Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) is a blathering idiot!

[usmbguest5318]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

 

[theHawk]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

This is the world we live in now. We get to dictate to private business what they can and cannot do. This is the world Obama built. Enjoy your gay wedding cake.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

"Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. "
Zuckerberg doesn't seem that bright either or this could be a typical Liberal belief coming out , The Federal government doesn't grant rights, its job is to protect them.

 

[Snouter]

Zuckerberg got PWND by pretty much everyone there who asked questions. What kind of delusional idiot thinks Zuckerberg is being honest? Hey folks, just try deleting your Facebook account.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Zuckerberg got PWND by pretty much everyone there who asked questions. What kind of delusional idiot thinks Zuckerberg is being honest? Hey folks, just try deleting your Facebook account.

What kind of delusional idiot thinks Zuckerberg is being honest?

By all means, referring to the transcript of the testimony, identify for us the specific lies Zuckerberg told.

• Full text: Mark Zuckerberg’s Wednesday testimony to Congress on Cambridge Analytica

Perhaps someone will refer the lies to the sergeant at arms, the Capitol police, or somebody so Zuckerberg can be charged with contempt of Congress and/or perjury.

 

[xyz]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps that you can't normally delete in Facebook. Apps in actual Facebook.

 

[usmbguest5318]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps in Facebook that you can't delete.

Whose content is the app? One's own or someone else's?

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"

• Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?

• Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Hell, an app isn't even content/data; it's a software program just as is Facebook, MS Word, Excel, Oracle or SAP.

 

[xyz]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps in Facebook that you can't delete.

Whose content is the app? One's own or someone else's?

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"

• Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?

• Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Hell, an app isn't even content/data; it's a software program just as is Facebook, MS Word, Excel, Oracle or SAP.

It works *within* Facebook. Facebook should provide some sort of virus checker/app approval.

 

[usmbguest5318]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps in Facebook that you can't delete.

Whose content is the app? One's own or someone else's?

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"

• Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?

• Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Hell, an app isn't even content/data; it's a software program just as is Facebook, MS Word, Excel, Oracle or SAP.

It works *within* Facebook. Facebook should provide some sort of virus checker/app approval.

That remark, however accurate it may or may not be, does not address whether an app is one's own data (or program) that one can in turn delete, which is what you remarked upon and is the point to which I responded.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps that you can't normally delete in Facebook. Apps in actual Facebook.

 

[xyz]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps in Facebook that you can't delete.

Whose content is the app? One's own or someone else's?

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"

• Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?

• Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Hell, an app isn't even content/data; it's a software program just as is Facebook, MS Word, Excel, Oracle or SAP.

It works *within* Facebook. Facebook should provide some sort of virus checker/app approval.

That remark, however accurate it may or may not be, does not address whether an app is one's own data (or program) that one can in turn delete, which is what you remarked upon and is the point to which I responded.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps that you can't normally delete in Facebook. Apps in actual Facebook.

It is in Facebook, in the list of apps. It does have a delete option, which does not work, as the app comes back.

 

[usmbguest5318]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps in Facebook that you can't delete.

Whose content is the app? One's own or someone else's?

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"

• Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?

• Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Hell, an app isn't even content/data; it's a software program just as is Facebook, MS Word, Excel, Oracle or SAP.

It works *within* Facebook. Facebook should provide some sort of virus checker/app approval.

BTW, are these apps things one is forced to use? AFAIK, one can download, install and use them or not.

• Facebook Apps for Android and iOS | Facebook
  
• Facebook on the App Store
  
• Social Media Roundup: Facebook Bulk App Removal, Messenger Unsend Feature, Improved Snapchat Lenses

Off-topic:

Have you tried the FB bulk app removal tool/process?​

 

[xyz]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps in Facebook that you can't delete.

Whose content is the app? One's own or someone else's?

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"

• Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?

• Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Hell, an app isn't even content/data; it's a software program just as is Facebook, MS Word, Excel, Oracle or SAP.

