Leaving?Facebookistan

離開“臉譜國”

Steve?Coll?史蒂夫·科爾

(continue)?You?might?expect?dense?legalese,?but?the?terms'?laguage?is?clear?and?soaring,?echoing?the?tones?of?constitutional?documents.?Some?of?the?declaratory?sentences?lay?out?the?commitments?by?Facebook's?royal?"We?."?"You."?The?terms?obfuscate?Facebook's?business?strategies?in?such?simple?language?that?the?deception?is?almost?poetic:?"Some?partners,?customers,?and?other?third?parties?that?help?us?(or?them)?deliver?ads,?understand?online?activity,?and?generally?make?Facebook?better."
（接上期）你或許以為服務(wù)條款中會(huì)有大量法律術(shù)語，但實(shí)際上條款的語言明確而高亢，有點(diǎn)像憲法性文件的語氣。其中一些說明性的語句闡述了臉譜公司至高無上的“我們”所做的承諾。其他部分則描述了“你們”的義務(wù)。服務(wù)條款以簡單的語言模糊了臉譜公司的商業(yè)策略，以至于欺騙都顯得近乎詩意：“有事，我們從我們的廣告伙伴、客戶和其他第三方那里獲得數(shù)據(jù)，來幫助我們（或他們）發(fā)布廣告、理解網(wǎng)絡(luò)活動(dòng)以及全面完善臉譜。”

Facebook?has?made?jarring?mistakes?as?its?leaders?have?learned?what?it?means?to?run?a?profit-motived?political?and?public?forum.?In?general,?Facebook?has?encouraged?its?users?to?accept?greater?and?greater?losses?of?privacy.?Zuckerberg?believes?the?world?will?be?better?off?if?it?adopts?"radical?transparency,"?as?the?journalist?David?Kirkpatrick?put?it?in?his?book,?"The?Facebook?Effect."
當(dāng)臉譜公司的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者認(rèn)識(shí)到經(jīng)營一個(gè)以盈利為目的的政治和公共論壇意味著什么時(shí)，臉譜犯了一些讓人不安的錯(cuò)誤?？偟膩碚f，臉譜鼓勵(lì)用戶接受越來越多隱私權(quán)的喪失。朱克伯格認(rèn)為，如果全世界的人都接受記者戴維·柯克帕特里克在他所著的《臉譜效應(yīng)》一書中所說的“徹底透明化”，世界將變得更加美好。

Zuckerberg's?business?model?requires?the?trust?and?loyalty?of?his?users?so?that?he?can?make?money?from?their?participation,?yet?he?must?simultaneously?strech?that?trust?by?driving?the?site?to?maximize?profits,?including?by?selling?users'?personal?information.?The?I.P.O.?Last?week?will?exacerbate?this?tension:?Facebook's?huge?valuation?now?puts?pressure?on?the?company's?strategists?to?increase?its?revenue-per-user.That?means?more?ads,?more?data?mining,?and?more?creative?thinking?about?new?ways?to?commercialize?the?personal,?cultural,?political,?and?even?revolutionary?activity?of?users.
朱克伯格的商業(yè)模式需要用戶的信任和忠誠，這樣他才能靠用戶的參與來賺錢，然而，他必須同時(shí)最大限度地利用這種信任來推動(dòng)網(wǎng)站追求利潤最大化，包括出手用戶的個(gè)人信息。上周的IPO將會(huì)加劇這一矛盾：臉譜現(xiàn)在的高估值使公司的戰(zhàn)略專家面臨提高每用戶收入的壓力。這意味著臉譜會(huì)發(fā)布更多的廣進(jìn)行更多數(shù)據(jù)挖掘并且更富創(chuàng)造性地思考將用戶的個(gè)人、文化、政治甚至革命活動(dòng)商業(yè)化的新途徑。

