It should be shocking, though. Comments like this don't contribute anything to the discussion and I would argue they're actually harmful because they make people complacent. If Facebook continually assures us that privacy is important in their discourse, but then on a practical level does what they can to destroy it, that's a big scandal and they should be raked across the coals for it.

Edit: typo

I upvoted that comment (admittedly only because it appeared greyed).

> Comments like this don't contribute anything to the discussion...

While flip, it makes a good point: this is a kind of “dog bites man” topic. Such topics can still be usefully addressed, (and the article is a good one) but the outrage should be at the effectiveness (if any) and perhaps techniques rather than the action at all (which unfortunately is the subject of the article title).

> and I would argue they're actually harmful because they make people complacent.

The brevity of the comment is indeed cynical, but it sparled a good comment from you as well as provoking thought on my part of “what makes a discussion like this relevant”

That's fair.

Should it really be "shocking" as in "surprising and bad"? I appears to me that one would have to be willfully ignorant to not be aware that FB & Co are very likely lobbying against privacy laws.

Having it confirmed should make you angry, but it shouldn't come as a surprise.

It depends where you come from. Not everyone is aware of the extent of lobbying. And, it may be - not necessarily - that FB does it more than other companies. These are all details that may get fleshed out in time

That's MO of all large corporation. Take Monsato for example - beautiful website full of happy parents with smiling children and message: "we love you and food quality is important". Behind the scenes: bankrupt farmers by spreading your own copyrighted seeds on their ground and try to patent human genes.

Right, so you're saying it's a symptom of a systemic issue.

Sounds like we're well overdue for an adjustment in laws to ensure that such things cannot go unchecked. Perhaps it's also a sign that globalisation wasn't an exclusively good development as it's tended to make corporations above nations and government. I wonder how we can dramatically rein in all of them so that it's rather more equitable.

Right. I would love to be a fly on the wall and see where things go wrong. Do the happy smiley PR people never talk to the actual figureheads making the corrupt decisions? Are they being held at gunpoint to say these glowing things about the company? etc etc etc.

I think Zuckerberg and Sandberg may not even be trying to be "evil" - maybe they are, I have no clue - they're "just" trying to grow their company in order to "do good in the world". If you convince yourself of something enough then you'll tend to put the blinders on to everything else. But people working jobs need to ask themselves on a continual basis if things are OK or if on the other hand their work causes real pain and misery

If someone quits due to a moral conflict, that just leaves the job open for someone with a lower moral standard. And a $100k salary job is a $100k salary job.

Plus, almost by definition, you have to put the blinders on to work in public relations.

Zuck already achieved his ideal, with a few compromises: well-connected social network of whole world, with no ethical abstention to share.

Remember, just one year ago the common consensus surrounding facebook was - "If you don't want it to be public, don't post it". We have learned so much since then.

Revelations are important.

Knowing how sausages are made makes for a more educated sausage consumer.

and how much would the consumer be educated by news such as "sausage maker lobbies against more sausage regulation"?

if everyone is ill and they know it's from sausage quality, why even discuss about regulating it? Just do it. that's what the short cynic comment was about. this is noise that only serves Facebook by pretending that the obvious action to be taken should be discussed. it's way past that point for online privacy.