It works *within* Facebook. Facebook should provide some sort of virus checker/app approval.

BTW, are these apps things one is forced to use? AFAIK, one can download, install and use them or not.

• Facebook Apps for Android and iOS | Facebook
  
• Facebook on the App Store
  
• Social Media Roundup: Facebook Bulk App Removal, Messenger Unsend Feature, Improved Snapchat Lenses

Off-topic:

Have you tried the FB bulk app removal tool/process?​

No, I'm not talking about device apps, I'm talking about apps within Facebook, like on a desktop or laptop.

 

[usmbguest5318]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps in Facebook that you can't delete.

Whose content is the app? One's own or someone else's?

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"

• Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."

Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?

• Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Hell, an app isn't even content/data; it's a software program just as is Facebook, MS Word, Excel, Oracle or SAP.

It works *within* Facebook. Facebook should provide some sort of virus checker/app approval.

That remark, however accurate it may or may not be, does not address whether an app is one's own data (or program) that one can in turn delete, which is what you remarked upon and is the point to which I responded.

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps that you can't normally delete in Facebook. Apps in actual Facebook.

It is in Facebook, in the list of apps. It does have a delete option, which does not work, as the app comes back.

That seems like a specific app's functionality problem, not a basis for imlying, as you did....

Zuckermaster is b.s.ing. I've noticed parasite apps in Facebook that you can't delete.

...that Zuckerberg was "b.s.ing." I'd be of a different mind were you describing a "doesn't work as described" aspect manifest for the preponderance of apps.

 

[xyz]

Facebook CEO Called Trusting Users ''Dumb F***s''

 

[usmbguest5318]

Facebook CEO Called Trusting Users ''Dumb F***s''

I'm not entirely sure just what your point is by sharing that article....

Did you read the conversation between 19 year-old Zuckerberg and his pal?

Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard

Zuck: Just ask.

Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS

[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?

Zuck: People just submitted it.

Zuck: I don't know why.

Zuck: They "trust me"

Zuck: Dumb fucks.​

Well...:

1. The guy was 19. What do you expect a 19 year-old to say? Surely not things particularly different from the above?
2. Zuckerberg was right. One who isn't a "dumb f*ck" would not provide emails, pictures, and addresses to someone whom they don't know well.

I'm sorry, but it's not derisive to call a fat person fat, or to call persons who clearly exercised no prudence and circumspective perspicacity dumb.

Skunks know they stink.
-- Old country/Southern saying​

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

And of course Kennedy is not alone in his ignorance as to Facebook, others in Congress are just as ignorant, yet they presume to enact measures to regulate Facebook.

 

[frigidweirdo]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

A world where these unintelligent people can be a part of the government.

 

[usmbguest5318]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

A world where these unintelligent people can be a part of the government.

A world where these unintelligent people can be a part of the government.

As go the members of the Senate Committee, I'm not ready to go so far as to, without qualification, call them unintelligent. There's no question in my mind, however, that they sat their sorry asses in their chamber and hearing room seats and made no effort to get very well informed about FB and how social media works -- both as a business and as a software product.

For that, I have plenty of derisive contempt to give them; doing that is just straight-up imprudent. There is no excuse for trying to put someone on the spot when that person is more knowledgeable and better prepared than one is. That's exactly what Kennedy tried to do, and in so doing, he made himself look adolescent and anachronistic. Heck, a short order cook would have come off looking more credible trying to tell Gordon Ramsey how to cook Beef Wellington than did Kennedy trying to grill Zuckerberg.