There?is?somethings?vaguely?dystopian?about?oppressed?peoples?in?Syria?or?Iran?seeking?dignity?and?liberation?inside?a?corporate?sovereign?that?is,?for?its?part,?creating?great?wealth?for?its?founders?and?asserting?control?over?its?users.
敘利亞或伊朗的受壓迫民眾在一個(gè)公司主權(quán)范圍內(nèi)尋求尊嚴(yán)和解放帶有模糊的反面烏托邦色彩，因?yàn)榫瓦@個(gè)公司來說，它正在為創(chuàng)始人創(chuàng)造巨額財(cái)富，并堅(jiān)持對(duì)其用戶的控制。

Zuckerberg?proudly?told?Kirkpatrick?that?he?revelled?in?the?ways?Facebook's?user?had?forced?him?to?become?more?democratic:"History?tells?us?that?systems?are?most?fairly?governed?when?there?is?an?open?and?transparent?dialogue?between?the?people?who?make?decisions?and?those?who?are?affected?by?them.?We?believe?history?will?one?day?show?that?this?principle?holds?true?for?companies?as?well."
朱克伯格自豪地對(duì)柯克帕特里克說，他對(duì)臉譜網(wǎng)用戶促使他變得更加民眾的方式感到洋洋自得：“歷史告訴我們，決策者和受決策影響的人之間存在公開透明對(duì)話時(shí)，系統(tǒng)會(huì)得到最合理的治理。我們認(rèn)為終有一天，理事會(huì)表明，這一原則同樣適用于公司?！?/div>

That?is?a?laudable?conception.?Yet?for?now,?at?least,?Facebook?concedes?to?its?users?only?when?it?judges?that?it?is?in?the?corporation's?interest?to?do?so;?what?user?votes?and?consultations?there?may?be?are?purely?advisory.
這是一個(gè)值得稱贊的觀點(diǎn)。然而目前，至少臉譜只有在斷定妥協(xié)符合公司利益時(shí)才對(duì)用戶讓步；不論用戶的頭片結(jié)果和意見是什么，都純粹是參考性的。

While?talking?to?varied?audiences?recently?about?my?new?book,?"Private?Empire:?ExxonMobil?and?American?Power,"?I?have?been?reminded?how?uneasy?Americans?from?of?all?ideological?orientations?are?about?corporate?power?and?sovereignty?these?days.?They?believe?in?capitalism?and?market?efficiencies,?to?be?sure,?but?they?fear?heavily?concentrated?private?power,?especially?where?it?encroaches?on?their?economic?and?personal?choices.?They?ask,?"What?should?we?do?"
最近，在我和各類讀者談?wù)撐业男聲端饺说蹏赫O克森美孚和美國勢(shì)力》時(shí)，我注意到如今各種意識(shí)形態(tài)傾向的美國人對(duì)公司的勢(shì)力和統(tǒng)治權(quán)有多么不安。他們相信資本主義和市場(chǎng)效率，這一點(diǎn)毫無疑問，但他們對(duì)高度集中的私人權(quán)利感到憂慮，尤其是在這種權(quán)利侵犯到他們的經(jīng)濟(jì)和個(gè)人選擇的情況下。他們問道：“我們?cè)撛趺崔k？”

Perhaps?it?starts?with?exercising?citizenship.?I?have?decided?to?exercise?mine——in?Facebookistan,?that?is.?This?seems?the?right?time?to?leave?such?a?crowded?and?volatile?public?square.
或許可以從行使公民權(quán)開始。我已經(jīng)決定行使我的公民權(quán)——就是在“臉譜國”?，F(xiàn)在似乎是時(shí)候離開這個(gè)如此擁擠不堪又反復(fù)無常的廣場(chǎng)了。

Farewell,?Facebook?friends.?May?you?enjoy?everywhere?the?full?rights?of?free?citizens.
再見，臉譜網(wǎng)的朋友們。但愿你們無論在哪里都享有自由公民的全部權(quán)利。（下）?

相關(guān)閱讀：離開臉譜王國：Leaving Facebookistan（上）>>