《Facebook内部故事》史蒂文·利维深度解析

需积分: 9 62 浏览量更新于2024-07-08 收藏 5.68MB PDF 举报

"Facebook The Inside Story by Steven Levy 是一本深入探讨Facebook公司历史的书籍，由知名科技记者Steven Levy撰写。本书详细记录了Facebook从诞生到成为全球社交媒体巨头的历程，涵盖了公司的关键事件、决策和影响。书中还可能涉及了Facebook创始人马克·扎克伯格的成长与领导风格，以及公司在隐私、数据安全和社会责任等方面的争议。" 在Steven Levy的这部作品中，读者可以了解到Facebook如何从哈佛大学的一个宿舍项目演变为全球数十亿用户使用的平台。"In the Plex"是Levy的另一部作品，讲述了谷歌的发展故事，而" Crypto"可能涉及了密码学和网络安全的主题。通过比较，"Facebook: The Inside Story"将揭示社交网络巨头在技术和政策方面独特的挑战。 "Artificial Life"和"Insanely Great"可能探讨了人工智能的发展以及苹果公司的创新历史，这些话题与Facebook在人工智能领域的探索和其产品设计哲学有所关联。"The Unicorn's Secret"和"Hackers"则可能分别揭示了初创公司成功背后的秘密和早期计算机文化的影响，这两者都是理解Facebook崛起的重要背景。这本书还提到了Penguin Random House，这是出版行业的领导者，强调了尊重版权的重要性。购买正版书籍不仅是对作者的支持，也是对出版业持续发展的贡献。Blue Rider Press作为Penguin Random House的子品牌，代表了这本书的品质和权威性。根据图书分类控制号（LCCN），这本书属于关于企业历史的类别，特别是Facebook这个特定公司。此外，书中的参考文献和索引将为读者提供更深入的研究途径，以便进一步探索Facebook相关的主题。 "Facebook: The Inside Story"是一本详尽的著作，不仅讲述了Facebook的崛起，也揭示了它在技术、社会和商业层面上的深远影响。通过 Steven Levy 的笔触，读者将得以窥见这家公司在其快速发展过程中的决策内幕，以及这些决策如何塑造了我们今天的数字世界。

factor in the results. Still, in the immediate aftermath, the idea that

Facebook was

responsible

for this outcome seemed preposterous.

Two days after the election, Mark Zuckerberg appeared at a conference

at Half Moon Bay, about thirty miles north of the Facebook campus. He

would be interviewed, ﬁreside chat–style, by David Kirkpatrick, an author

turned conference organizer who had himself published a book about

Facebook six years earlier. Naturally, he asked Zuckerberg about the charges

that Donald Trump might have beneﬁted from misinformation circulated on

Facebook via the personalized news feeds of its users.

Zuckerberg brushed oﬀ the thought. “I’ve seen some of the stories

they’re talking about around this election,” Zuckerberg said. “Personally, I

think the idea that fake news on Facebook, of which it’s a very small

amount of the content, inﬂuenced the election in any way, I think is a pretty

crazy idea.”

As I sat in that hotel ballroom attending the conference, the remark did

not feel as if Zuckerberg made a giant blunder. The “crazy idea” remark was

part of a longer, thoughtful reply, and Kirkpatrick did not challenge him on

it. It remains uncertain whether anything that happened on Facebook made a

signiﬁcant diﬀerence in the 2016 election.

But over the next two years, as people learned more about Facebook and

the way it operated, dire concerns emerged about Facebook’s role, not just

in the election but in the body politic at large, and the

world

at large. Time

and again, they would point to the “crazy” statement as an indication that

Zuckerberg was clueless—or lying—about the damage his company was

doing. After months of criticism, Zuckerberg would ﬁnally apologize for the

remark.

And much more.

While the election was a turning point for Facebook, many would say it

was a long-overdue reckoning. To its critics, the things that Facebook had

boasted about as its most cherished accomplishments were now unmasked

as liabilities. The huge user base once seen as a world-changing kumbaya

was now alarming evidence of excessive power. The ability to give voices to

the unheard was identiﬁed as a means to bequeath an earsplitting sound

system to hate groups. The ability to organize political movements of

liberation was now a deadly tool of oppressors. The joyful metrics that

spurred smile-inducing memes to entertain and uplift us now were ﬁngered

as an algorithmic boost to misinformation.

For the next year, Facebook’s reputation tumbled.

Facebook is racist.



