are the real product."
Zuckerberg may not like it but that's the way informed consumers – not to mention legal precedent – perceives Facebook's business model.
"What, you think because you're paying Apple that you're somehow in alignment with them?
Yes, if "in alignment" means that Apple's consumers voluntarily pay what they consider a reasonable price in exchange for the product or service they receive, which they obviously do. Apple's motivations (to make lots and lots money) are "in alignment" with their customers' willingness to spend lots and lots of money. If they were not "in alignment", that relationship would cease to exist.
If people are willing to use Facebook in exchange for divulging personal shopping habits or other information, that's OK too. Their motivations are equally "in alignment".
If you were in alignment with them, then they'd make their products a lot cheaper!"
No, that's just an absurd statement devoid of logic.
Aww... did someone knock the crown off of precious baby King Zuckerberg?
Wake up there Mark. People are frustrated with getting spammed by advertisements, game requests and other crap. I hope Apple comes out with something that's free and ad-free and your little empire will collapse.
Aww... did someone knock the crown off of precious baby King Zuckerberg?
Wake up there Mark. People are frustrated with getting spammed by advertisements, game requests and other crap. I hope Apple comes out with something that's free and ad-free and your little empire will collapse.
I suppose Apple could buy a cross-platform competitor that could wipe FB out. I just don't think they're that interested in doing it.
I agree with Mark Zuckerberg! (AD POPS UP: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook T-shirt & Hoodie Unisex T-Shirt). It is ridiculous (AD POPS UP: Ridiculous Cheer Holiday Ornament Cards) to be criticizing Facebook (POP UP WINDOW APPEARS Sign Up for Facebook | Facebook) for the way they advertise and collect data! (LINK appears to every keystroke 512ke has made for the past 10 years). Pfffft! (Pfffft....- dandelions t-shirt).
Zuckerberg can't hold Cook's jock strap. He's a kid who invented something cool. Now Facebook is practically Orwellian. Of course he's going to mock Cook's comments...his whole financial empire rests on exploiting data.
Actually, he didn't invent anything. MySpace was already around when Facebook showed up. He just did it better at the time.
Mr. Zuckerberg,
You have fuc*ing ads plastered all over my wall, in which 99% of them don't pertain to me and I won't click on the other 1%. This means you are not and will never make money off of me.
Face it, you sold out when Facebook went public. Deal with it.