Should Facebook be nationalized?

[Enemy of the State]

Let's Nationalize Facebook

The author is concerned with all that information being under control of one group of people. The solution, of course, is to give it to another, bigger group, this time one that has lots of guns. Brilliant! Oh and everyone from outside the US apparently. America runs these internet tubes!

[Claudius Gothicus]

I don't get it... Nationalized as in only people from one country can connect between eachother? or ''Nationalized'' as in Facebook being State Owned?

Whatever the case is, LOL.

[Enemy of the State]

I don't get it... Nationalized as in only people from one country can connect between eachother? or ''Nationalized'' as in Facebook being State Owned?

Whatever the case is, LOL.

As I understand it, the author is advocating giving the US government ownership of Facebook.

[Claudius Gothicus]

As I understand it, the author is advocating for the US government to nationalize Facebook.

Ohh I see... and the reason being? No wait, I get it, evil corporations rule the world and spy us through facebook.

[Menelik_I]

I don't get it... Nationalized as in only people from one country can connect between eachother? or ''Nationalized'' as in Facebook being State Owned?

We could have a one world government to solve that part.

[Vizvii]

Fortunately, this is not going to happen in any shape or form.

[Savoyard]

Well marriage is already nationalized, why not go all the way?

[King Gambrinus]

Not stated owned. People owned.

[Enemy of the State]

Not stated owned. People owned.

It's already owned by people. How could it not be? Animals don't have property rights.

[King Gambrinus]

It's already owned by people. How could it not be? Animals don't have property rights.

No, now it's owned by the highest bidder, which is not what I or anybody else signed up for. When I signed in to Facebook it was in trust of the very few people who have access to my details. I realise my mistake in trusting the few.

Enemy, you're a prominent anarchist on here. Surely you want the power of Facebook to be in the hands of many and not few?

[Enemy of the State]

No, now it's owned by the highest bidder, which is not what I or anybody else signed up for. When I signed in to Facebook it was in trust of the very few people who have access to my details. I realise my mistake in trusting the few.

How exactly would you have Facebook run?

Enemy, you're a prominent anarchist on here. Surely you want the power of Facebook to be in the hands of many and not few?

As far as I can tell, Facebook has not used coercion against anyone. People freely sign up and they are free to leave. You should know my anarchist principles are based upon non-aggression.

[King Gambrinus]

How exactly would you have Facebook run?

Zuckerberg can do what he wants with Facebook. Unfortunately he decided to try and get some hubris in the stock market and now some shareholders will probably demand access to our details.

What I'd like to see is a facebook owned by the people with total transparency. If you're desperate to keep something private, the internet isn't the place to go. I'd trust the masses to respect my facebook account and try not hack into accounts, since I have the same power they do...Do I trust the shareholders and ad companies? Nope.

As far as I can tell, Facebook has not used coercion against anyone. People freely sign up and they are free to leave. You should know my anarchist principles are based upon non-aggression.

Sure, but when was giving shares to the highest bidder part of the plan?

Also, when you leave, it doesn't matter. Your account details still exist in their data. I can't suddenly make The Illusionist no longer exist in their data. They still have my details.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

No, certainly not. Facebook would collapse if it was state run, and if facebook ever started some undesirable practice well the state has a monopoly of force.

What I'd like to see is a facebook owned by the people with total transparency. If you're desperate to keep something private, the internet isn't the place to go. I'd trust the masses to respect my facebook account and try not hack into accounts, since I have the same power they do...Do I trust the shareholders and ad companies? Nope.

Sure, but when was giving shares to the highest bidder part of the plan?

Also, when you leave, it doesn't matter. Your account details still exist in their data. I can't suddenly make The Illusionist no longer exist in their data. They still have my details.

If they wish to change their terms of service though they can only use it on data after the change, or to people who give consent for it to be applied retroactively. I remember huge uproar a few years ago when something like that happened, and facebook backed down.

[Whukid]

No, now it's owned by the highest bidder, which is not what I or anybody else signed up for. When I signed in to Facebook it was in trust of the very few people who have access to my details. I realise my mistake in trusting the few.

Enemy, you're a prominent anarchist on here. Surely you want the power of Facebook to be in the hands of many and not few?

Actually, it is what you signed up for when you accepted the General Terms of Use. If you don't like it, don't use it.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Can't imagine anything more stupid. It's not even sure that Facebook is going to be particularly monetisable.

[Vizvii]

Can't imagine anything more stupid. It's not even sure that Facebook is going to be particularly monetisable.

Isn't it already monetisable?

[removeduser_487563287433]

Isn't it already monetisable?

I should be more specific. Facebook's ad revenue model relies at the moment on basic CPC ads, and the advertising industry is far from convinced that these work. Facebook is rolling out new options, but currently the ad dollars aren't really coming in and Facebook's business model is still somewhat dubious. Any other considerations aside, it's not a very economical investment right now.

[Vizvii]

Your details are also fully optional, you aren't required to post them on Facebook. Though you can't prevent others from taking and uploading drunken pictures of you.

[Princeps]

No reason not to nationalize facebook. No reason to presume that the government would mismanage the site: running something like facebook is quite easy compared to running a post office. The US post office is facing bankrupcy for quite natural reasons, i.e. email etc. But the post office is the only definately secure way of transmitting information: no one is reading your mail, that's for sure while everyone is reading your email. A government run, secure site with strong privacy rules would be sort of like the post office of the future.

Of course, stupid "market/private property is gOOOOOd" ideology will never allow it. It would be sacrelige.

And I like the first amendement. Wouldn't object to see it extended to facebook as well.

[Blau&Gruen]

Should Facebook be nationalized?

Na, simply stop using it and meet some real people instead of accounts.