And here's the thing: Kennedy didn't have to come off looking stupid. That could have been easily avoided in at least two ways, one being very low-effort:

• Get well informed:
  • First Person Approach:
    • Join FB and take the time to explore it thoroughly, read the TOS, add and remove some apps, etc.
      • Do it via a PC
      • Do it via a phone
    • Read a paper or two about the business model for web companies like Google, FB, Twitter and the like that offer something for free yet make billions of dollars.
    • Read an industry overview about the IT industry or the social media and third-party apps portions of it.
  • Second Person Approach:
    • Have one or two Senate staffers do the hands-on testing/exploration and then provide a summary of what they found, discovered, learned, struggled with, found easy, etc. Printed screen shots with handwritten notes in the margins and whatnot would have been sufficient...It's just a briefing document for his consumption.
    • Have one or two staffers read the above noted materials and provide a written summary or flow charts and/or some other graphics that conveys the key ideas and processes.
• Don't get well informed before hand -- two low effort approaches. If one was too busy to get well informed, either approach is an honorable alternative.:
  • Use one's time with Zuckerberg to get well informed by asking the man questions designed to expand Kennedy and others' subject matter knowledge. It was obvious from that hearing that Kennedy wasn't the only anachronism on the committee. That'd have been far more productive to the country as well as to the legislative process than were those dumb-f*ck questions designed to get the man to say things that suited Kennedy's political objectives.
    
    No matter how fancy be the plane and pilot, neither can outperform a bird, bee or bat. But with careful study, maybe one day a plane and pilot will come close. From that frame of mind, Kennedy could have made use of Zuckerberg's testimony and knowledge and positioned one or more of his similarly unaware colleagues to ask "biting/bitchy" questions.
  • Do none of the above, accept that one doesn't know what one is talking about, doesn't know "this computer stuff," and simply yield/cede one's time to a senator on the committee who does know what s/he's talking about and who does understand the industry and who did bother to get well informed and who, therefore, won't come off sounding like they just walked out of a time machine and some nitwit(s) made them a U.S. senator.

Kennedy took nary a one of those approaches! No, not even close. He sat his hick-sounding ass there and tried to grandstand. Hell, the man had the temerity, given his torpid ignorance of the subject matter, to lean in and condescendingly try to ridicule Zuckerberg, who knew more about the topic under discussion than did all those Senators and their staff.

Truly, I 'bout fell out of my chair when I saw him lean! I thought, "No he did not just try to lean! What the hell does he think he's up to? I bet he's about to go "bear huntin' wit' a switch." And, Lord, but didn't he do just that! He sure 'nuff did. He went into his little diatribe of questions, came out looking too stupid to pound sand in a rat hole, and for all that, hadn't said anything worth so much as pea turkey squat.

 

[frigidweirdo]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

A world where these unintelligent people can be a part of the government.

A world where these unintelligent people can be a part of the government.

As go the members of the Senate Committee, I'm not ready to go so far as to, without qualification, call them unintelligent. There's no question in my mind, however, that they sat their sorry asses in their chamber and hearing room seats and made no effort to get very well informed about FB and how social media works -- both as a business and as a software product.

For that, I have plenty of derisive contempt to give them; doing that is just straight-up imprudent. There is no excuse for trying to put someone on the spot when that person is more knowledgeable and better prepared than one is. That's exactly what Kennedy tried to do, and in so doing, he made himself look adolescent and anachronistic. Heck, a short order cook would have come off looking more credible trying to tell Gordon Ramsey how to cook Beef Wellington than did Kennedy trying to grill Zuckerberg.

And here's the thing: Kennedy didn't have to come off looking stupid. That could have been easily avoided in at least two ways, one being very low-effort:

• Get well informed:
  • First Person Approach:
    • Join FB and take the time to explore it thoroughly, read the TOS, add and remove some apps, etc.
      • Do it via a PC
      • Do it via a phone
    • Read a paper or two about the business model for web companies like Google, FB, Twitter and the like that offer something for free yet make billions of dollars.
    • Read an industry overview about the IT industry or the social media and third-party apps portions of it.
  • Second Person Approach:
    • Have one or two Senate staffers do the hands-on testing/exploration and then provide a summary of what they found, discovered, learned, struggled with, found easy, etc. Printed screen shots with handwritten notes in the margins and whatnot would have been sufficient...It's just a briefing document for his consumption.
    • Have one or two staffers read the above noted materials and provide a written summary or flow charts and/or some other graphics that conveys the key ideas and processes.
• Use one's time with Zuckerberg to get well informed by asking the man questions designed to expand Kennedy and others' subject matter knowledge. It was obvious from that hearing that Kennedy wasn't the only anachronism on the committee. That'd have been far more productive to the country as well as to the legislative process than were those dumb-f*ck questions designed to get the man to say things that suited Kennedy's political objectives.
  