. Facebook aids genocide.



. Facebook is an

outrage machine.



. Facebook is destroying our attention span.



Facebook is killing the news business.



And the dam burst in 2018, when news came that Facebook had allowed

personal information of up to 87 million users to end up in the hands of a

company called Cambridge Analytica, which allegedly used the data to

target vulnerable voters with misinformation. Facebook bit-ﬂipped from

Most Admired Company to Most Reviled.

Governments on three continents would probe the company, becoming

increasingly hostile at what they saw as foot-dragging or outright

intransigence on Facebook’s part. Investigative journalists around the world

focused their attention on Facebook, and hardly a day went by that another

example of its misbehavior did not emerge. The privacy worries that had led

the FTC to impose a huge ﬁne and a 2011 Consent Decree would be

regurgitated; Facebook would be ﬁned an astounding $5 billion for violating

the decree. The charge that Facebook was a toxic attention sponge would be

leveled in Congress and on television talk shows. Even worse were the

reports that Facebook (and its subsidiary WhatsApp) spread intentional

misinformation that aided genocide in Myanmar and other regions.

By 2019, government bodies around the world would be characterizing

Facebook using language usually reserved for terrorist organizations and

drug rings. A report issued by a parliamentary study in Great Britain called

Facebook “digital gangsters.” New Zealand Privacy Commissioner John

Edwards tweeted that the company’s leaders were “morally bankrupt

pathological liars.” Salesforce CEO Marc Benioﬀ compared Facebook’s

toxic consequences to those of the cigarette industry.

Meanwhile, revenues and proﬁts kept rising. This whetted the appetite

for sanctions and regulation even more. As the 2020 presidential election

shaped up, multiple candidates joined the calls of legislators and regulators

for Facebook to be broken up. It wasn’t just that Facebook might have had a

hand in the result of a controversial election: the charge was that Facebook

was destroying democracy itself!

In the three years since the 2016 election, the Facebook reputational

meltdown has been epic. There have been other spectacular train wrecks of

companies that once were the darlings of the press and beloved by investors:

Enron and Theranos come to mind.

But the Facebook crisis was something unique. It began with a

gloriously idealistic goal: to connect the world. But the assumption was

overly optimistic, and the company pursued its naïvely utopian—and

undeniably self-serving—goal with a tragic disregard for consequences. To

critics, Facebook was a twenty-ﬁrst-century corporate Gatsby, careless in its

privileges, self-involved in serving its own needs and pleasures.

Yet there is still something to the company’s insistence that the good it

does outweighs what it now admits is the bad it foments. Billions of people

are still on Facebook, as well as its sister companies Instagram and

WhatsApp. It is still part of our lives, perhaps as much as ever.

In Nigeria, I already saw Facebook as one of the most interesting

companies in the annals of business and technology. But over the next three

years of reporting, I found myself documenting the most complicated,

dramatic, and polarizing story that I had ever covered.

Fortunately, Facebook kept talking to me.

•



•



•

I FIRST MET

Mark Zuckerberg in March 2006. At the time, I was

Newsweek

’s

chief technology writer, working on a cover story about a phenomenon

called Web 2.0, a stage in the Internet business where new companies

emerged whose plan was to connect people with one another. The

companies we were writing about included Flickr, YouTube—still an

independent start-up—and MySpace, the leading company in a relatively

new ﬁeld known as social networking. I had also heard of a hot new

company that was having remarkable success by focusing on colleges, and

wanted to hear a bit more about it, perhaps to give it a name-check and

quote its founder. He was scheduled to appear that month at PC Forum, a

conference I regularly attended. So I contacted Facebook to see if I could

meet Zuckerberg.

We agreed that I’d meet Mark at lunch, just as he arrived, and we’d chat

then. I didn’t know much about him and was not prepared for what

happened.

When we were introduced, I took it in stride that he looked even younger

than his twenty-one years. I’d met a few other peach-fuzz magnates in my

years covering hackers and tech companies. But what did shake me was his

reaction when I asked him what seemed to me to be a few softball questions

about what the company was up to.

He just stared at me. And said nothing. Time seemed to freeze as the

silence continued.

I was ﬂummoxed. This guy is the CEO, isn’t he? Is he having some sort

of episode? On the spectrum, as some would later speculate? Was there

something I’d written that somehow made him hate me?

I didn’t know then that this was common behavior for Zuckerberg.

Though I was unaware at the time, I had joined the fraternity of people

who’d been stunned by Mark Zuckerberg’s trancelike silences.