  No matter how fancy be the plane and pilot, neither can outperform a bird, bee or bat. But with careful study, maybe one day a plane and pilot will come close. From that frame of mind, Kennedy could have made use of Zuckerberg's testimony and knowledge and positioned one or more of his similarly unaware colleagues to ask "biting/bitchy" questions.
• Don't get well informed: Do none of the above, accept that one doesn't know what one is talking about, doesn't know "this computer stuff," and simply yield/cede one's time to a senator on the committee who does know what s/he's talking about and who does understand the industry and who did bother to get well informed and who, therefore, won't come off sounding like they just walked out of a time machine and some nitwit(s) made them a U.S. senator.
  
  If one was too busy to get well informed, this approach is an honorable alternative.

Kennedy took nary a one of those approaches! No, not even close. He sat his hick-sounding ass there and tried to grandstand. Hell, the man had the temerity, given his torpid ignorance of the subject matter, to lean in and condescendingly try to ridicule Zuckerberg, who knew more about the topic under discussion than did all those Senators and their staff.

Truly, I 'bout fell out of my chair when I saw him lean! I thought, "No he did not just try to lean! What the hell does he think he's up to? I bet he's about to go "bear huntin' wit' a switch." And, Lord, but didn't he do just that! He sure 'nuff did. He went into his little diatribe of questions, came out looking too stupid to pound sand in a rat hole, and for all that, hadn't said anything worth so much as pea turkey squat.

But what's the point of being well informed? You might find the truth. Who wants the truth? Not the people who pay their extra money.

 

[usmbguest5318]

In today's "Facebook" hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) remarked:

​

I'm not going to argue that part of the purpose of a user agreement -- any software firm's, not just Facebook's (FB's) -- is to cover the software provider's ass. It is there for that.

Equally important, however, is that the user agreement identifies to users what they can and cannot expect from Facebook.

• Kennedy said, "It's not to inform your users about their rights."
  • Well, no, it's not because FB isn't a government; thus it does not confer rights. What it does is say, "This is what we offer and this is what we will do." Users aren't forced to agree to the user agreement, but if they want to use FB, they must agree with what FB indicates it will do with their information and with content placed on the FB platform.
• Kennedy said, "I'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite [the FB user agreement]...and tell your $1200/hr. lawyers you want it written in English...In non-Swahili, so the average American can understand it."
  • Have you actually taken a look at FB's user agreement? It is written in plain English. Any American who can't understand that user agreement has no business using their time to post remarks of any sort on any platform. They need to enroll their illiterate asses in a remedial reading class.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me as a FB user to remove my data?"
  • Zuckerberg replied, "You already can delete all your data."
  • Kennedy replied, "Are you willing to work on expanding on that?
    • Say what? Just how does one expand upon an extant ability to delete 100% of one's data? Maybe by allowing one to delete more than 100% of one's data, aka, someone else's data....
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to prohibit the use of my data?" (Watch the video; I may have the exact wording amiss.)
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.
• Kennedy asked, "Are you willing to allow me to take my FB data and move it to another social media platform?
  • Zuckerberg: You already can do that.

Watch the video above and see for yourself. Sen. Kennedy, as is typical of Republicans, and most especially of Trumpkins (I don't whether Kennedy is a Trumpkin.), was sitting there trying to put Zuckerberg on the spot and "catch him," yet it's clear that Kennedy hadn't "done his homework" and that he'd not instructed any of his aides to do it for him so he didn't come off looking like the complete fool he did, a FB using fool who hadn't bothered to take the time to understand the platform/tool he'd willfully chosen to use.

A world where these unintelligent people can be a part of the government.

A world where these unintelligent people can be a part of the government.

As go the members of the Senate Committee, I'm not ready to go so far as to, without qualification, call them unintelligent. There's no question in my mind, however, that they sat their sorry asses in their chamber and hearing room seats and made no effort to get very well informed about FB and how social media works -- both as a business and as a software product.

For that, I have plenty of derisive contempt to give them; doing that is just straight-up imprudent. There is no excuse for trying to put someone on the spot when that person is more knowledgeable and better prepared than one is. That's exactly what Kennedy tried to do, and in so doing, he made himself look adolescent and anachronistic. Heck, a short order cook would have come off looking more credible trying to tell Gordon Ramsey how to cook Beef Wellington than did Kennedy trying to grill Zuckerberg.

And here's the thing: Kennedy didn't have to come off looking stupid. That could have been easily avoided in at least two ways, one being very low-effort:

• Get well informed:
  • First Person Approach:
    • Join FB and take the time to explore it thoroughly, read the TOS, add and remove some apps, etc.
      • Do it via a PC
      • Do it via a phone
    • Read a paper or two about the business model for web companies like Google, FB, Twitter and the like that offer something for free yet make billions of dollars.
    • Read an industry overview about the IT industry or the social media and third-party apps portions of it.
  • Second Person Approach:
    • Have one or two Senate staffers do the hands-on testing/exploration and then provide a summary of what they found, discovered, learned, struggled with, found easy, etc. Printed screen shots with handwritten notes in the margins and whatnot would have been sufficient...It's just a briefing document for his consumption.
    • Have one or two staffers read the above noted materials and provide a written summary or flow charts and/or some other graphics that conveys the key ideas and processes.
• Use one's time with Zuckerberg to get well informed by asking the man questions designed to expand Kennedy and others' subject matter knowledge. It was obvious from that hearing that Kennedy wasn't the only anachronism on the committee. That'd have been far more productive to the country as well as to the legislative process than were those dumb-f*ck questions designed to get the man to say things that suited Kennedy's political objectives.
  
  No matter how fancy be the plane and pilot, neither can outperform a bird, bee or bat. But with careful study, maybe one day a plane and pilot will come close. From that frame of mind, Kennedy could have made use of Zuckerberg's testimony and knowledge and positioned one or more of his similarly unaware colleagues to ask "biting/bitchy" questions.
• Don't get well informed: Do none of the above, accept that one doesn't know what one is talking about, doesn't know "this computer stuff," and simply yield/cede one's time to a senator on the committee who does know what s/he's talking about and who does understand the industry and who did bother to get well informed and who, therefore, won't come off sounding like they just walked out of a time machine and some nitwit(s) made them a U.S. senator.
  
  If one was too busy to get well informed, this approach is an honorable alternative.

Kennedy took nary a one of those approaches! No, not even close. He sat his hick-sounding ass there and tried to grandstand. Hell, the man had the temerity, given his torpid ignorance of the subject matter, to lean in and condescendingly try to ridicule Zuckerberg, who knew more about the topic under discussion than did all those Senators and their staff.

Truly, I 'bout fell out of my chair when I saw him lean! I thought, "No he did not just try to lean! What the hell does he think he's up to? I bet he's about to go "bear huntin' wit' a switch." And, Lord, but didn't he do just that! He sure 'nuff did. He went into his little diatribe of questions, came out looking too stupid to pound sand in a rat hole, and for all that, hadn't said anything worth so much as pea turkey squat.

But what's the point of being well informed? You might find the truth. Who wants the truth? Not the people who pay their extra money.

Well...okay, you can say that. Lord and I and both know I'm plenty critical and very demanding of high integrity and high quality work performance and that I really don't have time for BS-ers and half-assers. That said, I'm not as cynical as your remark above suggests you are.

I'm not chiding you for having gone there, as it were. I'm just saying I'm not going there with you.