In subsequent years, Zuckerberg seems to have addressed this issue, and

actually will conduct fairly personable interviews. (On occasion, though, the

frigid stare still surfaces. One of his executives refers to it as “the eye of

Sauron.” Others who know him well say that at those instances he’s just

thinking, apparently at such a high level that the world stops for him.) But at

the time, I found it baﬄing and unnerving. I looked across the table at the

companion he’d arrived with, a former venture capitalist named Matt Cohler

who was now working for the company. Pleasant smile. No lifeline.

In this case, I ﬁnally stumbled on a way to break the silence, changing

the subject and asking Zuckerberg if he knew anything about PC Forum. He

said no, and I explained its roots as the key industry gathering in the

personal-computer era, where Gates and Jobs would go at each other with

smiles on their faces and shivs in their ﬁsts. After hearing that bit of history

he seemed to thaw, and for the rest of the lunch he was able to talk about the

company he started in a dorm room, though he did not share with me the

game-changing developments that his team were building at that very

moment in their second-ﬂoor oﬃce in Palo Alto, features called Open

Registration and the News Feed, that would supercharge his company and

put the name Zuckerberg alongside those earlier legends of the PC Forum.

I covered Zuckerberg and his company as it grew from start-up to star. In

August 2007, I wrote a

Newsweek

cover story about Facebook, focusing on

its shift from a college website to a service that aspired to connect the entire

world. When I moved full-time to

Wired

in 2008, Facebook was one of the

focuses of my reporting. I engineered a cover shoot with Zuckerberg and his

role model, Bill Gates. We did an interview for

Wired

’s twentieth-

anniversary issue. When Facebook introduced new products, I was often

oﬀered a preview and a sit-down with the CEO. I talked to him about

search, about virtual reality, about the star-crossed Facebook phone, about

the NSA’s hijacking of tech-company data, about his dream of providing

low-cost Internet to the developing world. When I started a publication

called Backchannel on the Medium platform, I stuck to the Facebook beat,

writing about the News Feed algorithm and Facebook’s AI team.

But it was a simple announcement from Facebook’s communications

team that made me realize that the breadth of the company’s ambitions

could only be fully captured in a book-length study. The news was that a

billion people had logged on to Facebook on the same day.

It stopped me cold. In the space of twenty-four hours, a sizable chunk of

the world’s population had been active on Mark Zuckerberg’s network.

That was new.

Occasionally a global audience of that size might be

gathered for a broadcast of the World Cup ﬁnal or some other major event.

But in those cases, the masses were spectators. These were people logging

on to a single interactive network. And this tranche of a billion people was

not a spike but a baseline, as Facebook was on pace to draw in more and

more of the world’s population.

Zuckerberg had been talking about connecting the world for a while. But

with this milestone, it appeared that his claims had to be taken seriously. On

a daily basis, Facebook would be setting records for gathering the largest

collection of people ever, who would frolic with friends, relatives, contacts,

and some people they couldn’t pick out of a police lineup—commenting,

posting news articles, selling and buying, organizing political movements,

and, in some cases, bullying peers, spreading idiotic memes, and recruiting

terrorists.

How did that happen?

I wondered. What were the implications? Was

Facebook’s still-youthful leader at all equipped to manage this

unprecedented phenomenon, handling all the complications that may come

from fulﬁlling his goal to connect the world? Was anyone, let alone this odd

person prone to going silent in conversations?

剩余548页未读，继续阅读

threenewbee

粉丝: 3w+
资源: 1792

《Facebook内部故事》史蒂文·利维深度解析

Steven Levy：In the Plex——How Google Thinks, Works, and Shapes Our Lives@2011.pdf

levy.zip_MATLAB实现_levy_levy 分布_levy分布_levy分布 matlab

Steven Levy ZP.zip 快速的face怎么实现的呢？这个开发的过程很重要！

levy.rar_matlab_

FREQ2LEVY.rar_FREQ2LEVY_最小相位系统

levy.rar_LEⅤY噪声_appearanceqb8_levy noise_levy zaosheng_levy噪音

基于精英策略和Levy飞行的粒子群算法.pdf

基于Levy-GARCH模型的上...ETF市场跳跃行为与波动特征研究_郑尊信.pdf

基于Levy变异的反向粒子群优化算法.pdf

引入萤火虫行为和Levy飞行的粒子群优化算法.pdf

最新资源